Manitoba Hansard — 8 June 1994 (Sitting 43, 35th Legislature, 5th Session)

35-5-43

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session -Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourt�ble Denis C. Rocan Speaker Vol. XLID No. 43 • 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 8,1994 JSSN OS42-S492

NAME ASHI'ON, Steve BARRE'IT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHO.MIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Tun, Hon. EVANS,Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon.

FRIESEN, Jean MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constttuellcles and PoUttc:al AftlUatton CONS1ITUENCY Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley GAUDRY, Neil GII.LESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli HELWER, Edward R. lnCKES, George KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon.

MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCORMICK, Norma McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. P ALLIS TER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK. Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry STEP ANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosano Point Douglas The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St.

Johns Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Osborne Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Rossmere Kirkfield Parle Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry Swan River PARTY. NDP NDP Liberal NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal Liberal NDP PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC Liberal PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP

3195 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, June 8, 1994 The House met at 1: 30 p.m. PRAYERS RO� PROCEEDINGS TABUNG OF REPORTS Bon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to table , first of all, the Annual Report for the Department of Rural Development, 1992-93 . I would also like to table the first Annual Report fo r Manitoba Decentralization. I would also like to table the Supple mentary Information for Legislative Review for Decentralization. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill18-Tb e Insuran ce Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Duchanne ), that leave be given to introd uce Bill 18, The Insurance Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les as suran ces, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill19- The Mental Health Amend ment Act Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey), that leave be given to introduce Bill 19 , The Mental Health Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia sant� mentale ), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill21 -T he Manitoba Medical Association Dues Act Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey), that leave be given to introduce Bill 21, The Manitoba Medical Association Dues Act (Loi sur la cotisation de 1 'Ass ociation m�dicale do Manitoba), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. BilllO-The Municipal Amendment Act Bon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Developmen t): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mr. Gilleshammer), that leave be given to introduce Bill 20, The Municipal Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les munici pali�s), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. , Bill22-Tbe Statute Law Amendment Act, 1994 Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey), I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), that leave be given to introduce Bill 22, The Statute Law Amendment Act, 1994 (Loi de 1994 modifiant diverses dispositions l�gislatives), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. •

(1335) Bill23-The Manitoba Historical Society Property Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Duchanne ), that leave be given to introduce Bill 23 , The Manitoba

3196 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 Historical Society Property Act;

Loi sur les biens de Ia Soci6t6 historique du Manitoba, and that the same be now received and read a first lime. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, having been advised of the contents of the bill, recommends it to the House. I would like to table the message . Motion agreed to. Bill 214-Tbe Freed om of Information Amendment Act Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. James (Mr. Edwards), that leave be given to introduce Bill 214, The Freedom of Inf ormation Amendment Act Mr.

Speaker: It has been mo ved by the honourable member for Inkster, seconded by the honourable Leader of the second opposition party, that leave be given to introduce Bill 214, The Freedom of Inf ormation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia libert6 d' acc�s ll l'inf onnation, and that the same be now received and read a first lime. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, 1be Freed om of Inf ormation Act, the act which the government takes great pride in, has one clause in it that many refer to as the Mack truck clau se, in which it gives so much discretion to cabinet and cabinet ministers to deny access to op position parties to getting vital information that would help us in terms of fa cilitating a more constru ctive critique of the government.

So this is an attempt from the Liberal Party to try to get government to provide the information that is needed, Mr. Speaker, and we anticipate the official opposition and, hopefully, the government will see the light of day in providing better inf ormation to the opposition parties, will e nsure that in fa ct there is better debate inside the Chamber. Thank you. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Gue s ts Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions , may I direct the atte ntion of honourable members to the gall ery, where we have with us this afternoon from the Springs of Living Water Acad emy, we have seventeen Grades 8 and 9 students under the direction of Mr. Brad Dowler. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for SL Vital (Mrs. Render). From the Roland Lauze School, we have seventeen Grade 5 students under the direction of Mrs. Matilda Gibb. This school is located in the constituency of the honou rable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton).

From the Maf eking School , we have twenty-one Grades 5 and 6 students under the direction of Ms. Gladys Wyatt. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk). From the Pinawa Secondary School , we have twenty-six Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. Brian McKenzie . This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr. Pramik). On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. •

(1340) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD The Winnipeg Jets Operating Losses Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Oppo s ition) : Mr. Speaker, in November of 1991, we op posed the deal the government had signed with the Jets and the Oty of Winnipe g. We opposed it, because it was a blank cheque for the operating losses of the team for capital liability and also a blank cheque to guarantee a return to the owners. We have been trying for two and a half years to find out the pro jections the government had about the exposure that the public and the taxpayers would have to the agreement that was prop osed and ratified by the Premier.

Unfortunate ly, we could not get those numbers and I had to ask the Provincial Auditor on May 5, 1994, for an analysis of the numbers that the provincial government had and what it meant to the public of Manitoba.

June S, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 3197 Today, we have been given, for the fust time, inform ation that the govemment in 1991 knew the pro jected losses would be $43.5 million for the terms of the agreem ent. I want to ask the Premier: Did he inform his cabinet of the potential $43 .5-m ill ion losses? Why did he not inform the public of Manitoba, who are also responsible for these losses? Bon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the member opp osite, of course, is attempting to sensationalize a situation in which the objective was to ensure we had a reasonable business arrang ement un der which to ma intain the operations of the Wmnipeg Jets in Winnipeg over a period of time in order to preserve over a thousand jobs and estimated annual revenues to three levels of gov emm ent of some $14 million ann ually.

We were, in eff ect, becoming partners in an arran gement that would ensure that various things happe ned, one of which was that the commitments that already bad been undertaken by Winnipe g Entelprises Coxporation to acce pt their share of the losse s-rather, to accept losses in excess of $200, 000 ann ually would also result in the shares that were then beneficially held by the Entetprises Coxporation being able to be sold on a pro rata basis with other shares of the club, should that club ultimately have to be sold because it could no longer function in Winni peg.

In other words, the upside being the potential of receiving back some , of course, of the 36 percent shares-some $18 milli on was not there under the previous agreement , and is there under the current agreement-the continued revenue stream of $14 million annually to three levels of government remains in Winnipeg; and the employment in excess of a thousand jobs, a thousand people over the period of time of the agreement. All of that on an interim basis until a solution could be fo und as to whether or not we would be able to build a new arena or a facility that would accommodate the Jets for the future .

That, of course , was the objective, continues to be the objective and is the rationale behind the acceptance of responsibility for losses of the club in order to maintain all of those benefits and in order to ensure, should a sale be the only option, that in fact the $18 mill ion would accru e to the govemments who own the shares. Mr. Doer: The Premier did not answer the question. Mr. Speaker, I asked the Premier whether he in fact had informed his cabinet of the downside of the agreement, and why he did not inform the public of the downside.

I recall the Premier, when he had his press conf erence, telling us we had peace in our time in terms of the hockey team, that he informed us of all the upsides. But I do not remember at all-and we looked back through our numbers, because we have been asking this question for two and a half years-the Prem ier presenting the downside of the agreement. Why did the Premier withhold the proj ections that he had in his band fro m the public who are paying the money and responsible for the money? Why did he only give us the upside of the agreem ent, which he repeats today in the House?

Why did he not make public the downside of the $43.5 -million projections that he had in his hands when he agreed to this interim arran gement with the Jets? Mr. Film on: Mr. Speaker, firstly, there was no hesitation ever to acknowledge that we would be responsible for the losses. That was part and parcel of the agreement and we said so publicly, and nobody ever attempted to hide it. It was an area in which the--b ut by the same token, if the member takes the projection of direct revenues to government over those same six years, he will have a figure that is double the level in which he is talking about losses.

So the upside is that you retain a revenue stream that is twice as large as the average losses that are accrued over the period of time, and you retain over a thousand jobs , and you retain a $40- to $50 -million economic spinoff to the economy as a result of it- An Honourable Member: And 36 percent of an asset. •

(1345) 3198 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 Mr. Filmon: -and 36 percent of an asset that can be sold , should it prove that the team no longer is viable here if an arena is not to be built in the future. All of those things were talked about, and he knows very well that they were talked about That was the basis on which he made his judgm ent and we made our judgment. Our judgment was to attempt to preserve the team here. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, but the public never had this inf ormation; the public was never given the pro jected losses.

The cabinet-and I cannot believe cabinet agreed to this agree ment-bad a $43 .5 million in November of 1991. That was never shared with the public . It required an auditor to go in and ferret out the minister's and Premier 's briefing notes from 1991 so we can finally know the exact amount of money oflosses. We heard the upsides at the press conference that the Premier had with the mayor. We have heard the upsides all the way through, but we bad never had the downside . We have never had the bottom-line numbers until today . My final question is to the Premier.

He has referred this matter to one blue-chip committee, to another blue-chip committee, to a third blue-chip committee. I believe it is now before the Bums committee . The obje ctive of the interim agree ment was to resolve the issue of the Jets and its ownership and its faci lity here in the city of Wmnipeg and the province of Manitoba. Are we any further ahead in terms of resolving the issue of a long-term ownership of the hockey team in Manitoba today than we were in November of 1991 in spite of the losses that we have had and the losses that are projected to take place in the next seven years? Mr .

Filmon: Mr. Speaker, firstly, I repeat. It was made public that we were taking the respo nsibility for the losses. That was never denied. That was never bidden. Secondly, I point out to him that if he wants to look at those figures, in the first two years, where losses were anticipated, losses did not materialize. So those losses did not take place in the first two years, and in the third year they were less than what was projected. So, in fact, nobody is attempting to mislead anybody or ever has. The only one who is attempting to mislead is the member opposite with his sensationalism. Point of Order Mr.

Doer: Point of orde r, Mr. Speaker. The Premier is imputing mo tives in terms of misleading the public. We have called for the last two and a half years to find out these numbers, and we had to go to the Provincial Auditor because the Premier would not tell us these numbers . It is the first time ever we have had the fact confirmed that in 1991 he knew the numbers and withheld them from the publ ic. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member does not have a point of order. ••• Mr. Filmon: No one knew the numbers because the numbers were only pro jections, projections which may or may not ever come to be.

I point out to him, in the first two years pro jected losses did not materialize. In the third year pro jected losses were less than- Mr. Speaker: Order, pl ease. For clarification, I ruled on your point of order. There was no point of order, and then the honourable Frrst Minister was finishing answering. Oh, on a new point of order. Okay. Point of Order Mr. Doer: I believe the First Minister had sat down when I stood up on a point of orde r. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Fus t Minister did sit down on your point of order.

