Manitoba Committee Hansard — 9 August 2022 (Legislative Affairs Committee, Sitting 3, 42nd Legislature, 4th Session)

42-4-la3

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session – Forty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs Chairperson Mr. James Teitsma Constituency of Radisson Vol. LXXVI No. 3 - 2 p.m., Tuesday, August 9, 2022 ISSN 1708-668X

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Forty-Second Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALTOMARE, Nello Transcona NDP ASAGWARA, Uzoma Union Station NDP BRAR, Diljeet Burrows NDP BUSHIE, Ian Keewatinook NDP CLARKE, Eileen, Hon. Agassiz PC COX, Cathy Kildonan-River East PC CULLEN, Cliff, Hon. Spruce Woods PC DRIEDGER, Myrna, Hon. Roblin PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne, Hon. Lac du Bonnet PC FONTAINE, Nahanni St. Johns NDP FRIESEN, Cameron, Hon. Morden-Winkler PC GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin, Hon. Steinbach PC GORDON, Audrey, Hon.

Southdale PC GUENTER, Josh Borderland PC GUILLEMARD, Sarah, Hon. Fort Richmond PC HELWER, Reg, Hon. Brandon West PC ISLEIFSON, Len Brandon East PC JOHNSON, Derek, Hon. Interlake-Gimli PC JOHNSTON, Scott, Hon. Assiniboia PC KHAN, Obby Fort Whyte PC KINEW, Wab Fort Rouge NDP LAGASSÉ, Bob Dawson Trail PC LAGIMODIERE, Alan, Hon. Selkirk PC LAMONT, Dougald St. Boniface Lib. LAMOUREUX, Cindy Tyndall Park Lib.

LATHLIN, Amanda The Pas-Kameesak NDP LINDSEY, Tom Flin Flon NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Malaya Notre Dame NDP MARTIN, Shannon McPhillips PC MICHALESKI, Brad Dauphin PC MICKLEFIELD, Andrew Rossmere PC MORLEY-LECOMTE, Janice Seine River PC MOSES, Jamie St. Vital NDP NAYLOR, Lisa Wolseley NDP NESBITT, Greg, Hon. Riding Mountain PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PIWNIUK, Doyle, Hon. Turtle Mountain PC REDHEAD, Eric Thompson NDP REYES, Jon, Hon. Waverley PC SALA, Adrien St. James NDP SANDHU, Mintu The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron Springfield-Ritchot PC SMITH, Andrew, Hon.

Lagimodière PC SMITH, Bernadette Point Douglas NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Vérendrye PC SQUIRES, Rochelle, Hon. Riel PC STEFANSON, Heather, Hon. Tuxedo PC TEITSMA, James Radisson PC WASYLIW, Mark Fort Garry NDP WHARTON, Jeff, Hon. Red River North PC WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC WOWCHUK, Rick Swan River PC Vacant Kirkfield Park

9 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS Tuesday, August 9, 2022 TIME – 2 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Mr. James Teitsma (Radisson) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Andrew Micklefield (Rossmere) ATTENDANCE – 6 QUORUM – 4 Members of the committee present: Hon. Mr. Helwer Ms. Fontaine, Messrs. Guenter, Micklefield , Sala, Teitsma PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Ms. Susan Dawes, Provincial Judges Association of Manitoba (by leave) MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Report and Recom mendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee, dated April 19, 2022 * * * Clerk Assistant (Mr.

Tim Abbott): Good afternoon, everyone. Need my gavel. Will the Standing Committee on Legis lative Affairs please com e to order. Our first item of business is the election of a Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Hon. Reg Helwer (Minister of Labour, Consumer Protection and Government Services): Yes, I nom- inate MLA Teitsma for Chair. Clerk Assistant: Mr. Teitsma has been nominated. Any other nominations? Mr. Teitsma, please take the Chair. Mr. Chairperson: Thanks, everyone. Our next item of business is the election of a Vice- Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Mr. Helwer: I nominate Mr.

