Third Session - Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVII No. 25A -1:30 p.m., Monday, April14, 1997 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Member Constituency Political Amliation ASHTON, Steve Thompson N.D.P. BARRETT, Becky Wellington N.D.P. CERILLI, Marianne Radisson N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave Kildonan N.D.P. CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. Ste. Rose P.C. DACQUAY, Louise, Hon. Seine River P.C. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. Roblin-Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary Concordia N.D.P. DOWNEY, James, Hon. Anhur-Virden P.C. DRIEDGER, Albert Steinbach P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. ENNS, Harry, Hon. Lakeside P.C. ERNST, Jim Charleswood P.C. EVANS, Clif Interlake N.D.P. - EVANS, Leonard S.

Brandon East N.D.P. FILMON, Gary, Hon. Tuxedo P.C. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. Springfield P.C. FRIESEN, Jean Wolseley N.D.P. GAUDRY, Neil St. Boniface Lib. GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. Minnedosa P.C. HELWER, Edward Gimli P.C. HICKES, George Point Douglas N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Pion N.D.P. KOWALSKI, Gary The Maples Lib. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATH LIN, Oscar The Pas N.D.P. LAURENDEAU, Marcel St. Norbert P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord St. Johns N.D.P. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McALPINE, Gerry Sturgeon Creek P.C. McCRAE, James, Hon. Brandon West P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane Osborne N.D.P.

MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. Assiniboia P.C. --..... MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn St. James N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East P.C. ' NEWMAN, David, Hon. Riel P.C. ' PALLISTER, Brian Portage Ia Prairie P.C. PENNER, Jack Emerson P.C. PITURA, Frank, Hon. Morris P.C. PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. Lac du Bonnet P.C. RADCLIFFE, Mike, Hon. River Heights P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. REIMER, Jack, Hon. Niakwa P.C. RENDER, Shirley St. Vital P.C. ROBINSON, Eric Rupertsland N.D.P. ROCAN, Denis Gladstone P.C. SALE, Tim Crescentwood N.D.P. SANTOS, Conrad Broadway N.D.P. STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. Kirktield Park P.C.

STRUTHERS, Stan Dauphin N.D.P. SVEINSON, Ben La Verendrye P.C. TOEWS, Vic, Hon. Rossmere P.C. TWEED, Mervin Turtle Mountain P.C. VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. Fort Garry P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann Swan River N.D.P.

1329 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, April14 , 19 97 The House met at 1: 30 p.m. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): I must inform the House of the unavoidable absence of Madam Speaker and therefore, in accordance with the statute, ask the Deputy Speaker to take the Chair. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MATTER OF PRIVILEGE (continued) Mr. Deputy Speaker: When the House adjourned on Friday, advice was being provided to the Chair on a matter of privilege raised by the honourable member for Broadway (Mr.

Santos) that the Speaker's ruling of Thursday, April! 0, 1997, during private members' hour not be viewed as a precedent of this House and, further, that this matter be referred to the standing committee on rules. At adjournment on Friday, the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) had indicated he had not completed his advice to the Chair and that other members may also want to advise the Chair as to whether a prima facie matter of privilege existed. Therefore, I recognize the honourable member for St. Johns on the matter of privilege. Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, just a few remarks in addition to the advice already offered to the Chair, just going back to briefly recap what took place. At the beginning of the session and into the lottery went a resolution by the member for Broadway which stated as its important clause at the end: "'THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Provincial Government to support legislation to elect the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba by secret ballot to ensure the Speaker's independence," of course following from events that took place in this House, regrettable events, in November, on the 28th and 29th. As well, we referenced other events in this House, for example, the Speaker's ruling on whether the phrase "racist policies of the government" were parliamentary or not.

What happened on Thursday was the Speaker got up at the beginning of private members' hour and made a ruling. The ruling was that this particular resolution was out of order because, during a matter of privilege early on in this session, the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) had moved an amendment to a privilege motion which regarded the idea of electing a Speaker. As well, she referenced the fact that a bill was on the Order Paper regarding the issue of the election of a Speaker. The points that I wanted to add are these.

As one who took place in a debate in this House in the 1995 session in private members' hour, I distinctly recall the long debate that took place regarding amendments to the maintenance enforcement regime in this province. The legislation was introduced, was set down for debate and indeed the legislation was enacted and given Royal Assent. Then we came back for fall sittings, and during that fall sitting a private member's resolution introduced by the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) was on the Order Paper. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, when that resolution was called for debate, the same Speaker sat there silently, allowing debate to take place, and we all took part willingly and eagerly, in fact, in that debate because it was a very important matter for Manitobans. That resolution talked and urged this House to commend the government for the action it took through its bill. No points of order were raised, and the matter was discussed for the period of one hour of private members' hour. *

(1335) That is the kind of precedent we have in this House, and that is how Speakers in this House have exercised discretion in the past and that is how the Speaker of the day exercised her discretion at that time on a government resolution. The other aspect I wanted to bring to the attention of the Chair is the fact that this resolution was known by the Speaker to be coming up on the Order Paper for

1330 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 1997 some 23 days. On the day the resolution came up for debate in this House, you, Sir, were not in the Chair; the Speaker was in the Chair. The Speaker did not even have the respect for this House, the respect for her office and respect for the entrenched principle of even the appearance of impartiality of the Chair not to rule against a motion which concerned her own office and her as an individual.

That was shameful; it was a conflict of interest at its worst at a time in this House when I would think that the Speaker and indeed the government, because the opposition does, wants to move towards an Assembly where we can again have some trust in how it works. But no, the Speaker ruled on a motion that affected her office and she herself. That is the disdain that she has for her office and this Assembly. There is a long series of precedents in this House, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, that when a motion concerning the Speakership itself is raised and there is no confidence expressed in the Speaker either directly or indirectly in a matter, the Speaker will defer to the will of the House, will allow the matter to go to debate. This is a general observation. There may be certain exceptions to that general rule, but nowhere could that general rule be more applicable than in private members' hour when a matter is raised reflecting on the Speaker and looking at the Speakership as an office of this House. Yet the Speaker did not see fit to allow the matter to be debated-for one hour.

It was going to go down to the bottom of the resolutions, one hour, that is all, on a matter that was essential to the operation of this Assembly in our view. So, with those few remarks, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we want to remind the Speaker, remind all members of this House that in our view-that is, the view deeply held by members of this side-the Speaker does not have the confidence of this House, at least of members of this side, does not in our view have the capability to carry on as Speaker, and in light of our view, that this House must move, as the majority of Legislatures in Canada have, to an elected Speaker, something that again is important to bring forward. This is not an issue that has disappeared into the past.