I ruled on your point of order, and then I recognized the honourable First Minister to finish with his response. ••• Mr . Filmon: Mr. Speaker, as I pointed out, in the fi rst two years the projected losses did not materialize. In the third year the actual losses were still less than the pro jected losses. So, in fact, the information shared was the inf onn ation that was appropriate to be shared and there continues to be two sides to the issue, one of which was: There are revenue streams that accrue directly to government

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3199 in tenns of taxation revenue. There are people employed in excess of 1,000, there are economic benefits throughout the economy in the range of $40 million to $50 million, and our objective is still to atte mpt to keep the Wmnipeg Jets operating in Winnipeg to maintain those benefits for the people of Manitob a. Domestic Violence Stayed Charges Mr. Gord Mackintosh (SL Jolms) : Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Acting Minister of Justice. Yesterday , the government introduced its new tolerance policy on domestic violence.

This new get-soft approach to assault means charges are dropped if the victim agrees not to testify. My question to the minister is: How is there justice when a charge is dropped and, apart from the victim 's te stimony , there is evidence of an assault? An ass ault is an ass aulL •

(1350) Bon. James McCrae (Acting Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : Mr. Speaker, the honourable member and the Minister of Justice (Mrs. V odrey) have discussed this initiative in detail during the Estimates discussion fo r the Department of Justice, so for the honourable member to call this some kind of a new policy, he already knows, is incorre ct, and he is absolutely wrong because this initiative is an enhancement of our zero-tolerance policy .

It is, as part of the pro ject, the Crown and a representative from the Women 's Advocacy program interviewing complainants, and the Crown will only stay proceedings where the victim does not want to proceed through the comt p roces s. This allows the court process to work more ef ficiently . The honourable member knows all this. This was discussed in detail . However, if there are any other questions like this , I would be pleased to pass them on to the Minister of Justice, but the honourable member is very wrong- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Mackintosh : Just to clarify, Mr.

Speaker, this matter just became known publicly yesterday and has not been dealt with in Estimates. Women's Advocacy Program Funding Mr. Gord Mackintosh (SL Jo lms): My question is: Given that charges can now be dropped even if the victim has been coerced or intimidated from testifying by the assailant and counselling for victims is essential to prevent this, would the government confinn that it is closing another door to victims by refusing to continue fu nding to victim services in five Manitoba communities and has refused to enhance the Wmnipeg Women's Advocacy Program? Bon.

James McCrae (Acting Minister of Justice and Attorney General ): The reason this government supports and funds the Women's Advocacy Program and has seen it expanded and the Family Violence Court expanded over the last fe w years is because of its commitment to the zero-tolerance aspect with respect to family violence. The honourable member does not say much positive about the ability of the Wom en's Advocacy people to identify where intimidation exists , and I think the honourable member owes the people involved in that program some explanation for his comments today. Domestic Violence Court Backlog Mr.

Gord Mackintosh (SL Jolms): Mr. Speaker, this government 's response to backlogs is to drop cases rather than competently managing the court. Given that on one day the Minister of Justice said to this House the backlog in Family Violence Court was four and a half months, the next day in this House said it was seven months, while everyone in the system knows it is up to one year, my question to the minister is: What role did the government play in effectively dis ciplining the only judge who has spoken up against this backlog?

3200 LEGISLA11VE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 Bon. James McCrae (Ac:ting Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : I remind the honourable member that becaus e of the conduct and the perf ormance of the gove rnment that he surely supported before ows came along, the backlog in our courts was 14 months . Through measures like the Family Violence Court and other measures, that has been reduced si gnificantly, and while traffic in the courts is alway s heavy these days, the Minister of Jus tice (Mrs. Vodrey) is doing everything in her power to make sure that the system wotks well for people . Mr.

Speaker, with respect to the latest question of the honourable member as a lawyer, I am shocked and outraged that he would suggest that the government of Manitoba or the Minister of Justice would have any role whatsoever in a decision properly made by the judiciary in this province. His question implie s that the Minister of Ju stice has somehow interfered in the independence of the judiciary. I as k that honourable member to lay a charge, to make a charge, or els e to make an apology to the honourable Minister of Justice and all of the members on this side of the House. The Winnipeg Jets Liability Cap Mr.

Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Oppo sition) : Mr. Speaker, picking up on some of the comments from the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) and the responses of the Premier (Mr. Filmon) on the agree ment signed in November of 1991 with the Winnipeg Jets organization, my question is to the Premier. In the same agreement that committed the government, the taxpayers, the combined City of Winni peg and provincial obligations, to $43.5 million, the franchise was valued at $50 mill ion.

Why did the govemment agree to pick up losses over a five-ye ar period in excess of 80 percent of the value of the franchise , given that, in the very same agreemen t, they put that value at $50 milli on, and why was there no cap put in place on the liability of the taxpayers? Bon. Gary Filmon (Premier) : Becaus e of the very simple reason that through the agreement that Winnipeg Enterp rise s alre ady had, they were already obligated to piclc up those losses.

Secondarily, it did, in fact, validate the value of their shares by virtue of the new aspect of the agreement that ensured that, on the sale of shares, the $18 million or whate ver was the sale price would, in fact, be repaid. Under the old agreement, legal opinion su gges ted that the 64 percent majority ownership could trans fe r the team and never have to recompens e the Winnipeg Enterprises for the existing shares. Finall y, in addition to that, the member neglects to say that it maintai ned a re venue st ream to govemments of some $14 mill ion ann ually during that period of time. Mr. Edwards: Mr.

Speaker, the Premier con sistently talks about-because, of course , he has to, given the se loss pro jection s-- the other value of the Jets in terms of creating jobs in the outside econo my. What he does not say is how many thousands of people could have been employed spending that $43 .5 million some other way. That is never talked ab out, the lost opportunity of those millions of dollars, paying people a fr action of what the players of the Wmnipeg Jets geL Private Investors Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition) : My second question for the Premie r: 1be private investors put up $7.8 mill ion.

That is a secured fund , secured by the province with their share s in the Winnipeg Jets. Why was it only required that private investors put up less than one-fifth of what the taxpayer is committed to in covering losses? Indeed, the private investors were allowed to have se curity for their investment, making it in eff ect a loan rather than an outright grant to the Wmni peg Jets. Bon. Gary Filmon (Prem ier) : Mr.

Speaker, I do not think that economics is probably involved in a lawyer 's training, given that question, because the member does not recognize that our share of the losses is only a sm all fraction of the money that is

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3201 spent by the operatioos of the team here. In fact, the team 's budg et is four times that which is involved in the picking up of the l osses . That all pays people who work in hotels, in restamants, in transportation, in travel, in support services, in are nas and all of those things. That is where over a thousand jobs come.

I dare say that the expenditure by governments of something like $6 million in a year would not create over a thousand jobs, would not create anywhere close to that So I would suggest that he go ba ck and get a little bit of ec onomic unders tanding bef ore he makes those kinds of sug gestions. Baade Report Government Position Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition) : Mr. Speaker, my final question for the Premier: The economist who did the most thorough study of prof essional sports and its economic benefits is Dr.

Robert Baade from the United States who studied 57 cities over 30 years in four professional sports. 'There are a number of reports conflicting on Ibis issue. My question for the Premier (Mr. Filmon), because I asked him Ibis a number of weeks ago in Estimates: Has his government assessed that report? Can he pro duce today a synopsis from government of that report 's conclusioos which spe cifically states that the economic benefit of profe ssional sports teams, including the Wmnipeg Jets, is ma ssively overstate d? That is the conclusion of that report. Can the Premier produce a critique of that report?

He obviously does not agree with iL Where is the- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Bon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the second opposition party bas raised this question once or twice before. One of these days I guess we will find out where the Leader of the Second Opposition really stands on the entire issue of the Jets and the economic benefit that they are to the province of Manitoba and what he wants to try and do and what he believes in. I do agree with the Pr emier (Mr.

Film on) that it would do some good for the Leader of the Opp osition to take some economic course s in terms of economic benefits of business entities here in our pro vince. We have had an opp ortunity to receive the Baade report, and we have had an opp ortunity to review that rep ort. We also have the Lavalin Report.

We also have the Coopers and Lybrand report, reports that suggest that there is a $50- million economic benefit in the province of Manitoba that indicate there is appr oximately 1,400 jobs generated by the Wmnipeg Jets in the ec onomy of Manitoba and the significant economic benefits that they derive to our province. The Baade report takes a certain app roach in terms of comparing investments in sporting prof essional organizatioos and facilities, to other kinds of investments , and it takes a dif fe rent app roach than some of these studies.

But I would also encourage the Leader of the second opposition party to be serious on Ibis issue, to look at all of the kinds of reports, reports done by very reputable organizatioos right here in our province and by senior business lea ders, Mr. Speaker, like Mr. Art Mauro. • (14 00) Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre Funding Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows) : Mr.

Speaker, in Family Services Estimates, the Minister of Family Services announced a new strategic thrust for Child and Family Services agencies of stress ing family supp ort and family presetvation. 'There is already an excellent organization that is doing that and that is the Ma Mawi Wi Chi ltata Centre and they have written to the Minister of Family Services and said that another year at a 10 percent reduction is cre ating havoc with the delivery of our programs to the community we setve.

I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services: What is she doing to implement Ibis new strategic thrust by giving additional resources to the Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre in order that they can carry out the mandate that they have which keeps children out of more costly care?

3202 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June S, 1994 Bon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Famlly Services): Mr. Speaker, indeed, we have set forth as a government a new vision for child welfare in the province of Manitoba, and that is family support, fam ily preservation and family responsibility. Mr. Speaker, we will be working and I will continue to work and to meet with community organizations to ensure that that new thrust and that new vision are fo llowed through with.

I have indicated there is a fund , and it is committed in our budget, $2.5 million, the Family Support Innovations Fund, that will look at innovative and creative new ways of doing business. Mr. Martindale: I would like to thank the minister for that answer and to ask her if the Ma Mawi Wi Centre is eligible for the Family Support Innovations Fund, and if so, will this make up for the funding they have lost, partly through research studies and partly through the 10 percent cut last year, which was not restored this yeatl Mrs. Mitchels on: Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated, I will be meeting with and working with all commun ity organizations and the Child and Family Services agencies to ensure that the dollars we put into ea rly intervention, early child development, fam ily support, family preservati on will be used in the very best manner possible to ensure that we reach out to as many children and families as we possibly can right throughout the province of Manitoba. I will be, as I said, working on that new initiative with the community, and when those announcements are ready and available, they will be made. Mr.

Martindale: I would like to ask the minister if she will agree to meet with the Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre, since sh e has agreed to meet with organizations, and will she take seriously their concerns and their need for funding? Since moving to their new location, their caseload is up by 75 percent. Will she undertake to meet with this organization at the first available op portunity? Mrs. Mitchelson : I take very seriously the concern for all children throughout the province of Manitoba to e nsure their safety, their security and their development I have never refused to meet with any organization.