Teitsma –or, sorry, Mr. Micklefield as Vice-Chair. Mr. Chairperson: Are there any other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, Mr. Andrew Micklefield is elected Vice-Chairperson. This meeting has been called to consider the Report and Recommendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee, dated April 19th, 2022. Before we get started, I'd like to provide the com- mittee with some back ground infor mation on the process followed in the past when dealing with Judicial Compensation Committee reports.

At previous meetings, repre sentatives from the judges association and other groups have appeared, by leave, before the committee, and the minister respon- sible has made an opening statement, following– followed by a statement from the official opposition. I would also like to remind members that prior to concluding consideration of this report, pursuant to the provisions of

section 11.1(27) of The Prov incial Court Act, a motion will be required in order to adopt or reject so me or all of the recom mendations in the JCC report. Ms. Susan Dawes of the Prov incial Judges Association of Manitoba has asked permission to speak to the committee today. Is there agreement from the com mittee to hear Ms. Dawes? [Agreed] Are there any suggestions for how long we should sit this afternoon? Mr. Helwer: I suggest we sit for an hour and rise earlier if that is the case. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, a proposal has been made to sit for one hour and rise earlier if –by will of the committee.

Is that agreed? [Agreed] I will now call on Ms. Dawes to make her presen- tation. Ms. Dawes, welcome to the com mittee. Do you have any written materials to be distributed? Susan Dawes ( Provincial Judges Association of Manitoba): Thank you, and yes, I do.

10 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 9, 2022 Mr. Chairperson: All right, and just a reminder that you're limited to 10 minutes for your presentation. You can start whenever you're ready. S. Dawes: All right, good afternoon, Mr. Chairperson and members of the committee. So, I'm Susan Dawes, counsel for the Prov incial Judges Association of Manitoba, and you have before you for consideration the report and recommendations of the 2020 Judicial Compensation Committee –the 2020 JCC, as I will refer to it.

The 2020 JC C made recommendatio ns about appropriate compensation for judges for the period April 1st, 2020 to March 31st, 2023. The JCC process is required by our constitu tion. It's been recog nized that whenever the expenditure of public funds is involved, the decision is inherentl y political and the Supreme Court of Canada has deter mined that in order to protect the in dependence of the judiciary, the setting of compensation for judges must be depoliticized.

And in order to remove politics to the greatest extent possible, each province must put in place an in- stitutional sieve, as the court called it, a filter, to depoliticize the setting of compensation for judges. The government must make its proposals to this inde- pendent, objective and effective tribunal, which then makes recom mendations about what constitutes ap- propriate compensation. In Manitoba, the standing com mittee and ultim- ately the Legislature then considers the report and recommendations and may choose to implement or vary them.

If the decision is to vary, the Legislature must justify its decision by providing legitimate reasons for doing so, which are based on a reasonable, factual foundation. The Provincial Court Act sets out the process for Manitoba. It requires a three-person panel: nominee of the association, of the Province and a chairperson. The 2020 JCC was chaired by Mr. Michael Werier. This is the sixth JCC chaired by Mr. Werier, who has chaired every one since 2002, with the exception of 2008. He has a proven track record of making fair a nd reasonable recommendations, and undoubtedly that 's why he was chosen.

The 2020 JCC held hearings in summer of 2021. They were originally scheduled for the fall of 2020, but with the uncertainty of the pandemic, there was an unprecedented agreement to delay the hearings. The association and the Province both provided detailed written submissions to the commis sion–or the com - mittee, rather –and the com mittee then heard oral argument from the Province and the association. The association provided expert economic evidence from Dr.

Eugene Beaulieu, who is a professor in the depart- ment of economics at University of Calgary, and the Province also provided signi ficant economic data as part of its own submission, but didn' t require Mr.–or Dr. Beaulieu to be produced for cross-examination.