This is very much a live issue, and when we see rulings like this where the Speaker has put herself in a conflict of interest, where she has shown again an inability to hold the position of Speakership, we say this must be a prima facie matter of privilege. It is one that must be considered. We must move towards an elected Speakership and so I certainly support the matter of privilege raised by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) and would urge the Chair, the Speaker to allow this matter to go to debate and to a vote of this House. Thank you. Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples) : Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I just wanted to add a few words of advice on this ruling on this matter of privilege. I think much has already been said, and I will just reinforce the importance of the fact that this happened during private members' hour.

The government and the government members have many opportunities of bringing forward their issues, their agenda, through different vehicles, but private members' hour is an hour where members in opposition and all members have an opportunity of bringing resolutions forward to private member's bill and I think that in making a decision on this matter of privilege a lot of weight should be given to the fact that this happened du ring private members' hour. I want to also mention that as a new House leader I appreciated my colleague the member for Inkster (Mr.

Lamoureux) speaking first and putting our position forward. He has been House leader for a number of years and as a new House leader he probably did it much better than I could, but he also told me, the member for Inkster. that this is not the first time that Private Members' Business has been ruled out of order. He told me that when he brought forward a bill on housing, Speaker Rocan ruled it out of order because there was a government bill present, and so it shows that there is discretion called for by the Speaker. To show the latitude that the Speaker has, we could use as an example from Beauchesne

Section 491, that says "The Speaker has consistently ruled that language used in the House should be temperate and worthy of the place in which it is spoken. No language is, by virtue of any list. acceptable or unacceptable. A word which is parliamentary in one context may cause disorder in another context, and therefore be unparliamentary." This cries out for discretion by the Speaker. But having said that, the climate that has been created in this Chamber for a number of reasons makes it very

April 14, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1331 difficult for the Speaker not to keep to the letter of the rules and the letter of the rule

Section 31: "No member shall revive a debate already concluded during the session or anticipate a matter appointed for consideration of which notice has been given. " That is the ruling that the Speaker referred to, and I am sure the Speaker got the best advice she could to rule on whether that resolution was in fact legitimate. *

(1340) Probably, according to the very letter there would be a problem with that resolution but again it is private members' hour and the Speaker should have the discretion to allow it. I know that as a police officer, when you are accused of favouritism when arbitrating to two people, you cannot use as much discretion, so you go to the letter of the law.

I think because of the climate that has been created in this Chamber, it is handicapping the Speaker to use common sense, yes, to use common sense and discretion for the good functioning of this Chamber, and we are spiralling down and down and down into less opportunities to allow the Speaker to do the job. But in this case I think the Speaker should have used discretion. This resolution should have been allowed, and I would ask the Sp1�aker to consider this in her ruling. Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Just briefly on the point of advice on the matter of privilege, and I, of course, rise on the point of privilege raised by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos). One of the fundamental principles that we have stated time and time again, one of the fundamental principles of the rules of this Chamber is that all of our constituents are equal, and all 57 members in this Chamber, in terms of the rules of the Legislature and the privileges and responsibilities and rights of this Legislature, all of us are equal because our constituents are equal.

Whether they have voted for a Conservative or a Liberal or a New Democrat, our constituents are all equal, and, therefore, we bring equal rights and responsibilities to this Chamber. In denying the private member's resolution last week, Mr. Deputy Speaker, again we see the pervasive decisions of the Speaker of the day denying the fundamental rights of each and every one of us to be equal members before the Chair, before the presiding officer in conducting the affairs of our constituents and our constituencies. That is the essence of the issue of privilege here again today.

It is not a question of whether we are spiralling up or spiralling down. It is a question of whether we are undermining, by decisions of the presiding officer, the roles and responsibilities of each and every one of us to represent our constituents in an equal way. This is not the first time, as the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) and the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) have pointed out, this has happened in this Chamber.

The rights of all of us to stand on a point of privilege was the major issue of dispute when unilateral decisions were made by a presiding officer to treat one side of the House, that being the governing side of the House, in an unequal and an unfair way to proceed to votes contrary to any motion of closure that was lacking in the Chamber at the time.

The decision on racist policy and racist language, the fact that we can call a policy of the federal government racist but a policy of previous and present and future provincial governments-that we can no longer as members of the Legislature represent our constituencies and say this policy is racist, again, is a role of the presiding officer to deny our responsibilities and duties as members, equal members in this Legislature. It was a private member's resolution last week; it was the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) raising a private member's resolution before this Chamber.

Now we have had private members' resolutions that have criticized even the government of the day from the government's own private member. We have had private members' resolutions that have had people on all sides vote even against government policies when it made sense for the constituents. We have had private members' resolutions, as late as last week, that had all­ party concurrence. One was the Pan Am Games. *

(1345) The right of a private member to bring forward matters on behalf of their constituents, I suggest to all members, is paramount, and I would hope that members opposite will vote for the rights of all private members and deal with the presiding officer in a way that starts to give rights back to all of us and all of our constituents on an equal basis. I would ask the presiding officer to take that into consideration on the legitimate point of privilege by the member for Broadway. Thank you very, very much.

1332 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April14, 1997 Mr. Deputy Speaker: I would like to thank honourable members for their advice on this matter. will take it under advisement for Madam Speaker. PRESENTING PETITIONS Mobile Screening Unit for Mammograms Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Bev Carlson, Audrey Korpan and Terry Genik requesting that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request the Minister of Health (Mr.

Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity. Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I beg to present the petition of D. Gouldsborough, D. Steinwandt, Nina Patey and others requesting that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request the Minister of Health to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity.

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mobile Screening Unit for Mammograms Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? No? Dispense.

WHEREAS medical authorities have stated that breast cancer in Manitoba has reached almost epidemic proportions; and

WHEREAS yearly mammograms are recommended for women over 50, and perhaps younger if a woman feels she is at risk; and

WHEREAS while improved surgical procedures and better post-operative care do improve a woman's chances if she is diagnosed, early detection plays a vital role; and

WHEREAS Manitoba currently has only three centres where mammograms can be performed, those being Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson; and

WHEREAS a trip to and from these centres for a mammogram can cost a woman upwards of$500 which is a prohibitive cost for some women,· and

WHEREAS a number of other provinces have dealt with this problem by establishing mobile screening units; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has promised to take action on this serious issue. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unitfor mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): Mr. Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Rural Development (Mr.