I have indeed met with many people since I have become the Minister of Family Services, and I will continue to do that At their request, I will certainly sit down and meet with them and discuss all of the options and oppo rtunities available. Private Personal Care Homes Operating Agree ment Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, last Thmsday the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) raised questions about Mr. David Pascoe, and I have a brie f response for the honourable member. 1be Nursing Home Association of Manitoba, an organization representing proprietary personal care homes, retained Mr.

Pascoe to act as a consultant for their organization. Manitoba Health played no role in Mr. Pascoe's retention by the association nor in his rem unera tion. All honourable members should be aware that my department continues to rely on the expert research resources of the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation.

In their report of Novem ber of 1993, assessing the quality of care in Manitoba personal care homes by using administra tive data to monitor outcomes, they concluded that, and I quote: Overa ll, the care in Manitoba's nursing homes appears to be very good, and I am advised that long-tenn care staff are fo llo wing up on the report carefully monitoring quality and performance in Manitoba 's proprietary and nonpropriet ary personal care homes. Environmental Legislation Enforcement Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson) : Mr.

Speaker, the report of March 1993 from the Economic Innovation and Technology Council review on environment labs stated that Manitoba has typically followed in the implementation of legislation and enforcement as op posed to leading it, and that Manitoba typically has not been

June S, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3203 aggressive in the enforcement of various environmental legis lation. With 58 dif fe rent types of establishments ma ndated under dif ferent legi slation for inspections and enforc ement, everything from swimming facil ities to air emissions to hazardous waste storage, I would like to ask the Minister of Environment: How does the decline in the number of st aff years in the department aff ect this government 's ability to enforce environmental laws? Bon. Glen Cu mmings (Min ister of Environment) : Mr.

Speaker, I hope the member did not intentiooally put on the record misleading information, because I am sure she knows full well that the number of staff that are employed in the Department of Environment bas been adj usted this year beca us e the laboratory is now run independently of the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment will in fact be a client of the laboratory . That accounts for, I believe, 36 personnel who are employed in Ward lab. Ms. Cerilli.: Mr.

Speaker, the staff complement in the department bas decreased in st aff years from 224 to 17 5 since 1991, with an 11 .4 percent reduction in the budget. Does Manitoba have the resources in the Department of Environment to enf orce all of its regulations in the province of Manitoba? Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the vast ma jority of iss ues that are raised that come through my office are that we are very often accused of over re gula ting.

Yesterday , in Estimates, as a matter of fact, we reviewed some of the inspections and regulatory aspects of the departmenL We , by priori tization, have carrie d out some very intensive inspections in specific areas. For example, the numbers wo uld indicate that potenti ally every swimming pool for which we are responsible in the province probably received three inspections last s umm er.

It seems to me to be a fai rly adequa te inspection program from the pub lic health inspectors within the departmenL On the public health side, the fo od services inspections, in fact, were a considerable multiple of the number of establishments for which we are responsible. So, Mr. Speaker, our level of inspection is quite high. Ms. Cerilli: Mr.

Speaker, since in the Estimates the minister confirmed that the re are 70 staff responsible for inspection and enforcement in all of Manitoba for all of the laws for which this department is responsible, can the minister explain to the House why reports are saying that Manitoba bas not typically been aggressive in the enfo rcement of various laws and legislation on the environment in this province? Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, there is a diff erence between being aggressive and doing a comprehensive jo b of taking care of the responsibilities within the department.

We talked about this yesterday in Estimates as well, but I guess there was no opportunity to get it on camera. The fact is that we, through the Department of Environment, take advantage of a num ber of other department to assist in enfor cement. We use Natural Resources peop le; we use RCMP; we use a number of other government employees wherever the situation warran ts. As a matter of fa ct, a perfect example last fall was the very succe ssf ul operation that was completed to control the amount of smoke that might get into this city during the period of stubble burning in the f all.

We bad complete co-operation fr om the RCMP, local police off icials, the Department of Agricu lture , and Natural Reso urces. All of these combined to make a very effecti ve workforce on behalf of the environm ental law. Private Personal Care Homes Operating Agree m e nt Mr. Dave Chomiak ( Kil d o na n) : Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health, who only half answered a question that I asked last week after a week. My question to the minister is: Can the minister confirm that the Nursing Home Association bas en tered into or is in the process of entering into an

3204 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 agreement to be self-regulating with respect to nu rsing homes with the provincial government? An Honourable Member: He half asked the question. •

(1410) Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Somebody observed that it was only a half-asked question, too, Mr. Speaker. So if it was only half answered, perhaps that explains it. Mr. Speaker: What did I bear? Mr. McCrae: I think the honourable member asked if we were engaging in some kind of arrang eme nt whereby there would be self -regulation. The regulation of personal care homes is not something to be treated without a great deal of seriousness by the govemment.

That is why we have a task: force at woik addressing issues like the regulation of personal care, about the standards that are existing today and whether or not they are being properly lived up to. I have made no agreement to relinquish control of the regulation of personal care. Mr. Speaker: Order, pl ease. Prior to recognizing the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr.

Cbomiak), I believe in the response given by the honourable Minister of Health-and I am not too sure exactly the comments or the words spoken by the honourable minister, but what I am going to do at this time, sir, I am going to take this matter under advisement. I am going to peruse Hansard, and I will come back to the House and I will be either asking him to withdraw or t� Some Hon ourable Members : Ob, ob. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I have suggested that I have not heard the c omm ents, and I am going to peruse Hansard and I will come back to the House after carefully reviewing the remaiks. Point of Order Mr.

McCrae: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, it is my sincere hope that when you peruse Hansard that Hansard correctly sets out precisely what I said. The words that I used bad a "k" in it, and I used the expression "half-asked question ." Mr. Speaker : I would hope so, sir. I would sincerely hope so. ••• Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, in his response the minister see med to contradict himself between his previous response and his first response to my question, and that was, the minister said everything was fine in the nursing homes, and there was no need to look at them.

In his second response be said, well, that is why we are looking at redoing the regulations. What is the purpose of the task: force then to examine the existing conditions in nursing homes as they presently exist toda y?-because there are some probl ems. Mr. McCrae: I would not have meant to imply that there is not always room for improvement. I did not mean to imply that at all. I was simply setting out for the honourable member what the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation said in its report. It used the words, overall the care in Manito ba's nursing home appears to be very good.

That is not an all-inclusive statement. As I am sure even the centre sets out in its report, there are are as that need to be addr essed, and we are addre ssing them through the task force that I referred to. So I hope the honourable member would not deliberately misunderstand me when I quote something from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation. That was said by this independent age ncy, but we are still having a task: fo rce to review the re gulations and standards , staffing and compli ance .

That is because we place the needs of the residents of personal care homes in Manitoba as the highest priori ty. Mr. Chomiak : Can the minister therefore con finn that there is no proposal on the table right now whereby proprietary nursing homes under the Nursing Home Association of Manitoba will be self-policing or self-regulating and that in fact that is the reason Mr. David Pascoe bas been hired by that ass ociation to carry out that woik?

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3205 Mr. McCrae: If the honourable member wants to know why that ass ociation hired Mr. Pascoe, let him ask that ass ociation, because I do not speak for the assoc iation. Lou isiana-Pacific Emissi on Controls Ms. No rma Mc Cormick (Osbor ne) : My question is to the Minister of the Enviroom ent. The minister has repeatedly assured us in Enviroom ent Estimates and in this House that the process for setting environmental co ntrol standards is adequate, well understood and sufficient to protect the health of Manitobans.

Today, in a CBC rep ort, Louisian a-Pacific official, Dan Dilworth, is quoted as saying VOC emissions are not an issue in Manitoba because the province bas not made any rules about emissions of these chemicals. Unf ortunately, the company is correct. My question to the minister: Does be disa gree with Mr. Dilw orth's statement, and can be table the standards which be says do app ly? Bon . Glen Cummi ngs (Ministe r of Environment) : Mr.

Speaker, as we discussed yestetday in Estimates, the setting of the air quality standards, the premise with which the departmem and the regulatory regime begins, is that the human health and the best possible level of protection for human health is the requirement for which we then base our standaids . The company is then challenged to produce techn ology , to produce a process that will guarantee that any emissions they may release or may possibly potential ly have for release are not such that they will exceed those standards which are set at the maximum level of prote ction for human health. Ms.

McCorm ick: A toxic chemical expert speaking on behalf of Louisiana-Pacific yestetday admitted under questioning that there could be dozens, even hundr eds, of chemicals with unknown health effects which could be released by this operati on. For bow many and what compounds does the department intend to set emission standards to ensure the protection of the surrounding community? Mr. C ummings: I am not going to enter into a debate in this House to do the wotk of the Oean Environment Commission at this particular juncture.

Presentations that may or may not have been made at the commissi on, I will wait until the commissi on bas examined the relevance of those commems. Let me be very clear that the province [interjection] Yes, let me be perfectly clear -I need a little help from behind me-that the province av ail itself of the best possible inf ormation acros s the country, and that means that we do not preclude any inform ation that will be brought to bear on this particular licence or on any other.

Because the province is not specifically pursuing one particular emission, that does not mean that we cannot acquire the inf ormation and the technology to do so. Clean Environment Commissi on Report Ms. No rma McCormick (Osbo rne) : My final question to the minister: Is the minister confident that the report of the Clean Environment Commissi on will be available by the early summer deadline for construction that Louisiana-Pacific bas placed? What does be plan to do if the commission requires more time to produce a comprebensive- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member bas put her question. Bo n.

Glen Cum mings (Minis ter of Environmen t): Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit offended by the direction that this questioning is taking , because we have said very clearly that when the Clean Environment Commission embarks upon the process which Louisiana-Pacific is now undertaking, they will act independen tly. They will take whatever time they need to make a decision, and that is the time fr ame which Louisiana-Pacific and the Province of Manitoba will have to f all into.

3206 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 A.E. McKenzie Co. Ltd. Privatization Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Spe aker, I have a question for the Minister of Culture and Heritage . Two mo nths ago we le arned that this government, as the owner of McKe nzie Seeds of Brandon, had authorized negotiations with fore ign seed companies to enter into some type of partnership, which could lead to privatization and possibly threaten its continued existence in Brandon. We were told that a decision would be made in six to eight weeks ; two months have ela psed.

Can the minister tell the House today whether a deal has been made between McKenzie Seeds and a fo reign seed company? If so, what are the details of the amm gements? Bon. Har old Gilleshammer (Minister responsible for A.E. McKenzie Co. Ltd.): Mr. Speaker, there has been no deal made . Mr. Leonard Evans: Can the minister advise this House whether the company will continue to seek out other potential buyers, or has the minister closed the door on this matter so that the gove rnment will not allow the company to continue seeking a private partner? Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr.

Spe aker, as the member knows from some of the discussions that he has had with Mr. West, the company has en joyed tremendous success over the last number of years. We have set out pr econditions , which I have explained to the member for Brandon East before . Because of the su ccess of the company, there is still a tremendous amount of interest out there in forming some sort of strategic alliance or partnership, and we have not precluded some deal being made . Mr.