The Province 's repre sentatives, both its counsel and the civil servants who were involved in pre - paring the submissions, worked hard to advance the Province's position about what compensation was ap- propriate for judges for the years in question, and, following the deliberations, the com mittee provided a unanimous report between the chairperson, the Province's nominee and the association' s, and the report makes it clear that all of the submissions received were carefully considered by the com mittee in light of the factors that are set out in The Provincial Court Act.

I'll focus on the most sig nificant recom men- dation, and that is the judicial salaries for the three fiscal years begin ning April 1st of 2020. The JCC recommended a salary of $280,500 effective April 1st, 2020. In making its recom mendation for that year, the JCC considered the extensive evidence and arguments provided by both the Province and the association regarding appro priate salar ies for Prov - incial Court judges. In its analysis, it properly focused on the six factors that are identified in The Provincial Court Act.

From an economic perspective, the JCC accepted the gov ernment's position that Manitoba continues to sit in the mid -range economically among the provinces across Canada, and the JCC 's economic analysis included consid eration of the impact of COVID and the party's basic agreement that, notwith- standing the pandemic, Manitoba economy continues to be in the mid-range of Canadian economies.

Like past JCCs, it found that other prov incial judges in Canada are the most important comparators, and that Manitoba's salary should be in the mid-range of that paid to other judges, similar to how the – Manitoba's economy falls vis-à-vis the others. One significant consideration, which is identified in the act, is–and has been a focus for JCCs in the past, as well–is the three -province or designated average. And the act provides that if the salary figure that is recommended is less than or equal to the designated

August 9, 2022 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 11 average, which is certified by the chairperson of the JCC, then it is binding. The designated average is the average of judicial salaries in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan, and so based on the salar ies actually paid at the time of the JCC 's report being issued, the certified designated average was $272,766. That 's April 1st, 2020. * (14:10) However, only Saskatchewan had finalized its salary for that year at that time. And so the 2020 salaries for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were yet to be determined.

Accordingly, based on the salaries that were available to be certified by the chairperson, the 2020 salary is not binding. However, I 've provided you today with an updated chart, which shows the most current informa- tion about judicial salaries across the country, and I have prepared and provided updated calculations of the three-province average based on the salaries that are now known. And you will see that Nova Scotia has now esta - blished a s alary for 2020 of $269,198 following the conclusion of lengthy litigation in that province that went up to the Supreme Court of Canada.

That figure is consistent with what this association had estimated for Nova Scotia before the JCC. New Brunswick's salary has still not been deter - mined. The JCC there has conducted its hearings, but a report has not yet been released, so we don't have a final average. But simply based on the final Nova Scotia salary being included, the 2020 Manitoba salaries are below the three-province average for each of puisne judges, associate chiefs and the chief judge.

So, in other words, but for the delay in establish- ing Nova Scotia's salary, due to the Nova Scotia gov- ernment's actions and the ensuing litigation, Manitoba's 2020 recom mendation would have been binding under

section 11.1(23) of the act. And for the later years, the recom mendations will be close to or below the average once New Brunswick sets a salary. So you can see from national chart that the 2020 salary puts Manitoba judges ' salaries within a group of jurisdictions at the low end of judicial salaries, well below Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and the federal jurisdiction, and the same will be true for the 2021 and 2022 years. So that salary–the JCC went on to make a number of other recom mendations. I won 't address those unless you have questions about them.

And, in closing, I 'd like to make some general comments about the importance of the judicial compensation process. As I said at the outset, both parties put forward extensive written and oral submissions to the JCC. It is critical that these recommendations are respected or all of that work is for nothing. And I'll reiterate some- thing that I say each time I come down here and speak to these reports. We're talking about 42 judges. If you implement something other than what was recommended, it's not going to impact the Province 's bottom line in any meaningful way.