Derkach), I would like to table the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review with regard to the 1997-98 Departmental Expenditure Estimates for Manitoba Decentralization. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Billl5- The Government Essential Services Amendment Act Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): Mr. Deputy Speaker. I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews), that leave be given to introduce Bill 15, The Government Essential Services Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les services gouvernementaux essentiels), that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to - -

April 14, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1333 the House. I would like to table the message from the Lieutenant Governor. Motion agreed to. *

(1350) Bill18- The Emergency 911 Public Safety Answering Point Act Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura), that leave be given to introduce Bill 18, The Emergency 911 Public Safety Answering Point Act (Loi sur les centres telt�phoniques de securite publique-service d'urgence 911), and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. I would also like to table the message of the Lieutenant Governor.

Motion agreed to. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD SmartHealth Expenditures Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the First Minister. The Premier on Decem ber 20, 1995, signed an Order-in-Council authorizing the loan guarantee and expenditure of some $26 million to the SmartHealth agreement that the government had entered into. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we would like to ask the government: How much money has been expended by SmartHealth, and how much money has been loaned and guaranteed by the Province of Manitoba under the Order-in-Council signed by the Premier? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): I will take that question as notice and bring the detailed information back to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Doer: Mr. Deputy Speaker, we understand that one of the committees dealing with the confidential information is meeting to look at draft privacy legislation sometime this week. It seems to us that legislation dealing with privacy and confidentiality should be in place before any money is either loaned or expended by the taxpayers of this province to the Royal Bank subsidiary. I would like to ask the Premier: Has any money been expended by the province?

Has any money been loan guaranteed by the province, and does it not make absolute sense for us to have legislation in place first for dealing with the privacy of citizens rather than having money flow first and deal with the privacy of legislation second? Mr. Filmon: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will take that question as notice and bring back the detailed information to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Doer: The Premier has been critical of almost everybody about their concerns on confidential information, concerns about this system of dealing with the SmartHealth operation.

In light of the fact that this Order-in-Council was signed some 16 months ago by the Premier and the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Stefanson) authorizing the expenditure of some $26 million in loan guarantees and expenditures to SmartHealth, I would like to ask the Premier: Will he ensure that no money flows in either loan guarantees or in expenditures until there is adequate time for this Legislature, this body of people, to pass legislation that will meet the test of Manitobans, that will meet the test of the Supreme Court decision dealing with confidential medical records that has been passed by the Supreme Court of Canada?

Does it not make complete and total sense to deal with the privacy issues first, rather than have the money and loan guarantees flow before the privacy of our citizens? Mr. Filmon: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will respond to that in conjunction with the information that I undertook to take as notice just moments ago. Introduction of Guests Mr. Deputy Speaker: Avant que nous poursuivions, je tiens a signaler la presence dans la galerie publique de 11 visiteurs de Toulouse, France, sous la direction

1334 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 1997 de Monsieur Gerald McLeod. Ce groupe visite Ia circonscription de Ia deputee de Fort Garry. Bienvenue au Manitoba. [Translation] Before we continue, I would like to indicate the presence in the public gallery of II visitors from Toulouse, France, under the direction of Mr. Gerald McLeod. This group is visiting the constituency of the member for Fort Garry. Welcome to Manitoba. *

(1355) Holiday Haven Nursing Home Departmental Investigation Mr. Dave Cbomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Deputy Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. In 1989 the province stepped in to operate the Rideau Park Personal Care Home directly.

We have researched the authority of the Minister of Health, and if the Minister of Health were to review the regulations in the Manitoba Gazette under The Personal Care Home Act, the minister would note that the minister has extensive authority to obtain information from personal care homes on demand as well as financial information, and the minister can withhold funding and force those institutions to provide that information. The real tragedy of Holiday Haven is that we raised the issue in October and nothing- An Honourable Member: Is there a question? Mr.

Cbomiak: Yes, there is a question, to the deputy minister. Perhaps the deputy minister will do something about it because they did not. The real issue here, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is why the province did not do anything from October until a death occurred in February. Will the minister now institute an investigation of his own department's handling of this issue so we can be assured that this can never happen again in Manitoba? Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): As the member well knows, once this particular matter was brought to my attention we took steps to change the management. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, it was done under the information provided me by the department that I did not have specific power to change management there. We requested that the operators of the facility relinquish their management, which they did. I can assure the member that in that particular facility we have a new management team. They are working towards ensuring that that facility can be accredited. Mr.

Cbomiak: Can the minister explain how the department has failed to act on numerous, dozens and dozens of complaints at Holiday Haven, other personal care homes, their own study and report from three years ago with 39 recommendations for improvements to personal care homes, how the department, the ministers of Health, the previous and the present, have failed to act on their own recommendations to prevent the kind of tragedy that occurred at Holiday Haven? Mr. Praznik: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in response to this particular incident that occurred early in my tenure as Minister of Health, I have undertaken a review internally of the workings within the ministry to see how we handle these issues and, as the member has pointed out, there is certainly a need for a number of things to take place, including audit and inspection.

If there is one fault here, I think it is the people in the department, the staff in the department who have worked with personal care homes, have tried to resolve issues at the level of management in trying to resolve issues in personal care homes, working with the management of those facilities. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I hope within a very short period of time to announce some changes that we will be taking that will ensure I think a better role in ensuring the protection of people in the personal care homes of our province. Mr. Cbomiak: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, how can the people of Manitoba have any more confidence in the pronouncements of the minister today, more pronouncements about change, when 39 recommendations that resulted from previous tragedies in personal care homes were not followed up on, when previous concerns raised by members in this House were not followed up on, when concerns raised by patients and residents were not followed up on? When the minister and the government took over another personal care home in 1989 on demand because it was -

April 14, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1335 a labour dispute, how can we have any assurance that the pronouncements by this minister, without a comprehensive plan and a review of the department's handling, how can we have any confidence that the situation could possibly improve yet? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as I have referred I believe in Question Period before and certainly responded to media requests, I have put in place an individual today who is reviewing for me the operation and making some recommendations on how we can improve our service within the ministry.

As well, I would remind the member that in our personal care homes across the province families of people who are in those facilities are in those facilities on a daily or weekly basis. There are always issues that arise from time to time, but generally speaking, we have a very good personal care home system in our province. Labour Market Training Co-Management Agreement Ms. Jean Friesen (Wo1seley): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the federal government is offloading responsibility for labour force development, but the Manitoba government does have a choice of accepting complete devolution as Alberta and New Brunswick have, or of a co-management agreement which maintains jobs across Manitoba, retains the sense of a national vision and brings a broad range of skills to the planning process, and which has been accepted by Newfoundland and is under discussion right now, according to new information in British Columbia and the Yukon.