Leonard Evans: Will the minister be prepared to provide information to this Legislature on the names of the companies that McKenzie Seeds has been negotiating with and any other companies that might be inte rested in entering into some arran gement with this company? • (14 20) Mr. Gilleshammer: We have just completed in recent weeks an exhaustive review of the ann ual report and are in the midst of that. We have set out the precon ditions that we have set before any companies that want to enter a strategic all iance. I do not think the member would want me to interfere with negotiations at this stage . Mr.

Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : Mr. Spe aker, would you call Bill 21, please. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill2-The Prescription Drugs Cost Assistance Amendment and Pharmaceutical Amendment Act Mr. Speaker : On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), Bill 2, The Prescription Drugs Cost Assistance Amendment and Pharmaceutical Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l' aide a l'a chat de m6d icaments sur ordonnance et la

Loi sur les pharm acie s, sta nding in the name of the honourable member for Inkster. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster) : Mr. Speak er, I had ad journed debate the other day knowing that our critic, the member for Crescentw ood, was wanting to say a few wolds on this bill. Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwo od): Mr. Spe ake r, I am pleased to stand today and put a few comments on the record in regard to Bill 2, The Prescription Drugs Cost Assistance Amendment and Pharmaceutical Amendment Act. I am pleased to see some progress made in this particular area.

The Liberal Party, as many will know, have been interested in the idea of developing a system of a Health Smart Card here in Manitoba. We have been consistently putting our ide as fo rward and on the record since 1988. Although it is six years later, and we still have not seen a Smart Card in terms of a Health Smart system , at least we are moving a little bit fo rward when we now are in the process of looking at a

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3207 Pbarmacare card system. So we are pleased to see some progress made in that area. I am hoping that we will actu ally see the implementation of a Pbarmacare card program in Manitoba within this year. I understand that there have been some potential delays, and we are not ready to actually implement the program as yet I hope that we will see that as soon as possi ble. I know that the gov ernme nt-! believe their intentions are sincere and that they want to get the program established.

I am hop ing that it comes as quickly as possible for those seniors and other individuals who in fact will benefit very much from this program. I also appre ciate and understand that if there are bugs to be wolked out in the system and things are not up and running that we could create more problems by trying to implement a program or a plan that is not ready to go. So I can appreciate that perhaps expectations of when a program could be up and running were perhaps premature, or there were more complications that occurred in terms of getting the system up and running than wa s originally thought.

I would hope as well that the minister, in looking at this pa rtic ular bill, might have considered emphasizing as well the five principles that are in the Canada Health Act as be looks at this particular piece of legislation. Those particular five areas in the Can ada Hea lth Act, of cour se, are comp rehensiveness, uni versality, accessibili ty, porta bility and public administra tion. I think the intent of this pa rticul ar am endment act incorp ora tes a nu mb er of these pa rticular principles, and I would like to have seen those principles clearly indicated in this particular piece of legislation.

I would really hope that the minister would take the op por tun ity when he is look ing at im pl ementing the PHIN, the personal identification num ber, and the entire purpose behind the Pbarmacare card system, that he would also look at the Health Smart Card idea where not only do we look at prescription drugs and other costs that are identified in this partic ular act in terms of having them on a system, but we look at other aspects of health care as well including number of visits to doctors, to physicians, etcetera.

I hope that we will see that as the next step in regard to moving towards a system that not only is more efficient for the c onsum ers but also assists the professionals as well, be those professionals pharmacists or physicians or other individuals who provide service to the consum er in the community. The Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) has stated in his remalks that the Pbarmacare card system will reduce adverse drug reactions and that it will pr omote better communication betw een physicians and the pharmac ist.

It also may assist in prev enting double doctoring which, of course, could result in doubling of the prescriptions as well. I surely hope that this particular act does do that. I very much look forward to any presentations that the public and other prof ess ionals may have at the committee stage to hear from the public as to what their concerns are. I know my colleague from Kildonan (Mr. Cbomiak) bas raised some issues in regard to confidentiality and privacy in regard to this particular amendment act.

On first read of this particular act and in having a number of solicitors also review this act, it would appear that the confidentiality guidelines are in fact very good in this particular act Again, we will be very interested in bearing from me mbers of the pu blic at the committee stage to bear their concerns, if any, on the issues of privacy and confidenti ality. We have seen some amend me nts in this particular act as well that talk about fmes and giving fines for faults or misleading information in claims or issuing false prescriptions.

We have seen an increase in the dollar amount for those fines, and we supp ort those increases. We think it is very important in any piece of legislation that if fines are related to doing something that is not all owed. that those fines not just be token but they be substan tial. We look forward to bearing from the public on those particular issues.

3208 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 The Minister of Hea lth also ta lks ab out stteamlining administrative procedures. H we bad moved to a Health Smart Card, we could have seen even more of a streamlining of that administra tion, but at least this is a fust step with the Pharmacare card system.

In the la st number of months, in regard to Pharmacare, in regard to the health care system here in Manitoba, we have certainly raised grave concerns about the increase in deductibles to the Pharm acare claims, the fact that this government has continued to deli st drugs and the fact that this government also has created an inflexible deadline for Pharm acare clai ms. We believe, because of the calls that we have recei ved from constituents and from people in Ma nitob a, that these changes have imposed hardships on many Manito bam.

There is a certain segment of our popul ation, of our socie ty, where these changes have not cre ated any hard sh ips, particularly financi al, but there is a certain group of people in our province where there has been hardships. We have received calls from individuals who are concerned that we have people on fixed incomes who have not been re gul arly fill ing their prescriptions because of the concern about that initial outlay, that initial cost.

We received calls from individuals who have expressed concern about individu als who may be diabetic who, in fact, are reusing their syr inges, who are not testing their blood as often per da y as they sh ould be. Again, they have done this, they have reduced the methods that they hav e used to ass ist in their own health care merely because of a concern for the cost of prescriptions, the cost of supplies, the cost of any equipment that assists them in taking care of themselves . So we are concerned about that, Mr.

Speaker, and those individuals are not being assisted by the department and in fact their health may deteriorate because of financial hardships, not able to access the equipment and the supplies and prescriptions that they need.

The minister in his comments on this particular bill ta lked about the instant rebate once the Pharm acare card system is in place, once the PHIN number is in place, and we very much hope to see that instant reb ate, because this is the type of situatio n that will ass ist those people of lim ited income and limited means so that in fact they will not have to worry about putting an initial outlay of dollars. That is a large concern.

Yes, people do receive a certain amount of money back from the Pharmacare system, but it is that initial cash flow problem that really is creating hardships for people in the community. So we certainly hope that there will be that instant rebate. Mr. Speak er, I bad wanted to keep my remarks very brief, basically to say that we support the principles of this particular assis tance act We look forward to hearing from the members of the public in the committee stage to s ee what their concerns are .

Oftentimes we as legislators, and even as bure aucrats who help in the formulati on of these bills, someti mes miss a particular aspect of the bill that someone from the public, that someone as a consum er or someone as a professional out in the community picks up on, and we hope that we will hear those comments, concerns at the committee stage.

We, again, would encourage the minister to look at adding five principles of the Canada Health Act in this particular piece oflegislation, and again we would ask him at the committee stage to look at that and we hope that we can see that being amended to this particular bill as it comes back for third reading . • (14 30) Mr. Speak er, we of the Liberal Party and our Liberal caucus with these few comm ents are certainly prepared to have this particular bill go to the committee stage. Thank you. Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East) : Mr.

Speaker, I would like to tak e this oppo rtunity to add a few words to the debate on this particular legislation regarding Pharmacare in the province of Manitoba. As our Health critic has already indicated, we are quite prepared to pass this bill to committee and have no intention of holding it up, but I want to ta ke an op por tun ity in obse rving that the

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3209 Pharmacare program that we have in Manitoba has been deteriorating over the last few years under this government. There is no question that the increases in the deductible both for those over 65 and those for under 65 have placed a greater financial burden on the people of this prov ince .

As of January 1994 the deductible has increased now for those over 65 to $129 from $117.25, and it is again increased on those under 65 from $206.90 last year to $227.60 this year. 1bis is a long way from when this program was originally established under the New Democratic Party governm ent of Ed Schreyer back in 1973. At that time the deductible was $50, no matter what your age, and the Pharmacare program picked up 80 percent of any costs after that. (Mr.

Bob Rose, Acting Speaker, in the Cbair) It was a substantial improvement in the medical care system and the health care protection that we offered Manitobans, Mr.

Acting Speaker, because it is vital for many people, particularly handi capped people, disabled people, elderly people particularly, but also others who are suffering from chronic illne sses who happen to spend a great deal of money, are forced to spend a great deal of money, on medicines in order, in many cases, to stay fit so they can function properly or even, in some cases, to be able to stay alive . 'There is no question in my mind that the proper utilization of medication under the supervision and guidance of a medical doctor is one way to keep people out of hospitals and personal care institutions, which, as we all know, are very expensive to operate .

Basically, therefore , you could say that the proper utilization of pharmaceuticals is a prev entative measure, a preventative type of program, and therefore nothing should be done to discourage people from utilizing the medicine that has been prescribed for them by their family physician or by their doctor. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Yet, Madam Deputy Speaker, with the increases that have occurre d under this government, people are now in a position, particularly those on low income, including many senior citizens, of wondering whether they can actually afford the medication.

I am worried that many people may be discouraged from taking the medicine that their doctor prescribes for them, simply because they cannot afford the deductible or they cann ot afford the 40 percent, that is, if you are under 65, the 40 percent that is now required of the cost of drugs.

We know, of course, thanks to the former Mulroney government and the protection afforded patent medicine or the protection afforded the drug companies in this country, the nongeneric drug companies in this country, that the cost of pharmaceuticals is virtually going to the moon. 'lbe cost of medicine is escalating astronomically and imposing a great burden on Canadians. I would only hope that the present government of Mr. Chretien would see fit to change this legislation so that we can again allow generic drugs to flourish, generic companies to flourish, in this country.

However, I am not too hopeful about that, given the reports that we have heard out of Ottawa and the commitment to, it seems to me, certain Quebec-based corporations that seem to have a great deal of influence with the government. Madam Deputy Speaker, the fact is that the costs of medicines are going up and at the same time this government is cutting back the amount of assistance, so people are having to pay more and more for their dr ugs.

As I have said, I am concerned that some may not take the medicine and therefore in the long run cost the taxpayers of Manitoba a lot more money than if they were able to get medicine at the relatively lower price that they were able to previously. I will give you one example : in my riding, an elderly lady, calcium Sandoz that she had to take, her doctor ordered this by prescription. It turned out that it was-we ll, it was very expensive in the first place , but I want to talk about the fact, in this case, that it had been delisted.