And as such, whatever you decide is symbolic more than anything else. And there 's two types of symbolism to choose from. The first is respect for the in dependence of the judiciary and the significance of this constitutionally mandated process. The second is the desire of a gov- ernment to send a message to groups with whom the Province is engaged in collective bargaining. The very purpose of the JCC process is to depoliticize the setting of judicial compensation. Now is not the time to look at this politically. The Province's position was carefully considered by the JCC.

All of its arguments were taken into account. The report is unanimous. It 's well reasoned. It takes into account the reasoning of past JCCs in Manitoba and the position advanced by the Province. So we urge you to respect the process, the need to protect judicial independence and to depoliticize the setting of judicial remuneration. You can do that by accepting in full the recommendations of this very ex- perienced, independent and objective panel.

So if you have questions, I would be pleased to do my best to answer them, but otherwise, on behalf of the association, thank you for granting us leave to speak to this matter. Mr. Chairperson: And thank you, Ms. Dawes, for your presentation. Just slightly over time, but I'll–I can allow that as the Chair. So, are there any questions for Ms. Dawes? Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Miigwech for your presentation. I do always enjoy the oppor tunity to hear you speak at committee, and so I really appre- ciate that.

12 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 9, 2022 You did mention a couple of times about depoliticizing the process, and I know in your final comments you noted that it is to accept the report. I mean, perhaps you can't answer this and maybe I 'm probably putting you on the spot, do–but do–have you found that the process has become more politicized in the last many years?

And again, we recognize that there is, you know, we've had –we've been dealing with COVID and so there's been some gaps and hiccups in respect of dealing with this, but is it a concern that this process has become more politicized in the last many years? Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Dawes–and before I acknowl- edge you, I just want to make sure everybody's aware we have about five minutes for questions. So, go ahead, you can respond. S. Dawes: Believe me, I could go on about this for much longer than five minutes, so I appre ciate the reminder.

Since the process was created –or sort of proclaimed by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1997, it has been an ongoing concern, politicization of the process across the country. There 's been litigation across the country from coast to coast. It arises periodically in all of the jurisdictions, I would say–or most of the juris dictions that have chosen to have a process such as this one, where government can reject the recom mendations, and we take the view, of course, that a binding process makes eminent sense, removes that element and that opportunity for politics to creep back in.

But in terms of this process, you know, t he submissions went in before the com mittee. It did its work. Now's the time when we can keep the process on track, so to speak, by respecting the recom men- dations and honouring the work of the committee. Ms. Fontaine: I ap preciate that response. And on behalf of–I'm–certainly, our colleagues on this side, I would imagine colleagues on the opposite side, just to convey our sincere miigwech for the im portant work that goes into these recom mendations. So, on behalf of that, miigwech for that work. Mr.

Helwer: Thank you for your presentation and for the recom mendations of the com mittee. I –we'll see what the committee judges here. I do want to remind the com mittee that then - Attorney General Andrew Swan, the NDP minister, declined the recommendations of the com mittee and went to court, and in the light of how we're moving to work closer and easier with people that have collective agreements, that's certainly not the recom - mendation that I would have. Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Dawes, wou ld you like to respond to that at all? S. Dawes: I would not. Mr.

Chairperson: Any further questions from members of the committee? Okay, then. Question period is over. We 'll now consider the report and–or the recommendations. Thank you, Ms. Dawes. Does the hon ourable minister wish to make any opening remarks today? Mr. Helwer: No. Mr. Chairperson: None. Does the official op position critic wish to make any remarks? Ms. Fontaine: So, once again, I want to say miigwech to Ms. Dawes for taking the time to present this im- portant report to the com mittee and to help us better understand the process that was under taken and has been undertaken and the importance of that work.

I would like to say miigwech to com missioner Werier and the panel memb ers and to all those who were involved in preparing these –this report. Certainly, it represents hours of research and hard work, and our Province is no doubt better off, thanks to all of this important effort. There is no question that the issue of judi cial compensation is very im portant. We want to attract the best and brightest and retain the best and brightest judges in Manitoba to ensure that we have a more wholesome, comprehensive, representative judicial.