I want to ask the Minister of Education why, according to a recent bulletin from the federal government, Manitoba is rejecting the co-operative opportunity that co-management offers. Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): The whole process of negotiating with the federal government and the provinces has been a bilateral one, province by province, each province negotiating individually with the federal government rather than all the provinces together bargaining and negotia ting for one set formula for across the nation. The reason for that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is very obvious.

Each province will have its own needs, its own way of addressing items. The goal for each province has been, and the goal for Manitoba definitely is, that we wish to negotiate the very best opportunities for Manitoba, the very best kinds of funding arrangements with the federal government that we possibly can, and we will do that in the best interests of Manitoba in a made-in-Manitoba solution that will suit us best just as the other provinces negotiate something that suits them best. Ms.

Friesen: Could the minister confirm that the real reason that Manitoba has rejected co-management is because the co-management agreement in Newfoundland provides for labour force development boards to include not just business but labour and education and that that is the real reason that this government is rejecting that approach, because it is an approach that they have rejected over the last five years? Mrs. Mcintosh: No, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Records Confidentiality Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, could the minister explain how, in the agreement she is negotiating, client confidential personal information will be protected when the administration of labour market programs requires access to Employment Insurance files which are linked to Revenue Canada files? Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we have a team of very capable negotiators working on this entire package for us, and we should have details ready to indicate to the member very soon as to exactly how we are going to be going about enhancing and improving the way in which this service is delivered in Manitoba. I assure her that implied in her question is an indication that she thinks these things are of no consequence to us, and in that she is totally and absolutely incorrect. *

(1400) Shelter Allowance for Family Renters Funding Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have been asking this government to explain

1336 LEGISLATIV E ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 1997 why they have cut the Shelter Allowance for Family Renters Program by 20 percent when it helps over 1,500 families a year with a rent supplement of on average $1 25 a year, which helps them to avoid going to food banks, to have increased security and a better standard of living, including housing. The minister has claimed there is poor uptake in this program.

I want to ask the minister if he has been advised to read the Children and Youth Secretariat early childhood working group report, which recommends proposing and promoting the SAFFR program and that would allow families to do the very things I have just talked about, have increased money for food and have a better standard of housing. Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Mr. Deputy Speaker, the program that the member is alluding to, the SAFF R program, somehow the member is alluding to the fact that money has been taken away from this program.

The money that is allocated to this program is based on applications. If applications go down, naturally there is not as much money that is spent in this program. Now, when we are setting up the objectives of the budget, we look at the previous year's applications. We use those figures as a basis for putting in for our budgetary considerations. At the end of the year when we look at the amount of take-up on this particular program, if there is not the amount of people that have been designated by the projections, then naturally the amount has gone down. So it is not a decrease in the funding that has gone.

It is just that there are not as many applicants that have taken advantage of the program. Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the minister did not answer my question, but I want to- Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I would ask the honourable member to put her question. There is not time for a statement prior to her question at this time. The honourable member for Radisson, with her question, please. Ms.

Cerilli: I want to ask the Minister of Family Services why this recommendation to promote the Shelter Allowance for Family Renters Program so that we will increase the uptake was not included in her Children First strategic plan, their document which is supposed to be the accumulated reports of the working groups from the Children and Youth Secretariat. Why are they cutting this program, rather than implementing the recommendation from the working group? Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and-no, that is going way back. The honourable Minister of Family Services. Hon.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You were going back to good old days when you made that comment. I want to thank my honourable friend for that question and indicate that, rather than members of the opposition talking and discussing and yelling across the floor while my colleagues are trying to answer questions, if they had listened very carefully and very intently, they would have heard the Minister of Housing explain very clearly how the program works. It does work well for those people that apply for the program.

I do want to indicate too that many of the new initiatives, if we could get on with passing the Estimates and on with the business of the House that is at hand-pass the Estimates and look at new programs that are going to benefit children and families through new initiatives through the Child and Youth Secretariat and with the co-operation of all departments. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Radisson, with her final supplementary question. Ms. Cerilli: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I want to ask the Premier: Will he admit that this is a $2 50,000 symbol of how this government is dealing with poverty, to claim one thing, to have reports that recommend to expand and promote programs, and in the budget to cut those very programs? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Deputy Speaker, the answer is: Absolutely not. What I think the member for Radisson fails to realize is that you put in money in demand-driven programs for the money that

April 14, 1997 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1337 you expect to be spent. In Pharmacare, for instance, we pay all the bills that come in and what we put in the Estimates is the estimate of what we expect to spend, but if, in fact, more is required, more is spent, because it is-[ interjection] Here we have people opposite who are so concerned with symbolism that they do not deal with reality. If there are applications for shelter allowances that meet the criteria, they will be approved and the money will be spent. So you do not budget for more money than you expect to spend.

You budget for what you expect to spend, and if more is required, more is put in. It is a totally demand-driven program. We have a member opposite who does not understand that. Maybe some of her colleagues who have been in government can explain that to her.

The fact of the matter is, this is absolutely a reflection of what is intended to be spent, and further still, if there is less demand, it is because people are having greater incomes and therefore have less dependence on the shelter allowances, and that is exactly, exactly what we want to see in this province is people's incomes rise, their standard of living rise, and therefore less dependence on government programs, not more dependence like the members opposite want. [interjection] Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I do not think she believes you, Gary. Pneumococcal Pneumonia Vaccination Program Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Deputy Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Pneumococcal pneumonia is a potential threat to thousands of Manitobans. In Manitoba, persons infected by the age of 65 spend an average of 15.6 days in the hospital due to this infection. This is the second highest rate of hospitalization in Canada, and the infection can have a mortality rate that runs as high as 40 percent. A vaccine is available, yet Manitoba has no plans for a vaccination program. The simple question to the Minister of Health is: Why not? Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I understand that currently the vaccine is provided at no cost to patients who have a chronic medical condition and whose physician does request it. The larger question, of course, is are we planning to get involved into a large-scale immunization program. I understand that our people within the department who manage these are having discussions now and looking at the benefits of such a program, so it is under consideration within the ministry. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, will the Minister of Health at least approve a vaccination program to protect the health of residents, in particular in areas such as our nursing homes? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as I indicated to the member, this particular vaccine is available at no cost to any individual in this province whose physician requests it because it fits with their medical requirements. The consideration of having even a limited or large-scale vaccination program is one that is not necessarily taken as an easy decision to make. There are a lot of factors that fit into that.