This is another complaint I have, Madam Deputy Speaker, and that is the whole matter of de listing. I dealt with the matter of increasing cost,

3210 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 but the matter of delisting also discowages people from taking the medicine that they should probably be taking under their doctor's supervision. This particular lady said that if she was not taking this particular medicine , be cause of her very extreme case of osteoporo sis, she would soon end up in a nursing home and costing the taxpayers a lot more money. It was delisted. It is costing her a lot of money. Her doctor appealed to the Department of Health but to no avail.

It is still delisted. 1bere are other cases of hardship of people who have been affected by delisting. There was an article, a letter to the editor not long ago, a couple of months ago, by a resident in Winnipeg talking about the difficulty he was having with the rheumatoid arthritis and the problem that he ran into with it being delisted. It is now costing him appro ximately $300 a year, and he just does not know how he is going to manage .

The individual whom I mentioned earlier, my constituent, was an elderly person on just the basic Old Age Pension and was having a difficult to make ends meet So, Madam Deputy Speaker, the fact is that the governm ent's Pharmacare program is not the same one that was brought in by the NDP under Premier Ed Schreyer. It was a step forwaro made in this province in 1973.

Incidentally, that was the same year we put the nursing homes under the medicare syst em, enabling people to enter nursing homes without losing their lifetime savings in the process and being forced on welfare when they had used those lifetime savings up. Madam Deputy Speaker, it seems to me that we are going backwuds . An excellent program that we had in place in 1973 bas been eroded substanti ally.

We have transferred the burden of maintaining a healthy lifesty le, maintaining health, from society through our health care programs onto the individual, and I say that that, no question, is a backwaro step, particularly when you think of the fact that medicines can play a role in kee ping people out of costly institutions. So it is not right from that logical viewpoint, and it is not right from the viewpoint of imposing a burden on those who are ill.

Why should one be overly penalized because he or she is threatened with an illnes s, or he or she is disabled, or he or she is elderly and simply must use a lot of medication? Madam Deputy Speaker, you may know, many of us know, of people who virtually spend thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars , a year on medications because they have to in order to be able to live.

So, while we agree with the particular bill bef ore us, and hopefully it will provide some improved efficiency and more immediate assistance to people because of the methodology of using this card system, nevertheless it does not take away from the fact that people are still going to have to pay. The average person in Manitoba is still going to have to pay a great deal more for medication.

To that extent we have gone backwuds, it seems to me. • (144 0) I have been around this House for 25 ye ars, and a lot of the excellent programs that we established to improve health care back in the '70s have been eroded by this governme nt, whether it be this program of Pbarmacare, whether it be increasing the rates unduly on residents of nursing homes or whether it be the elimination of the rural Childr en's Dental Health Program. That too, Madam Deputy Speaker, was a preventative program , and that too is going to cost us as a society a lot mo re in future because of the elimination of it.

There is no question in my mind that thousands of children in rural and northern Manitoba will no longer get the dental care they nee d, and we as a society are going to pay for it in terms of more difficult dental problems in the future for those people, more costs in the future for those children as they grow. So with those few words, as our official Health critic has indicated, we are quite prepared to have this bill passed on to committee and hopefully bear representation from the public in Manitoba. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

The question before the House is second reading ofBi ll 2 on the proposed motion of the honourable

1une 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3211 Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), The Prescription Drugs Cost Assista nce Amendment and Phannaceutical Amendment Act. Mr. Barry Schellenberg (Rossmere) : I welcome the bill. V irious groups have supported the bill in the health industry, and I have heard a good support in the community. We look upon it being very valuable. It will prevent abuse and give eligible drug buyers an immediate rebate at the counter, and these Health Sm art Cards will provide , you know, a perso n's entire medical history.

Also, it will eliminate the need for those with Phann acare coverage to pay up front and wait for a rebate. So we actually supp ort this very much. The Minister of Health back at that time, 1989, promised that he was looking at it to bring in this health card back in '89 already . So it is a long time coming. During the Rossmere by-election, I must say that I was faced with health care, and part of that health care, of course, was home care and Phannacare. Every block, every street it was health care and Pharmacare.

Really, I do not have to tell the members opposite this because they were down those very same stree ts, and I am sure they got the same message that I got. An Honourable Member: Did the member for Pembina (Mr. Orchard) help get you elected? Mr. Schellenberg : I got quite a bit of support from members opposite. I also must mention the Liberals were a little slow in getting on this iss ue. After they saw we raised it, the people were behind us. The Liberals , like lloyd Axworthy and the member here for Inkster (Mr.

Lamoureux), were very much in support of health care once they found out the people of Manitoba were concer ned about universal health care. There is one promise that was broken by the people opposite , and that is the pr omise to increase Pharmacare at the rate of inflation. We ll, since 1988, the people under 65, it went from $150 to $227.60; over 65, it went from $85 to $129. Also the reimbursements have fallen from 80 percent to 75 percent.

To know what the people want in health care, and Pharmacare is just one small part of a larger package, all I have to do is listen to the phone calls I get, the letters I get. I get long letters written to me from all over Rossmere. We do not have to do a lot of researc h and studies; just listen to people and we will soon know that Phann acare, as part of health care, is a very, very major issue to them . I did welcome the debate in the Rossmere by-election, and now I welcome a debate right here in the Legislature. Not only broken promises of increasing at the rate of inflation, but many drugs are delisted.

I do get phone calls , I do get letters about this, the great cost. They go to a doctor. They think it is all covered. Then suddenly a bill comes. Also the increase in the deductible is another issue . So the whole concept of health care, and Pharmacare is just part of it, is under attack. Universal health care is under attack. What seems to be foll owed is the Connie Curran model of health care and to privatize and Americanize our health care system , and Pharmacare is just part of that I hear the Minister of Health (Mr.

McCrae) , the present one, and the f onn er one said it as well, that he is concerned about the patient-patient care. Continuously, everyday I hear patient care. It is a very honourable statement, but I think the members opposite are more concerned about profits than patients. I think they are more interested in profits for certain companies than they are in patients. 1ust look at the generic drug companies that are being bashed.

New drugs do not come on the market as a result of the fe deral Tories or the Mulroney government 's legislation, and our government here has done very little in pressuring them to change it. I must say the Liberals have made very little effort as well. So profits for these big drug companies are No. 1. That is the main issue. I must say our party has, through its history, a very different perspective on health care. We began, the Schreyer government began a lot of these progr ams: Pharmacare , health care. One reason is we thought, our party thought, health care was a major issue.

It should be univers al, we should all have it, but it is cost-efficient. It is far

3212 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 cheaper to keep patients at home instead of in a costly hospital bed. We are the pio neers in this area. I often feel we are the only ones that seem to be standing in there and supporting universal health care, and Pharmacare is just part of this package . I must also mention the minister last year, the former minister, impo sed a date here, and it denied 1,800 people last year from $300, 000. This again shows how serious the y are about Pharmacare. Yes, we have a new Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) , but really there is no differe nce, only a new face.

The same po licies go on year after year. If we are not careful-the people ofRossmere told me this year in the by-election. They did not just tell me, they also told the other parties at the door. If we are not careful our health care program will be or could be dismantled, and they encouraged me, they encouraged others, to speak out. •

(1450) Continu ously, I get phone calls, I get lett ers. They ask me, are you telling the people in the Legislature what is happe ning? I say, I have not had the oppo rtunity, but I have said a little bit now. Re ally, what I said here , I have heard at the doors, and all those members , they know those streets in Rossmere . During the by-election I would go down one street, my opp onents down the other. I am sure we got the same message, and that message was preserve universal health care, home care and Pharmacare. Continuously at meetings I am called aside , and they say, are you aware of this delisting?

It goes on continu ously, one thin g after another, very, very well done. People are aware of this, and I would just like to have this bill with a few more things added to it. However, I will leave it at that. Personall y, I support the Smart Card. It is a beginnin g. I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members : Yes. Madam Deputy Speaker : The question bef ore the House is second reading of Bill No. 2, on the prop osed motion of the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae ).

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed] Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Would you call second readings of Bills 12, 13 and 14? SECOND READINGS Bill 1.2-- The Provincial Auditor's Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Orchard), that Bill 12, The Provincial Auditor's Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le �rificateur provincial, be now read a second time and be ref erred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr.

Ernst: During the con sideration of the Estimates of Expenditure for the Legislative Assembly-part of the jurisdiction, part of the expenditure of the Legislative Assembly, of course, is the Provincial Auditor-the Provincial Auditor app roached the Legislative Assembly Management Commissi on and indicated to them that she thought a change in some of her practices -practices that had been quite longstanding and historically were no longer required in her view , and that the resources she put to this particular issue, that is, the preaudit of vouchers coming from departments , the resources she expended on that would be much more appropriately used elsewhere in her function as an Auditor.

After some consideration , LAMC agreed to do that and, of course, that necessitated this bill, which deletes the requirement for the Provincial Auditor to expend some five staff years and resources on a practice which she indicated, and which LAMC, I think, agreed, was somewhat ancient and no longer re quired, and that the resources would be better off put to doing other audit functions within her p urview . Madam Deputy Speaker, the bill was brought forward and I commend it to the members of the House. Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, sec onded by the member

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3213 for Elmwood (Mr. Malow ay), that debate be adj oumed. Motion agreed to. Bill 13- The Condominium Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), that Bill 13, The Cond ominium Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les condominiums, be read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House . Motion presented. Mr. Ernst: I am pleased to introduce for second reading today, Bi11 13 , The Condominium Amendment Act. The Condominium Act has fo r many years guided the development and ma nagement of condominiums in Manitoba, and, in so doing, the act requires condominium cotparations to have a reserve fund to be used for emergency expenditures such as major roof repairs or replacements of heating systems and other major common elements of the property.

Under the act, reserve funds must curren tly be held in a special account such as a savings account at a bank or other financial institution. Until recent years the interest earned on such accounts was reasonable to say the least, but curre ntly, however, the rate of return on unit owners' money held in reserve funds is extremely low. In recognition of the low interest rate s on savings and other types of accounts, Bill 13 will now enable condominium cotparations to invest reserve fu nds in a broader range of financial instr uments.

For example , condominium corporations will be able to acquire government bonds and other government-backed securities . Considering a broader range of investments, we have consulted in the department with the condominium managers as well as the Canadian Condom inium Institute which represents managers, developments and unit owners. While the people consulted have differing views as to how wide the range should be, all fee l the reserve fund should be held in relatively low-r isk instruments. I, Madam Dep uty Speaker, concur with that view.

I think it is importa nt to know that while condominium managers should manage their investment funds to the maximum benefit of the condominium unit owners, at the same time they ou ght not to be involv ed in speculative investments and ought not to put at risk the reserve funds which are intended for major repair or replacement of their home . With that in mind, the range we have chosen will allow for a greater return on the fund while not exposing it to excessive risk. So in summ ary, I believe the amendment will be a significant improvement to the act.