I ap preciate the J -J-C is in dependent from the Province of Manitoba and the Prov incial Judges Association of Manitoba, and strives to provide an objective analysis of judicial compensation and make recommendations accordingly. The J -J-C helps find an appropriate middle ground betw een the Province and the association 's recom mendations, which we clearly saw outlined in this report. So, again, miigwech to everyone for being here today, for presenting and certainly in the pre paration of this report. Miigwech. * (14:20)

August 9, 2022 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Fontaine. Are there any questions from any members of the committee on the report? Seeing no questions, does the honourable minister have a motion? Mr. Helwer: I do, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairperson: You may move it. Mr. Helwer: I move THAT the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs: accept the recommendations in

schedule A; and recommend the same to the Legislative Assembly. Mr. Chairperson: It has been moved–[interjection]– oh. He needs to finish. Does he have to read the entire

schedule A? [interjection] All right, minister, you must read the

schedule A, apparently, so. Mr. Helwer:

SCHEDULE A Recommendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee accepted by the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs That the annual salaries for the puisne judges are: (

i) April 1st, 2020 to March 31st, 2021 is $280,500; (ii) April 1st, 2021 to March 31st, 2022 –a cumulative adjustment equal to the annual percentage change in the average weekly earnings for Manitoba on April 1st, 2021; (iii) April 1st, 2022 to March 31st, 2022 – cumulative adjustment equal to the annual percentage change in the average weekly earnings for Manitoba on April 1st, 2022. The percentage change in the average weekly earnings shall be calculated based on the percentage change over the preceding calendar year.

This recommendation should apply to all who were judges as of April 1st, 2020, including those who retired or otherwise leave the bench prior to implementation. 2. That the salary differentials for the chief judge and the associate chief judges remain in place as of April 1st, 2020. This will mean a salary of $320,940 for the chief judge, and $294,525 for the associate chief judges. This recommendation shall apply t o all judges who were either a chief judge or an associate chief judge as of April 1st, 2020, including those who retire or otherwise leave the bench prior to imple- mentation; simple interest– 3.

Simple interest shall be paid, from April 1st, 2020 to the date of retroactive payment of salary increase or increases including the differentials for the administrative judges and related per diems for senior judges, in accordance with the relevant prejudgment and post -judgment interest rates as set out in the The Court of Queen's Bench Act. 4.

Prejudgment interest shall be payable from April 1st, 2020 to the date the salary and per diem recommendations are imple mented, whether by vote of the Legislature or by virtue of s.11.1(29) of the act, and post -judgment interest should be payable from that date to the date that judges are paid the retroactive adjustments. 5. No interest shall be payable in respect of the period from October 22nd, 2020 to July 20th, 2021. 6. That effective April 1st, 2020, each full-time and senior judge's annual education allowance should be increased from $3,000 to $3,500.

This shall apply to all who were judges as at April 1st, 2020, including those who retire or otherwise leave the bench prior to implementation.

The combined amount of the education allowances of full -time judges and senior judges shall be provided to the court in an amalgamated fund to be administered by the chief judge in accordance with the principles set out below: Individual full -time judges and senior judges shall continue to have access to their educational allowance in order to fund their attendance at con- ferences and seminars, and/or for other edu ca- tional purposes, as approved by the chief judge in accordance with court policy.

With the consent of each individual full-time judge and senior judge, unused portions of each full-time judge and senior judge's education allowance may be used to the benefit of the court as a whole in relation to judicial education. All uses of the allowances are subject to approval by the chief judge in accordance with court policy.

14 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 9, 2022 7. That mandatory retirement be set at age 75, in accordance with The Courts Modernization Act. Consistent with the transitional provision in The Courts Modernization Act, judges who are over the age of 7 5 will continue to hold office until six months after the recommendation is implemented. 8. That changes to the CSSA via the superannuation amendment act will apply to the portion of judges' pensions that are held in the Civil Service Superannuation Fund.