Obviously, you have the potential of inconveniencing and there is always some risk with vaccination to vast numbers of people. I understand Ontario is the only province that has launched that to date, and we are looking at that program. It is under consideration, but it is not just an easy decision to make. *

(1410) Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Lamoureux: I wonder if the Minister of Health can indicate to the House in terms of when does he anticipate that we will be hearing from the Department of Health whether or not Manitoba will in fact have a vaccination program, so that in the long term our health care needs will be met into the future and there is also the potential saving of considerable dollars. Mr. Praznik: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as I pointed out to the member, there is always a host of factors that have to play into that type of decision.

The medical expertise within my department, they are considering a proposal now to do such a thing. When they have

1338 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April l4 , 1997 worked through the process and have a recommendation for me, then we will make a decision. Sheriff's Officers Meeting Agenda Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Mr. Deputy Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Justice. The sheriffs officers in the Department of Justice have been concerned for some time now about a lack of government response to their fears about staffing levels, equipment, protocol, training.

There has been some attention to this issue both in the local media and we raised a question last week in this House, but the issue came to a head, I think, when we saw the police more frequently being called in to do, at public expense, the work of sheriffs officers. My question to the minister is-and this is further to his answer last week that he was not about to interfere even in providing this House with numbers of recommendations implemented for their safety: What role did the minister have in calling a special meeting between management and sheriffs officers on Friday afternoon? Hon.

Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Deputy Speaker, although I specifically asked no one to meet, I was very pleased that my senior staff, as a result of questions raised in this House, went to speak to the sheriffs officers to ensure that there were no outstanding issues that could not be addressed immediately. I understand that meeting did occur between some of my senior officials and the sheriffs department-very pleased to see that happen, and I hope it continues to happen. Mr.

Mackintosh: Would the minister confirm to this House that the meeting was not about employee safety but was about the government's issue of image, because the meeting was called to issue a gag order and threaten the employees that, if they spoke to the media or MLAs, there would be disciplinary action? Mr. Toews: Mr. Deputy Speaker, that is one of the most irresponsible accusations that I have ever heard. If that member for St. Johns wants to go and visit the sheriffs officers today, he is free to do so.

If members of the media wish to speak to sheriffs officers or to senior officials in my department, they are welcome to do so. I have been very open, very frank with the media indicating exactly where we are in terms of the recommendation. I am very pleased to see the progress that has been made. There is always time for more. You know, I want to say if there is any concern at all about the process that has been adopted, there are Workplace Safety and Health independent officers who can go in and make that assessment. I would welcome any inquiry by Workplace Safety and Health in that respect. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Mackinto sh: Well, then, I will follow up by asking the minister: Who are Manitobans to believe, the people, the sheriffs officers who were at that meeting and reported that, or the minister? Mr. Toews: Frankly, this is a member who has really no concern about those officers' safety. I want to say here on the record- Point of Order Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns. on a point of order. Mr. Mackintosh: I ask you, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, to consider, I ask the minister to consider his remarks right now, and I ask the minister to consider tackling the issue rather than the messenger and withdraw those remarks that reflected on my purpose in bringing this very serious matter of personal and public safety to the Legislature. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Minister of Justice, on the same point of order. Mr. Toews: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have no objection to the message; it is just that the messenger is not very accurate. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member did not have a point of order. * * * - -

Aprill4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1339 Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable minister, to conclude his remarks. Mr. Toews: Without wanting to engage in partisan politics, I want to assure this House that the safety of public servants, who are doing an important job, is my primary concern. He has made certain accusations in respect of the involvement of sheriffs officers and police officers. I want to indicate that that is an ongoing role and will always be an ongoing role for police officers.

If he wants a complete briefing on that aspect, he can go to see any one of the senior officers in my department to explain why police officers are involved in providing security in certain situations. That is a situation that has existed as long as I can remember. It continues. We have supplemented the number of sheriffs officers by I believe it is 10 part-time sheriffs officers to accommodate fluctuating needs. I want to say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I care about the sheriff's officers, I care about the safety of the public. Louisiana- Pacific Environmental Concerns Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in a letter to Louisiana-Pacific dated March 24 from Mr. Larry Strachan, he spells out that wood wastes not contaminated with resin or hazardous material may be used for livestock production operations. He also says that the livestock area must be 50 feet away from water and that the area not cause pollution to surface water. I will table those letters. Given that direction from Mr. Strachan, can the minister explain why his department has not stepped in to prevent the wastes that are being dumped in a sensitive area, that being the NE 31-35-26 where material is being dumped in a slough? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Environment): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I thank the honourable member for the specifics provided in the

preamble to her question. We will examine that exact site, and if any remediation is required, that remediation will be carried out. Ms. Wowchuk: Given that the directive says wood wastes contaminated with resin cannot be used for livestock bedding, I would like to table this manila folder for the minister and share with him some of the material that is being put into the site. I would like to tell the minister that this material is-[interjection] These are clearly pieces of processed material.

I would like to ask the minister why his department is allowing material to be dumped in a slough which is full of cattails and will soon be the site of ducks and geese nesting. Why is he letting material covered with resin be put into these sites? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Could I ask the honourable member-I would not say that you were displaying it, but the product that you have tabled would be a little difficult to table. I think that your end result was that you wanted to get it to the minister.

If you wanted to just pass it to the minister rather than tabling it, not yourself but the page, but rather than tabling it so that we do not have to take it into the record. So if the page would just take it to the minister. Ms. Wowchuk: I would be happy to have the minister have them. There are three copies if other people would like them. Mr. McCrae: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I assure the honourable member that neither I nor the Environment department has any intention whatever of allowing contaminated substances or materials to be deposited in environmentally sensitive places.

So, as I said in answer to the first question put by the honourable member, she has given us specific information, which is something that is appreciated-it was not done that way last time around-and we will be very happy to follow up this question. *

(1420) Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Swan River, with her final supplementary question. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Deputy Speaker, given that this is a very serious matter for the people in the valley, for people who live on the reserves downstream who are concerned about their water supply, will the minister tell us why his staff is not taking action when this site was reported last week on Wednesday and on Saturday

1340 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 1997 this material was still being deposited? When are you going to start taking some action and protect the water? Mr. McCrae: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will, along with the Environment department, examine the details of the information we have already made available with respect to the various sites where this type of material is stored.

We will look into the matter to see if we are talking about an additional site, and if that is the case and there is toxic material-I remind the honourable member that the material we were talking about previously has been found to be nontoxic and natural in its properties-if the honourable member is raising something different and new today, that indeed would be a different and new matter, and we would certainly look into it with all vigour. RCS Greenhouses Government Assistance Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, unfortunately, we learned recently that the Waskada greenhouses, from which a lovely ripe and flavourful tomato was presented to each member in the House last year by, I believe, the honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism, is in receivership and that it is possible that the family involved may lose their farm as well. Could the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism please tell the House why his department did not get actively involved in assisting this excellent product to find the markets that it deserved in Manitoba? Why was his department not actively engaged in this? Hon.