I think it will bene fit those for whom it is inten ded, that is condominium owners, and allow them to provide for investment of their funds for a reasonable rate of return yet not be involv ed in the speculative types of investme nts. Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask that all honourable members support the bill and that we refer it to committee . Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrow s) : I move, seconded by the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), that debate be adj oumed. Motion agreed to. Bill l�The Real Estate Brokers Amendment Act Bon.

Jim Ernst (Government Bouse Leader) : I mo ve, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), that Bill 14, The Real Estate Brokers Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les courtiers en immeubles, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Ernst: Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to offer, for the benefit of the members of the House, a brief explanation of the main principles outlined in Bill 14. •

(1500) 3214 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 Although the bil l contains a number of provisions, peibaps the most significant relates to unclaimed real estate deposits. By way of backgro und, I remind all honourable members that an real estate brokers in the province must maintain a trust account for their clien ts' deposits. Occasionally, a broker is unable to dispose of that deposit, either because the parties have abandoned it or one or both of the parties cannot be located by the broker.

In still other situations, deposits are orphaned when the broker goes out of business or leaves the provi nce. 1bere is no provision curre ntly in the act for the ongoing custody of the funds in these cases, except for the Manitoba Securities Commission, to impose a freeze on the account at the broker's bank. However, in such a case, the funds simply remain on deposit with the bank inde finitely. 1bere is no way to remove it.

This bill provides the means for a broker or the Manitoba Secur ities Commission in these situations to request the unclaimed or orphaned fu nds to be paid to the Manitoba Securities Commissi on. The commission will hold the funds in trust, pending claims by persons entitled to the funds. If the funds remain unclaimed, the balance held by the Securities Commission will be paid to the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the province on March 31 of each year. Should a claim occur thereafter, the deposit would be paid to the rightful claimant out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The bill contains several other amendments which will serve to bring the act in line with current business practices in the real estate industry. 1be act in its present fonn does not pennit an individual who is regist ered as a broker to expand the brokerage operati on by opening up a branch office or employ an a uthorized official to manage the branch office. This bill makes it possible for this to be done . 1be curre nt act does not require brokers to notify the Registrar when they open up a branch office.

As a result, the Sec urities Commission is not always aware of brokers ' branch offices or who is responsible for managing the branch office. The bill will require brokers to register all branch offices and provide the Registrar with the name of the branch manager. Thirdly, where a broker's head office is located outside of Manitoba or the broker has many authorized officials, there is no requirement in the act for the broker to de signate an official representative of the Provin ce of Manitoba.

An amendment introduced by this bill will require brokers to name one of their authorized officials as the Manitoba representative so that members of the public and the Securities Commission will know who is authorized to speak on behalf of the broker in Manitoba. The act prohibits registr ants from displaying their reg istration certi ficates in their offices.

Evidently, there was a perception 30 or 40 years ago that displaying certificat es publicly could lead to the misunderstanding on the part of the public that the broker's office was a government office or that the broker was in some way ass ociated with the government. Representa tives of the industry have suggested this prohibition is te rribly antiquated and should be discontinued, given the number of other licences, certificates and permits displayed in business offices today. Finally , there are a number of housekeeping changes which honourable members will notice, including one changing the heading for

Section 9 of the act, repealing

Section 18 respecting fe es and transf erring that provision into the regulation-m aking section, which is more app ropriate under the present statutory fo rmat, and making it clear that the authorized official must be an individual rather than a person, which in the act a person is described as a corporation, association, syndicate, et cetera. Madam Deputy Speaker, that concludes my rematks on Bill l4, and I commend it to the House . Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrow s) : I move, secon ded by the member for Radisson (Ms. Ceri lli), that debate be adj ourned. Motion agreed to.

June 8, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3215 Bon. Jim ErDst (Government House Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, would you call Bill 8. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 8-1be Fisheries Amendment Act Madam Deputy Speaker: To resum e debate on se cond reading of Bi ll 8, The Fisheries Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur Ia ¢che, standing in the name of the honourable member for Thomps on (Mr. Ashton) . An Honourable Member: Stand. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is there leave to pennit the bill to remain standing? [a greed] Ms. Marianne Ce rilli (Radisson) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to be able to have the opportunity to speak on this bill related to the fisheries in Manitoba.

The basic areas of the bill are an in crease in fines, penalties for convictions under the act, for violations of the act, to raise the increase in fines from $500 to a new limit of $10 ,000 for infractions. 1be bill also gives inspectors power to enter and inspect any place , including vehicles, to examine them for fish, for records, for bills of lading , or open any containers to searc h for fish without a warran t where it is practical. 1be bill also gives the inspectors the power to stop vehicles .

I think it raises a number of issues of concern, but the focus that I am going to take , Madam Deputy Speaker, in my comments is that in a lot of ways this bill is completely missing the mark. This bill does not deal with a number of the factors related to fish stock reductions and the reduction in fish catches , the reduction in the amount of fish travelling through the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board, and the number of fish being caught in the province of Manitoba in some of our large fisheries.

Madam Deputy Speaker, no matter how much we increase fines , it is not necessarily clear if these fines are going to go back into fish stocking of lakes . But once the fish are gone, no amount of fining is going to bring them back, and I think that is one of the reasons that this bill is missing the mark. We have to look at dealing with the real problems and preventing ongoing reduction and depletion of fish stocks in the provi nce. We also know that this government in other areas where they have increased similar kinds of fines under 1be Environment Act.

There has never been an incre ase in the kind of penalties and enforcements that have gone along with increasing fines. We can go along and increase the total amount of fines available under the law, but it is going to be, I think, more enforcement and prevention that is going to be the issue . I think a lot of times what happens is that these big numbers become , for this government, a chance to make it look like they are doing something when in fact they are missing the marlc and not really doing anything at all. I have been doing some background to try and get a picture of what is happe ning in this area.

We have discussed this somewhat in the Environment Estimates, and one of the things that I am trying to get a better understanding of is if this government is doing anything to look at the relationship between water quality, particularly in Lake W"mnipeg, and the decline in fish stocks. It has been continned that last year there was a significant reduction in activity in the fishe ry. There were significant layoffs at the Freshwater Fish Marlceting plant, and we have to start looking at putting all the pi eces together so that we can understand why this is happen ing.

There were some comments made by the minister in Es timates, again, in a sort of placating fashion, that there really is a natural cycle to fish stocks, and we should not really get too excited. But we do not have to look too far, only out east to the Atlan tic, to see what happens with that kind of thinking. We have had one of the most dev astating environmental disasters in this country , that has occurred on the planet, in terms of the depletion of the fishery in Atlantic Canada. It is a travesty. I cann ot even find the right extent of the words or the adjectives to describe this.

I have some connection to Newfoundland through my family. I guess I look to this too in

3216 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 rather a personal fashion, because I know that members of my family have come from a fishing background from New foundland. I had the chance recently to talk to some women who are from Newfoundland and were describing the impact it has had on their lives. They were describing the impact it has had on the entire region. When you have an industry that is so vital to a region, as the Atlantic cod fishery is to that region of the country, we can see that we have to start being much more careful with what we are doing.

The warnings were given, Madam Deputy Speaker, regarding the fishery in Atlantic Canada There were people talking about overfish ing. There were people talking about the use of the dragnets and increased technol ogy. We have seen all the incidents in terms of encroachment of fo reign vessels into the Grand Banks and all the conflict that that has caused. •

(1510) Hopefully, what will happen from all of that disaster and crisis is we will learn some lessons and start applying principles of conservation and ecology into our economic activity and industries when we rely on the natural resources in our pro vince. I am not convinced that that is happening under this government. I am not convinced that they are learning the lessons of the Atlantic experience in Canada, and that they are trying to see if we can avoid a similar disaster and fate here in Manitoba.

That brings me back to looking at what is really happening and understan ding the impact of going to a reduced net size for fishing in Manitoba. There are some people that believe the last year that the fish are still there .

There are some people that might say that the fish are there and because it was a cold winter, that aff ected the fishing this past winter in Man itoba, and that is what led to the fact that there was a reduction in the number of employ ees kept on over the winter at the fish marketing plants and aff ected the fa ct of the employment decrease by the fisher people that rely on that industry throughout northern Manitob a. As I was saying earlier, we have to start looking at the entire picture and putting the pieces together.

I wanted to pursue this issue of water quality in habitat related to the fishery in some of these large freshwater lakes in Mani toba in particular, because we know that there is a lot of activity along the water basins that lead into these lakes that has been causing prob lems. We have had major accidents like Dunnottar within the last few years, where sewage has flowed into the basin of Lake Winnipeg, and we know that on a regular basis there is emuent from a variety of other sewage systems that goes into the lake , particularly into spawning ground areas.

We cannot help but assume that this is having a detrimental impact on the ability of the fish to regenerate itself. Other activity along river basins that could be having an effect as described to me is agricultural runof f and how that is again aff ecting fi sh spawning areas. The Wmnipe g River is one river, I think , that has a large amount of industry on it, and it is one of the tributaries into Lake Winnipe g that we have had some focus on. It has the ACL fa cility upriver and it has Pine Falls upriver.

We know that there have been spills confirmed of pesti cide and chemicals , and all of that ends up into the Lake Winnipe g. We are starting to get more results from studies done by scientists at the University of Manitoba and starting to find out that there is an impact on the quality of the fish. We can only then extrapolate from that, and understand that there is likely also an impact on the ability of fish to breed and repr oduce.

The other thing that becomes clear, and this is part of the debate going on in British Columbia with the salmon, is the effect of industry and water use on water temperature and water quality, and the sensitive balance that exists when fish are spawning when they need the water to be at a certain tem perature, and how that temperature is aff ected by the amount of water that is in the tributary or area where they are spawning.

June S, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3217 If we have a reduction in the water lev el, that will increase the temperature and consequently will prevent the fish from being able to spawn and reproduce effectively. So it is app arent that we have to look at all of the variables that can be aff ecting the fishing and the catches that are occurrin g, and we caonot assum e, as this bill does, that we can deal with it simply by developing a system that is going to look for the individu als who are exceeding their quotas or their limits. That, I think, is admitting that there is a probl em.

So this bill is beneficial in that It is showing that the government realizes that there is a problem with the fishery in Manitoba, but, as I said, I do not know if it is going to deal with the reasons for that prob lem. I am also concerned that aboriginal bands and organizations have not been consulted on this matter despite the number of court decisions on their hunting and fishing rights and despite the number of recommendations we have had through various committees and commissions that have toured the provin ce.

We still do not seem to understand the relationship that is there for aboriginal people to activities like fishing, and that they do have an important contrib ution to make and they have important rights that need to be respected. I do not claim to have a lot of experience in these kinds of issues. I have never lived in the North, but I do know that there have been programs in place, this northern transportation program that was there to ensure that these northern communities were going to have some equal access to market, and they were not going to be penalized by their geography.