For the purposes of the supplementary judicial pension, the commuted value shall continue to be calculated in accordance with the standard set out in The Pension Benefits Act and regulation as if it were a registered plan, as amended from time to time. For greater certainty, notwith standing the amendments to the civil service super annuation plan as set out in bill 43, the calculation of the commuted value of judges shall not be affected, and the supplementary plan shall fund any difference resulting from the change to The Civil Service Superannuation Act. 9.

That the parties engage in a process to create an administrative document that provides guidance on the judges ' supplemental pension plan and retirement insurance and that the Province contribute to the association 's reasonable legal and actuarial costs to a maximum of $7,500 for reviewing the Province's draft document. 10.

Effective April 1st, 2020, a senior master who resigns as senior master after serving at least seven years, and thereafter carries out the functions of a master shall be entitled to receive the greater of the current annual salary of a master and the annual salary they received immediately before the resignation. This should apply to all who were senior masters as at April 1st, 2020, including those who retire or otherwise leave their position as masters of the Court of Queen's Bench prior to implementation. 11.

The Province shall pay 75 per cent of the association's reasonable legal costs to a maximum aggregate of $55,000. 12. The Province shall pay 100 per cent of the association's disbursements including the costs of experts to a maximum of $30,000. 13. That, unless otherwise stated, all changes shall be effective on the date of approval by the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. 14. In these recommendations, date of approval means a. the date that the vote of concurrence referred to in some

section 11.1(28) of The Provincial Court Act takes place with respect to these recommendations; or b. if the recommendations must be implemented because of subsection 11.1(29) of The Provincial Court Act, the first day after the end of the 21- day period referred to in that subsection. Mr. Chairperson: I thank the minister for his extensive motion. I'm just going to ask if it's the will of the commit- tee to accept this motion or to use this motion as it was written in front of you? I think there was a couple of very minor faux pas, but if it's acceptable to the com- mittee, we will use the written copy.

Agreed? [Agreed] THAT the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs: accept the recommendations in

schedule A; and recommend the same to the Legislative Assembly.

SCHEDULE A Recommendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee accepted by the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs 1. That the annual salaries for puisne Judges are: (

i) April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021 is $280,500; (ii) April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022 - a cumulative adjustment equal to the annual percentage change in the average weekly earnings for Manitoba on April 1, 2021; (iii) April 1, 2022 to Mar ch 31, 2023 - cumulative adjustment equal to the annual percentage change in the average weekly earnings for Manitoba on April 1, 2022. The percentage change in the average weekly earnings shall be calculated based on the percentage change over the precedi ng calendar year. This recommendation should apply to all who were Judges as of April 1, 2020, including those who retired or otherwise leave the Bench prior to implementation.

August 9, 2022 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 15 2. That the salary differentials for the Chief Judge and the Associate Chief Jud ges remain in place as of April 1, 2020. This will mean a salary of $302,940 for the Chief Judge, and $294,525 for the Associate Chief Judges. This recommendation shall apply to all Judges who were either a Chief Judge or an Associate Chief Judge as of Apr il 1, 2020, including those who retire or otherwise leave the Bench prior to implementation. 3. Simple interest shall be paid, from April 1, 2020 to the date of retroactive payment of salary increase(

s) including the differentials for the administrative Judges and related per diems for Senior Judges, in accordance with the relevant prejudgment and post-judgment interest rates as set out in the The Court of Queen's Bench Act. 4. Prejudgment interest shall be payable from April 1, 2020 to the date the salary and per diem recommendations are implemented (whether by vote of the Legislature or by virtue of s.11.1(29) of the Act), and post-judgment interest should be payable from that date to the date that Judges are paid the retroactive adjustments. 5.

No interest shall be payable in respect of the period from October 22, 2020 to July 20, 2021. 6. That effective April 1, 2020 each full -time and Senior Judge 's annual education allowance should be increased from $3,000.00 to $3,500.00. This shall apply to all who were Judges as at April 1, 2020, including those who retire or otherwise leave the Bench prior to implemen- tation.