James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Deputy Speaker, let me at the outset say that the information the member brings to the House is inaccurate. The Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism along with the Department of Rural Development have been working very aggressively to try and find options that would be helpful for the RCS Greenhouses in the Waskada community. There would be a great desire to have that operation operating and providing produce. Mr. Sale: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, will the minister confirm that the company is currently not meeting its obligations and is in fact in default and that the family is at serious risk of losing their farm and that at this point he is talking about closing a door long after the horse is gone? Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Speaker, let me again indicate to the member that there is a series of conditions that developed as it related to the greenhouses. I can tell the member as well that there have been many community people working to try to find alternatives.

Also, I can assure the member that there was a stay of proceedings that was introduced as it relates to the Farm Debt Review Act which put the whole issue on hold for a series of time, and there were no alte rnatives that could, at the particular time, be brought forward that would have anything happen but what has happened. Student Transportation Minibuses Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Mr. Deputy Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.

Changes to the capital school bus formula means that local school divisions are responsible for replacing their bus fleets and lifts the already extended usage limit of 15 and a half years. This downloading means that we will see even older buses on our roads, higher property taxes and greater safety concerns. Will the minister tell us: Is she still recommending the use of minivans to replace school buses to transport students, despite the safety concerns raised by divisions such as Lakeshore School Division No. 23? Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): I have never recommended the use of minivans. Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Deputy Speaker, my second question to the minister: Will the minister confirm-and given that April is Mathematics Education Month, I have a mathematics question for her-that this program will in fact cost the Winnipeg School Division over $2 million and that this will come from property taxes or programs for children, from classrooms or property taxes? Mrs. Mcintosh: No, I will not confirm that. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for St. James, with her final supplementary question. - -

, April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 41 Ms. Mihychuk: Well, I do not think that is really a problem-solving answer, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but it was not a short question. An Honourable Member: You want a long answer, sweetie? Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Deputy Speaker- What did she say? An Honourable Member: ... sweetie. Ms. Mihychuk: What I want is a direct answer and for her to come forward and tell Manitobans that this program is another downloading and more manipulation of the budget numbers. Mrs.

Mcintosh: I would warrant you cannot get much more direct than yes and no, but if she does not think that is direct, perhaps she could give me a new definition of being direct. I say to the member that we are now providing for school divisions the amount of money equivalent to the purchase of a bus. We used to buy the bus; we now give them the amount of money they require equivalent to the purchase price of a bus. They can now choose whether or not to purchase the bus, or they can redirect the money to something else if they feel they would like to do that.

As well, we are now providing for urban school divisions busing grants for students, kindergarten to Grad�: 6, which we never used to do before. We will also provide it for Grades 7 and 8 if the school divisions decide they wish to bus students in that particular arena. So we have not, as the member indicated, done anything detrimental. Rather, we have actually, I believe, helped improve a situation. Deputy Minister of Natural Resources Investigation Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, last fall Manitobans were treated to the spectacle of the deputy of Natural Resources claiming $7,300 in restaurant, liquor and lounge bills and claiming to do it in the employ of the Province of Manitoba. The government's response was to assign the investigation of this appropriateness or not to the Clerk of the Executive Council. My question for the Minister of Natural Resources is: Why is no report being presented to the people of Manitoba regarding the appropriateness of these expenses? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Deputy Speaker, that will be provided. Mr.

Struthers: Instead of covering up, why does this minister not ask the Provincial Auditor to investigate this matter instead of taking

part in a cover-up that was begun last fall? Mr. Cummings: Mr. Deputy Speaker, perhaps the member might want to reserve his opinion until he has seen the report. * (1 430) Investigation-Report Availability Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Mr. Deputy Speaker, when will that report be ready for Manitobans? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Dep uty Speaker, I will undertake to make sure that report is made available. Poverty Rate Reduction Strategy-G arage Sale Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Deputy Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Native and Northern Affairs.

Recently the minister and I both attended a public forum at the Indian and Metis Friendship Centre. The forum was organized by aboriginal women and the focus was on combatting poverty. The Minister of Native and Northern Affairs suggested that one solution to the problem of poverty was to have a garage sale. This was met by outrage by the people who were present. Notwithstanding the fact that the government may go ahead on this, could the

13 42 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 19 97 Minister of Native and Northern Affairs tell the Legislature and tell poor aboriginal Winnipeggers and Manitobans how having a garage sale is going to solve the problem of income poverty? Hon. David Newman (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am glad that the honourable member for Burrows was present on that Saturday afternoon for a long and very, I felt, meaningful day, where I am sure we all learned a lot.

One thing that I learned was having a garage sale in the way that it was presented met with public disapproval of several members in attendance. The idea was not a traditional garage sale, but the idea was to have products donated by manufacturers and others who had products that were worthy of citizens of Winnipeg which would then be-the whole process would be managed by the people in the community and the proceeds would go to the benefit of the people in the community so they learn entrepreneurship, organizational skills and get revenue.

I might say, after a few vocal participants indicated displeasure with that idea, after the event was over, a number of people came up to me and staff and indicated that was a good idea and they would like to participate in it. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Time for Oral Question Period has expired. NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS Dr. Robert Sangster Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Do I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr.

Tweed: It is a great pleasure for me to rise today to offer congratulations from myself and the people of Turtle Mountain and hopefully on behalf of all Manitobans to Dr. Robert Sangster of Baldur, Manitoba. Dr. Sangster was nominated for the Family Physician of the Year A ward on behalf of the entire Baldur Health District staff and on April 11 was presented as the winner of this award. "Dr. Bob,"' as he is affectionately known in the community of Baldur and surrounding districts, was nominated for this award by the community of Baldur and for his community involvement.

He is an active member in the Baldur Business and Economic Development Committee and for the Argyle municipality, and he is certainly dealing with the current issues of the day, including the securing of another financial institution in the community of Baldur and dealing with the seniors housing issues. He is also active in many of the community events that take place, and I know in the times that I have stopped in to visit with him to say hello, I have met him in different locations, such as the curling club, the coffee shop and at work.

He was the founding member of the southwest association of rural physicians, and he is the district chairperson for southwestern rural education program through the University of Manitoba. I think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, some of the comments that were made when he was nominated and when he received the award exemplify the fine man that Dr. Bob is. They referred to him as a tenacious medical detective, a man of integrity, a keen sense of humour, always approachable, supportive, conscientious and a willing teacher, and I think the one statement made by his colleagues probably represents the greatest feeling of all.