I think it is incumbent on this government to ensure that they are going to take a comprehensive view and ensure that there are programs in place that are going to mea n that all of these communities are going to be able to continue to participate in the economic activity that fishing has given them for generations. 1be world of fishing has changed tremendously over the years, and we cannot allow that to penalize the Fus t Nations of the pro vince. Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not think that I can overemphasize the concern that we have in this area.

It seems ironic that after all of the cutbacks that this government has made in the Department of Natural Resources, the cutbacks in all the conservation officers and in all the staff that are there to support safe use of natural resources, that we now have them bringing in what I think some people would call a very authoritarian or Draconian bill. It seems that the government is getting quite desperate . I think that the government is acknowledging that there is this problem by bringing in this bill in such a m anner . 1bey are admitting that there is a problem and they are starting to panic.

We cann ot continue in the same vein and think that we can have the kind of approach that is at the back end or the far end of the system without putting equal resources into the front end in teDDs of prevention. So I think, especially by my questions in the House today , the government cannot accuse us of being opposed to strong environment and natural resources legislation enf orcement, but why do we not have this government looking at the problems with fish stocks in the various regions of the province?

I know that my colleagues who repre sent diffe rent areas of the province in diff erent rural and northern areas have asked repeat edly, over and over again, for this government to deal with the question of fish stocks in various regions of the provi nce. It seems like they will continue to take the attitude that they do with environment and development issues where they will say, well, there are problems with budgets. This is the kind of issue that shows us very clearly that we cannot separate environment and development, and we cannot only look at the tail end of legislation and government programs.

We have to start realizing that we cannot just talk abou t inte grating environment and development issues, we have to do it, and we have to find ways that are going to be able to ensure that we are going to protect our natural resources. • (1 520)

3218 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 We have to look at the practices that are being utilized in the province , and one of the things I do not think this governm ent has looked at carefully enough or really developed enough is co management of natural reso urces with aboriginal communities. This does a number of things. One of the things that this does that I support is it puts the responsibility where the responsibility belongs.

So we can get away from what is happening in our economy where we have decisions being made with respect to our local economies and our natural resour ces by people who are not even in our provi nce. That is what happens when we pri vatize the Crown co:rporations like Freshwater fishery, when we take away their authority and we give the control of our natural resources over to private companies, often who have their bead offices outside of the province.

So we have to find ways, as through co management, of having communities who have a long-term interest in the viability of that industry to have some authority and decision-ma king power in determining the management in the future of bow that resource is going to be utilized. We have to be better at coming up with creative models of doing that. There are some examples from the province and from other parts of the cou ntry where there are succe ssful co management agree ments being dev eloped. This also address es the issue of justice for aboriginal communities.

I have spoken a number of times in this House about the need to connect environment, development, health and justice issues . This is bow we are going to do it, through models of co-management that are going to mean communities in rural and northern regions will have some power and decision making at the table and be involved in the benefits, as well, from the management of natural reso urces . We can also look at different models, such as that from the Berens River fisheries co-op, where we have co-operation between a number of people involved in the fishery.

We can use those kinds of models to ensure that there is not going to be the element of-I do not know what the words are- but so that we can make sure that there is going to be a co-operative approach, and that we can use shared resources to make sure we are going to effectively and equally utilize natural reso urces in the province . I know there will be a number of concerned groups who will come forward with some proposals regarding amendments for this bill fisher men, aborigina l organizations. I look forward to that committee bearing, when we will bear from the community.

I think it is unfortunate that there bas not been more consultation with respect to this bill. It seems there are a number of initiatives being undertaken by this gov ernment related to environmental matters that are knee jerk-sort of the politics of panic. There was a survey that was done recently by the Department of Environment where they only gave p eople two weeks to respond.

That does not give people adequate time to consult with their organizations, their volunteer boards, their executive boards, their members , so that they can think through a survey that asks some very detailed and important questions so they can respond. I think the bearings on this bill are going to bring out a lot of inform ation that is going to be very important for this government to pay attention to and for all of us to pay attention to as we deal with this ver y serious matter of the fisheries in Manitoba. I look forward to those bearings.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask bow much time I have remaining. An Honourable Member: Lots. Madam Deputy Speaker: Eighteen minutes remaining. An Honourable Member: Go for it Say it again. Ms . Cerilli: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. An Honourable Member: Mariann e, explain it to him one more time-that little bit about the catfish. Ms. Cer illi: This is the part about this House that I en joy so much.

June S, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3219 Madam Deputy Speaker, it seems that I am going to have to tell you again- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order , please. Ms. Cerilli: -of the issues related to the fisheries in Manitoba that are of deep and important concern, the issues that are not being addressed by this government in terms of natural resource management. That is exemplified by the fishery.

The interesting thing is the ministers talk about doing their work, as I was saying earlier, the effects of the cutbacks in Natural Resources and the qu estions I asked today in terms of enf orcem ent and inspection and the fact that we are not going to have the staff , the persoonel there to enforce this act and this amendment to the act. So, although they are increasing the penalties to $10 ,000, which, I am sure, would put a number of these fisher people out of business-[interjection] Fisbelpersons, as the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) comments. That- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Bon.

Gle n Cu mmings (Minister of Environmen t): Madam Deputy Speaker, the member is indicating that she is looking for higher fines. Would she also be prepared to acknowledge that the RCMP help enforce those regulations? Madam Deputy Speaker: The honou rable Minister of Environment does not have a point of order. ••• Ms. Cerilli: Madam Deputy Speaker, not only does be not have a point of order. He does not have a point because that is not what I said. We went through this yesterd ay in Estimates where the minister continually tried to put words in my mouth and accused me of putting words in his mouth.

I think that what I am saying is not to that we should be increasing the total amount of fines, as this bill does, that what we need to do is enforce the law and start making the polluter pay and start ensuring that we are going to have some teeth in our environmental legislation. I just finished saying that the $10 ,000 fine would probably put a lot of these- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order , please. Ms. Cerilli: -individuals out of business. Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please . I am ex periencing some difficulty bearing the honourable member for Radisson. Ms.

Cerilli: Madam Depu ty Speaker, maybe the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings) is fee ling rather sensitive , considering the issues that are being raised. I mean, the amount of reduction in both the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Environment for enf orcements is tremendous , and we have reports coming to this government criticizing them for their lack of ability and lack of willingness to enforce environment-related regulations. We have, over and over again, examples- •

(1530) Point of Order Mr. Cummings: Madam Deputy Speaker, the member talks about reduced budget. I wish she would learn to calculate that the saving in our budget is money we no longer have to put out for the Hazardous Waste Corp. We are saving the dollars for the taxpayers, and she wants us to waste them. Madam Deputy Speaker : Order, please. The honourable Minister of Environment does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts . ••• Ms. Cerilli: Madam Deputy Speaker, maybe the Minister of Environment can explain to me where the 49 staff from the department are .

A few of them are with the lab that has been transf erred. We have a lot of problems on this side of the House with privatizing lab facilities. We think that the public bas the right to be able to know what kind of water that they are drinking, and they should be able to get that water quality-

3220 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 Point of Order Bon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources) : Madam Deputy Speaker, this is my bill, and I am trying to find out bow all this conversation is related to my fish bill I wonder whether you could ask the speaker to maybe refer to the bill once in a while at least. Madam Deputy Speaker: The honoura ble Minister of Natural Resoun:es does indeed raise an interesting point. I would remind all honourable members that relevance is indeed supposed to be specific to the principles of the bill . ••• Ms.

Cerilli: Madam Deputy Speaker, the point that I was making is that the Department of Natural Res ource s, as well as the Dep artment of :Environment, is eliminating the staff that are going to enforce these kinds of amendments and this kind oflegislation. They cann ot, on the one hand, claim to be wonderful natural resource managers and concerned about ecology and environment and, on the other band, eliminate the people in their departments that are going to do the wolk.

We have talked over and over again about how if they really mean it, they would put their money where their mouth is and they would put the staff in the departments that are going to do this wolk, because without the staff you are not going to have enforcement. 1be Minister of :Environment (Mr. Cummings) was talking ea rlier about having the RCMP involved in enforcing the stubble burning regulation. So I was responding, Madam Deputy Speaker, to his comments.

I think that is a precedent-setting move-we realize that-in terms of environment legislation, but they are involve d, as I understand it, solely in that issue in terms of stubble burning. They bad to bring in an amendment to the act that all owed that to happen. I think I asked questions at other times regarding the powers of the police and the RCMP relative to environment and natural reso un:es legislation. We have to look at the kind oflaws that we have in this area and if they are actually criminal laws. It is intere sting.

I was looking at some of the environment legislation from parts of Europe over the winter when we were not in the session. I was looking at bow other parts of the world are looking at putting more penalties for environment and natural resources related infractions under their penal code. That is some thing else that is related I think to the comments made by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings) when be talked about the RCMP being involved in enforci ng some amendments to 1be Environment Act.

I want to go back again, Madam Deputy Speaker, to the comments I was making about Newfoundland and the fishery in the Atlan tic, because I was saying that we have a lot that we can leam from that Canadian experience .

One of the things I learnt there with that issue was that over 80 percent of the fish that are caught in the Atlantic are exported whole and frozen from the Atlantic without being p rocesse d We have an agreement with the United States where this 80 percent or more of the fish goes, that we have to give them that fish without having any of the benefits of the value-added jobs being done in the Atlantic.

Again, let us take that and apply that into Manitoba and see if we are getting into that kind of a situation here , because we keep talking about, the governmen t keeps talking about this thing called value-added jobs, but yet we keep seeing them getting themselves into situations with respect to natural resources where they are not doing that, where they are not ensuring that all of the jobs related to whether it is fisheries or agriculture, particularly in livestock, where we are going to see that the processing jobs occur here in Manitoba so we can complete that loop of economic activity and have more of those jobs in Manitoba.

Some of the other changes that are occurring in the fishery I think would cause us some concern. We are concerned that there are going to be the processing jobs retained in Manitoba. It is sort of related to what is happening in some of the agricultur e related indust rie s. I represent a constituency that has the Swift plant and those kind of industries in the constituency. I talked to constituents who wolk at the fish malketing plant, and they have told me their concerns. They have told me their concerns about being laid off this

June S, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3221 winter and about their concerns of what is going on in this industry. I think that we have to look at the big picture, Madam Deputy Speaker. We cann ot come fo rward with simp listic answ eiS, as this bill does, which is looking at the tail end of the problem and trying to tack on this authoritarian approach that is not looking at the full picture . It is similar to what the government is doing on its young offendeiS policy. It is a similar kind of appr oach where they are not going to put it into the broader context.