The combined amount of the education allowances of full-time Judges and Senior Judges shall be provided to the Court in an amalgamated fund to be administ ered by the Chief Judge in accordance with the principles set out below: Individual full -time Judges and senior Judges shall continue to have access to their educational allowance in order to fund their attendance at conferences and seminars, and/or for ot her educational purposes, as approved by the Chief Judge in accordance with Court policy.

With the consent of each individual fulltime Judge and Senior Judge, unused portions of each full - time Judge and Senior Judge 's education allowance may be used to the benefit of the Court as a whole in relation to judicial education. All uses of the allowances are subject to approval by the Chief Judge in accordance with Court policy 7. That mandatory retirement be set at age 75 in accordance with The Courts Modernization Act.

Consistent with the transitional provision in The Courts Modernization Act, Judges who are over the age of 75 will continue to hold office until six months after the recommendation is implemented. 8. That changes to the CSSA via The Super - annuation Ame ndment Act will apply to the portion of Judges ' pensions that are held in the Civil Service Superannuation Fund.

For the purposes of the supplementary judicial pension, the commuted value shall continue to be calculated in accordance with the standard set out in The Pension Benefits Act and Regulation as if it were a registered plan, as amended from time to time. For greater certainty, notwithstanding the amendments to The Civil Service Super - annuation Plan as set out in Bill 43, the calcu- lation of the com muted value of judges shall not be affected, and the supplementary plan shall fund any difference resulting from the change to The Civil Service Superannuation Act. 9.

That the parties engage in a process to create an administrative document that provides guidance on the Judges ' supplemental pension plan and retirement insurance and that the Province contribute to the Association' s reasonable legal and actuarial costs to a maximum of $7,500.00 for reviewing the Province's draft document. 10.

Effective April 1, 2020, a Senior Master who resigns as Senior Master after serving at least seven years, and thereafter carries out the functions of a Master shall be entitled to receive the greater of the current annual salary of a Master and the annual salary they receive d immediately before the resignation. This should apply to all who were Senior Masters as at April 1, 2020, including those who retire or otherwise leave their position as Masters of the Court of Queen's Bench prior to implementation. 11.

The Province shall pay 75% of the Association' s reasonable legal costs to a maximum aggregate of $55,000. 12. The Province shall pay 100% of the Association's disbursements including the costs of experts to a maximum of $30,000. 13. That, unless otherwise stated, all changes shall be effective on the date of approval by the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

16 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 9, 2022 14. In these recommendations, "date of approval" means a. the date that the vote of concurrence referred to in subsection 11.1(28) of The Provincial Court Act takes place with respect to these recommen- dations; or b. if the recommendations must be implemented because of subsection 11.1(29) of The Provincial Court Act, the first day after the end of the 21-day period referred to in that subsection. Mr. Chairperson: The motion is in order, but now I have to say this. Sorry. It has been moved by Minister Helwer THAT the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs: accept the recommendations in

schedule A; and recommend the same to the Legislative Assembly.

SCHEDULE A Recommendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee– Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you–dispense. The long look was sufficient to catch the attention of my fellow committee members. The motion is in order and the floor is open for questions. Any questions from members of the committee? Seeing no questions, is the com mittee ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr.

Chairperson: Shall the motion pass? [Agreed] If there are no further questions or comments, is it the will of the committee to report to the House that we have completed our con sideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee, dated April 19th, 2022? [Agreed] The hour being 2:30 p.m., what is the will of the committee? Some Honourable Members: Rise. Mr. Chairperson: Committee rise. COMMITTEE ROSE AT: 2:30 p.m.

The Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Debates and Proceedings are also available on the Internet at the following address: http://www.manitoba.ca/legislature/hansard/hansard.html

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	42-4-la3
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	42nd 4th hansardpdf la3.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	b2255e48b92e2b983ab56fa03da9a03a16016acc

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