That was they referred to him as a gold standard against which all other doctors are compared. He is certainly a fine member of the community and a symbol and an example for aiL and I stand here today to offer my congratulations to Dr. Robert Sangster. Village Lane Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I ask leave to make a nonpolitical statement. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Osborne have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Ms. McGifford: Today, I want to bring the attention of all members of this Chamber to the development of - -

April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 43 Village Lane in Osborne Village. This project will transfonn a dilapidated building on Wardlaw and Osborne into 20,000 square feet of market area, including 12 individual stores. Village Lane, expected to be finished in May, will offer a variety of shops to reside nts, for example, fruit and vegetable stands, a butcher, a deli, and so will bring the traditional market milieu of the village which, with its dense population and pedestrian traffic, is the perfect setting for a market. But Village Lane is more than a commercial enterprise.

Consider the history of the village. There have been several incarnations-early in the century and then a rebirth during the passionate and romantic sixties. Now again, after some difficult years, it is time for another rebirth. During each of these phases, the village has always managed to keep its personality and be an urban village, a place of goods and services, a place of chann and intimacy midst a large sprawling urban centre. Village Lane is reclaiming Osborne Village, giving it new life and personality while retaining its original flavour. I want to comment, too, on the family behind Village Lane.

The Lagopoulos family have been village mainstays for 30 years. They helped revitalize the community in the '60s, just as they are doing in the '90s. In th�! meantime, they have lived in the village, participated in streetscaping, the development of the Osborne Village Biz, and done just about everyth ing that community-spirited people do. In closing, I congratulate all Osborne Villagers on their detennination to bloom again. Weather permitting, when the snow clears, it should be a great spring. Thank you. Hebrew Sick Benefit Association Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, may I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Kildonan have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Chomiak: I had the honour and pleasure, together with other elected officials and many hundreds of members from the community, to celebrate and congratulate the Hebrew Sick Benefit Association on their 90th anniversary celebration the past Saturday. This is an organization that began in 19 06 and which was recognized to serve as a spiritual and guiding light amongst all of the new Jewish immigrants in Winnipeg.

The association was a place where these immigrants could get help with their problems, were guided culturally, spiritually and financially. It provided a wide range of services for its members, including free dental and medical care, religious services and even free burials in their own cemetery. In fact, as many speakers pointed out, it was a forerunner to medicare in many instances. It manages apartments. It has been a vibrant organization, and it is carried on now in not only the Jewish community at large but in the community that I represent at large and beyond to provide benefits to many, many individuals.

It was a very exciting evening, an evening of hope, an evening of building a foundation for the future based on the past 90 years. It was also time for commemoration to cele brate as well the Beth Israel Synagogue 20th anniversary, a synagogue that was fonned partially, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, together with a merger from the Hebrew Sick Benefit Assoc iation. * (1 440) I can only wish congratulations on behalf of all members of this Chamber to the outstanding work of the anniversary comm ittee, including chairpersons Dave Chochinov and Sharon Bronstone, the fundraising committee, and all the honorees and past presidents of the Hebrew Sick Benefit Association and Beth Israel Synagogue and the sisterhood who have carried out their work inside and out of the community these past 90 years and can only anticipate further work in the commun ity as their work continues.

I might add, we also were honoured to have a concert prepared by the cantors from the other synagogues in the city of Winnipeg which was an outstanding representation of Jewish culture, history and spiritual development, and I can only say it was one of the most inspiring evenings that my wif e and I and all of the individuals have ever had an opportunity to attend. So, on behalf of all members of the Chamber, I wish congratulations and a hearty congratulations and

13 44 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA April 14 , 19 97 support to the Hebrew Sick Benefit Association on its and Mr. Conrad Artibise for his dedication and hard 90th anniversary and Beth Israel Synagogue on its 20th work in fundraising for this proje ct. anniversary. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to say again it was a big Parkland Region Events weekend for Dauphin, one in which we celebr ated the co-o perative efforts of many people in our area. Thank Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Mr. Deputy Speaker, you. I request leave to make a nonpolitical statement. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Dauphin have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Struthers: This past weekend was a big one in the history of the town of Dauphin and the Parklands surrounding it. We had not one but two grand openings on the weekend. On Friday, April II, the Dauphin RCMP subdivision was formally opened with tours available and very many people in attendance for the well-organized and very deserved celebration that took place in Dauphin at the opening of our subdivision. I want to recognize the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Toews) for making the trip up to Dauphin to join with us in the celebration of the Dauphin RCMP subdivision. It was a project that was in the planning stages and the arm-twisting stages for many years since the mid and early 19 80s. It finally became a reality on Friday, and I look forward to the continuation of an excellent community program that the RCMP do in our area out of that building.

On Saturday, April 12 , the town of Dauphin also celeb rated the grand opening of the Parkland Recreation Complex, another proje ct that was in the planning stages for a long time and now has also reached fruition, and I want to congratulate the Minister of Housing, Mr. Reimer, for taking the time to come up to Dauphin and join with us in the celebration there as well.

The recreation complex is a one-of-a-kind unique facility for Manitoba, and I would offer my congratulations to the mayors and town councils and the reeves and town councils over the past number of years who have worked so hard and diligently to make this dream a reality. I also want to point out specifically Mr. Dave Bosiak of the Dauphin Joint Recreation Commission for his vision and leadership ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik), that Mr.

Deputy Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majes ty with the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson) in the Chair for the Department of Housing; and the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the Department of Natural Resources. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concu rrent Sections) HOUSING Mr. Chairperson (Ben Sveinson): Order, please.

Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this

section ofthe Committee of Supply meeting in Room 255 will resume consid eration of the Estimates of the Department of Housing. When the comm ittee last sat, it had been considering item 1. (b )( 1) on page 83 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass? Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): When we ended off last time, we were talking about Lord Selkirk Park, I believe. The member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) had gotten in on asking some questions, and I wanted to continue on in that vein. I want to get some quite specific information. We had been discussing the problem with vacancy rates at Lord Selkirk Park and other public housing developm ents and the costs that that is having on the - -

April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 45 Department of Housing. So I want to spend a little bit more time dealing with that, and I guess, just first of all, I want to get some fairly specific information from the minister on this. First of all, though, just to confirm that Lord Selkirk Park has had their mortgage paid; is that correct? That is one of the developments that is paid off, as it were? Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Yes, I believ<! that is true. That has no outstanding debt on it. Ms.

Cerilli: So what kind of detailed information do you have with you from the staff here in terms of the costs at Lord Selkirk Park annually and monthly? I am interested in getting some more detailed information in terms of maintenance costs, and I know I have got some information with me about maintenance costs budgeted, different developments. Let me see here. This is modernization of improvements.