They are not going to look at the problems that are causing there to be diffi culty in the industry. They are not going to put it into the context of the economic, social and environmental proble ms. They are just going to try and go for some band-aid solution where they do not even have the staff to fol low through and carry out and enforce the regulations they are brining in. Madam Deputy Speaker, I tbink it is pretty clear that it is going to be very important for this bill to go before the committee so the public can have its say.

Over and over again on these kinds of natural resources issues we bear very important comments from the communities that are most aff ected. I think that is also one of the themes that should be recognized that is lacking from this legislation, is there is no place for those communities, for those people who are making their livelihood from these resources. I hesitate sometimes to call fish resources, but we will use the term here today . I think I have made myself quite clear. I am looking forward to, as I said, bearing from the community, bearing what people from the North and rural Manitoba have to say.

I know there will also be some people from Winni peg on band, hopefully some people who also make their live lihood from the fishery in tenns of processing, manufacturing and sales, and we can start to put together the big picture. The big picture is, I am sure , what the me mber for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) will also refer to. I thank you for the op portunity to put my remarks on the record. Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake) : Madam Deputy Speaker, it is a pleasure to be able to rise today and make my comments to an amendment to

an act that affects one of the most important industries this province bas, and that is the commercial fishing industry. 1be bill and the chan ges, to me, do not make necessarily a whole lot of sense . Here we are regurgitating old acts and saying we are going to increase enf orcement; we are going to increase the fine levels; we are going to increase to make it unavailable for people to poach, for people to sell fish on the side when right now the minister knows the fisbenn en can do that They can do it one or two ways.

They can do it by registering through Natural Resources to sell their fish, or they can do it through their quota system where they can indicate to the local Natural Resources people that if they are selling some fish from their quota through Freshwater that they can inf onn and get a receipt claiming they have sold X amount of fish besides what they are selling through Freshwater and receive a receipt for that and it will go against their quota. • (154 0) One of the questions I have with regard to this is, where was there no enf orcement before ?

Natural Resources officials could stop pretty well anyone they think are doing some thing illegal in the fishing industry. They can do that now. They do it now, because I have seen it and I have beard it in my own consti tuency. They do it now. They stop the fishermen and they check out whether the truck, the boat, whatever-they can do it now. Now all of a sudden we are going to find five pounds of fish above and beyond what they are supposed to and get fined $10 ,000 for it Where are the real culprits ?

How is this minister, is this minister going to, this summer, get a boat and tmvel on Lake Winni peg and Lake Manitoba? Is be himself going to be out there enforc ing this? Is be going to enforce this? [interjection] You hope so. Madam Deputy Speaker, the minister puts in amendments to

an act Where is be going to get the staff to do this? Where is be going to get the staff! Right now Nat ural Resources staf f are at a minimum to enf orce such

an act. Even before there

3222 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8, 1994 were hardly any officers to be able to do what this minister is implementing in the act. The minister asked me if I read the spre adshee t. Well, I do not have the spreadsheet because I cannot find the spre adsheet So if the minister had given it to me, I woul d have been able to speak to iL I apologize . I have not seen the spre adsheet. I am speaking from what I am awar e of. The minister is saying the spreads heet. Are you sayin g, then, that you are going to increase the enforcement? Is that what you are saying?

Well, if that be the case, so be it Right now there is not the enforcement. Previous, there was not the enfo rcement So how this minister thinks that he is going to come in with a cavalry load of enfor cement officers taking care of his amendment and fining people up to $10, 000, taking away their licences, doing whatever, their quotas, their livelihoods -perhaps the issues are not necessarily the poaching and the enforcement Perhaps the issues are more . Some of them , one of them is the stock. Now you talk to the fishennen out in the areas, and they can tell you in certain areas there are no fish.

The stock is down. The stock is down from overfishing. Perhaps stock is down from poor spawning. Stock is d own, perhaps, from opening up the lakes too soon in some areas. These are the concerns of the fishennen. These are the concerns more than the fact that they are worrled about the people who are overfis hing and not going through the Fre shwater Marketing Board-the stock. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have questioned this minister and the previous minister about stock enhancement. I have written to the minister. I have met with people who talked about stock enhancement on Lake Winni peg-very important to them .

Their fee ling , and in certain areas, certain management areas of the fishing industry say that the way to go is to enhance the spawning and the hatchery situation on Lake Wmnipeg in different areas. The minister, in his reply and in some of his commen ts, says that is a good idea, and we are going to look into that. I have comments here from the minister saying that, for example, the Dauphin River hatche ry: I would agree the operation in Dauphin River hatchery would complement the proj ects proposed by Fishe r River First Nation and others.

The department is pleased to assist with Fisheries Enhancement proj ects. Madam Deputy Speaker, when? Are we going to have something in action this year? I doubt it. An Honourable Member: Have they applied? Mr. Clif Evans: Yes, they have ap plied. They spoke to the minister' s department They spoke to the minister's depart men t requesting it. The Dauphin River hatchery has been a request from the Dauphin River Band for years. The communities that I have written to the minister about want to take and e nhance the spawning program and enhance the stock that is being depleted in Lake Winnipeg in certain areas.

I think that if we had that end of it, if we could support the enhancement of spawn, increasing spawn and the hatcheries, we might not have these proble ms. There would be plenty to go around and again if it was managed properly . Management of the source is an important part of the comm ercial fish industry in this province and for our people who do depend on commercial fishing. That, again, leads to my saying : we have to worlc with the fishennen. We have to worlc closer with the fishennen.

I am not saying there is or there is not; perhaps there are some people within the department who fe el there are lots of fish, and others who fe el there is not. Who knows better than the people who in generations and generations have fished Lake Winnipeg and Lake Manitoba and Lake St. M artin, McBeth Point? These are the people who have been there for generations, passing on the quotas to their sons, their daughters. These people know. You go into aboriginal communities where fishing is the mainstay economically for that community, and they will tell you.

They will tell you exactly where there are fish, why there are not fish and how we can enhance and improv e the supply and the quantity of the pickerel and sauger and whitefish stock in these lak es.

June S, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3223 Lake Winnipe g, the largest inland lake in North America, and the approx imately 80 0-plus commercial fishennen in Manitoba fish from Lake Wmnipe g, right from the south basin directly north through Gimli, through Nason , through Pine Dock area, Mason Island , up through Berens River, Bloodvein, McBeth Point, all these areas.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I would think that before we start imposing such severe penalties we should start worldng with the fishennen to enhance the fishing ind ustry, not go out and have people running around checking every truck, every boat, every vehicle , every skip that is up there and sa ying, let us see what you have , let us see your net size , let us see what you are using, what are you catchin g, let us see your quota. Not only are you taking away the time that these fishennen have to fish, but unless you can be certain, you are imposing on people 's rights to make a living.

I am certainly not saying that people who go against the regulations, people who overfish should not be penalized. I am not saying that for one min ute. I am saying again, are you going to enforce it? How are you going to enforce it? Who are you going to get $10, 000 from? These people just get by from fishing season to fishing season, mostly in the red every season. They are mostly in the red. Their expenses have increased. The cost of boats for these fishennen has increased. The cost of motors has increased. The cost of nets has increased. Everything has increased in costs for these fishennen. •

(1550) Granted there may be people out there and fishermen out there that are trying to subsidize some of these costs by selling fish not exactly legally . Perhaps that is out there , but is that the real, real cause of the situation that our commercial fishennen have in this province? No, it is not. Madam Deputy Speaker, some years ago the Minister of Natural Resources during Estimates reduced the freight subsidy . The freight subsidy has caused a great, great deal of hardship on the fishennen.

I would ask the minister to come with me to my constituency and talk to the fishennen out there when they talk about the cuts in the fr eight subsidy. Perhaps a small cut, as the government would say, but the freight subsidy decrease is causing a great, great deal of hardship. Freight subsidy cut; a cut in prices for the fish; increase in all the cost of the equipment-then you wonder why these fishenn en even fish.

The industry needs to survive , and it needs to survive with sup port, enhancement progra ms, supp ort from government and ideas and consulting along with the fishennen and the government of the day to be able to say, let us do something about our commercial fishing industry. One of the other issues that we have is the prices for the fishennen. The prices for the fisbennen over the last couple of years have been increasin gly down. So now prices of fish are down, costs are up, fishennen in the areas cann ot get the loans that they once could.

Who is going to give them a loan when their assets are in the red as compared to others? In most cases, of the 80 0-plus commercial fishennen, it has become an nonviable process. We need something to enhance these people. Commu nities all around in my are a and the honourable memb er for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) and others, in Thompson, Rupertsland, the economic situation in those communitie s, the economic high in that community, comes from whether the fishing industry is surviving, whether it is flourishing or whether it is stagnant. We can attribu te a lot to costs and prices as our f anners have.

Our f ann ers are fa ced almost in the same situation, but at least there are pr ograms. There are sup port programs for f ann ers that make available to these people, to these fann ers, an opportunity that if they have a little bit of somet hing lef t over they can increase their viability by the support programs and by entering into agreement with the support program. FIS hennen have none of that. Fishennen are basically businessmen totally on their own.

Every year costs are up, and the fishennen, to be able to make it viable and survive , have to depend on the market, have to depend on the good price through Freshwater Maiketing.

3224 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 8,1 994 You go out, and I have been at two very large conferences held here in Winnipe g over the past two or three yea rs, pe ople in support of the Freshwater Marlteting system , people opp osed to it, but the majority of the fishermen in this province support the Freshwater Fish Madceting CoipOration. They support it They do not want to go back to the old system. They want to maintain the system . To be able to do that, Madam Deputy Speaker, they need the marketplace for their fish. The pickerel and sauger prices have to increase .

We had wo:n:l just a couple of weeks ago- I heard on the radio that pickerel and sauger prices were in fact going to be on the upswing this year for the fish market-o ffering and letting the fishermen know that the prices will be up so they will be able to fish their full quotas for this year. The last couple of years, because of the prices, quotas were not filled If the price was not there the fishermen were saying , why would I want to go out and fish in 30-below weather, out onto the lake and put my nets in and come back later on in the day and come out of there with half a tub.

It does not make sense, so we have to enhance the lake . We have to provide the fishermen, not only with the price for their catch, but also we have to provide them with the fish themselves in the lake and sustain that level of fish stock in Lake Winnipe g, Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin. Madam Deputy Speaker, the member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer) has dropped by here to help me in my discussions. He very well knows what the fishing industry has been doing in the last couple of years. Part of his constituency is on Lake Wmnipe g and he knows.

I am sure the fishermen have come to him and have said, we have to do something about the fishing industry in Manitoba. I am sure the member for Gimli agrees with me on what I am saying, that we do need something to be able to provide our fishermen with an industry that will provide them with the proper amount of fish, with the proper price so these fishermen can be in the black. If the prices are available, quotas are fill ed, the bills are paid If the bills are pai

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-5-43
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 5th hansardpdf 43.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	b7d4e8be0013112d4f20adf0388b4c622a7a46e7

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