That is what I am interested in finding out, modernization of improvements, maintenance and any other costs that are associated with specifically Lord Selkirk Park and to find out as well what amounts you are generating in terms of rent revenue from that development and specifically what the vacancies there are costing you right now. * (1 450) Mr.

Reimer: We are just trying to get the figures because we have to use them at different levels in the statistic book, but the amount of units that we have got vacant in the total units is 12 6 units vacant out of 31 4, which represents a 40 percent vacancy rate in that complex. The member was asking for the amount of money that is generated out of that unit. It will naturally fluctuate by month because of the vacancy rate, but the latest figure was just over $65,000 per month that is generated from those units. As to the maintenance, we do not have that figure here, but we can get those figures for the member. Ms.

Cerilli: I would appreciate that. Just considering that this development has its mortgage paid, what the opportunity is then for it to not be a money loser but a moneyma ker in terms of the rent coming in. I would appreciate if I could get similar information for the other developments.

Maybe divide them-I know I have asked before-of the ones that have their mortgages paid for already, and how many of the other developmen ts, particularly in the core area, the ones that are high vacancy, to look at the cost there for maintenance and modernization improvement, just to finish off on that thought then, to get that information as well. I am sure that you have this similar to the information you sent me from last year. I am sure the department has all this already, and it is not a big problem of getting that to me for each of the different developments, particularly in the city of Winnipeg. Mr.

Reimer: I think it is just a matter of, as the member mentioned, getting the right correlation of the lines and the expenses towards it, and we can endeavour to get that for the member, sure. Ms. Cerilli: Thank you. Just then generally, how many other developments-and I am looking at this list, the ones that are having real problems with vacancies, but maybe I should look more at the ones just generally and not focus just on the ones that are having problems with vacancies.

I want to find out how many in our portfolio in the province have their mortgages paid for, and if you have some kind of figure that we are still owing-that is probably in the Estimates book here somewhere-the amount we are still owing in terms of mortgage. Mr. Reimer: The majority of the units that are still in the Housing portfolio would still have a fair amount of debt associated with them because the vast majority of the units that were built were in the '70s, which were subject to 50-year mortgages. So there is still a fair amount of money outstanding on them.

In general terms, the outstanding mortgages, totally, would be somewhere between $300 million and $350 million that is still outstanding as a figure owing on these properties. Ms. Cerilli: I want to move into a related area. It has to do with the way that the Manitoba Housing Authority, the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation are addressing the whole issue of identifying properties to declare as surplus. I was

13 46 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 19 97 interested in the Estimates book this time to see that there is actually more detailed description. It says, prepare plus or minus 1, 500 various legal documents for sales, transfers, leases, loans, guarantees, discharges, right-of-ways, subdivisions, easements, security renewals, et cetera. Then it says, dispose of real properties declared surplus or acquired by foreclosure. I have a lot of questions in this area. Maybe to start off with, I would just to ask you to define what surplus means and the process that you use for declaring properties as surplus.

Mr. Reimer: There is a fair amount of involvement in looking at the Housing portfolio as to coming to any type of decision regarding whether projects are surplus and whether they should be offered for sale, and what the criteria are for listing projects for sale. We do have what we call an asset review committee set up within the board, which is charged with looking at the portfolio in the various venues.

What it has been doing is looking at not only housing material or housing stock here in Winnipeg, but also throughout Manitoba with the idea of looking at areas of whether there is merit to declaring the projects surplus, taking into consideration their vacancy rates, to a degree the cost of repairs that is associated with these buildings, the ongoing maintenance of the building or buildings in trying to come to some sort of direction on it. * (15 00) It is a fairly detailed and quite a long process because we do not want to just be selling things for the sake of selling them; there has to be a logical return or logical realization that we are not just having a fire sale on these buildings for the sake of getting out of them.

There has to be either a logical and a reasonable reason for declaring the building surplus. Even if it is declared surplus, that does not mean necessarily that it is going to be sold because of the fact that a lot of times, because of location and market conditions, it just may not be feasible for anybody to buy it. We have a lot of buildings in the remote areas, in small towns, that have been declared surplus for years, and they sit on our books year after year after year as surplus units, and we cannot do anyth ing about it.

That does not mean that we are going to just sell them for a buck or something like that. We look at trying to get a fairly reasonable return on them or try to recuperate the taxpayers' investment in it as best we can, so there are units-! do not know whether we have the number that are sitting on our books right now declared surplus, but I do know that in some of our outlying areas they have been on there for a long time. They have not been picked up; they just sit there.

So, in the meantime, we will utilize them for housing, and if there becomes an opportunity to possibly move them into a different sector or under a different ownership, we will move those people if they are still in there into different accommodations or try to accommodate them that way. So there are a fair number of variables that come into play before there is a decision as to how the units are disposed of. Ms. Cerilli: I would appreciate it if you could go into a little bit more detail in this area. I mean, you have mentioned a few things, maintenance costs , the vacancy rates.

As you said, there is a very specific sort of process or formula that is considered. I am interested in both getting a little bit more detail here and now, and then seeing if you could provide for me, following up our Estimates here. something in writing. Mr. Reimer: It has been pointed out that in a lot of the rural areas, this is where there is the situation of surplus properties that have sat for a long time and nothing has happened with them . It is just because of the lack of demand to pick up these units.

A good example is duplexes where we will have one person in there continually for upwards of two years or more, where we cannot rent the other one. The member asked for the criteria. It varies in extent because of the locations as to what is going to dictate being decl ared surplus, other than, like I mentioned before, chronic vacancies and the fact that they do not fit into the town's scheme of people wanting to stay there, or they just do not want those units, and so they become surplus to us.

If the member wants, I can get the list of surplus vacant property that has already been sitting on our book and possibly even whether it can have a time frame involved with how long some of them have been vacant. We can fix that up. We can get that for the member. - -

April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 47 Ms. Cerilli: I am going to try a bit of a different approach on this. What is the government's goal in this whole area of doing this? You said that there is ongoing assessing, and there is a comm ittee that is continually dealing with this whole area. What is the government's goal? Mr. Reimer: I think that our primary goal and one of our mandates with the Housing department is to be there to supply affordable housing to the citizens of Manitoba in a manner that is the most efficient, not only for the users but for the providers of the units.

The evaluation that I am referring to, I think, is healthy in that we have to be aware of where there is no longer need, so there are no longer demands. It is usually that the "no longer the demand" for housing will dictate whether we will sell the unit or declare it surplus and try to sell it. That is usually the criteria. The utilization of public housing, ifthere is a demand for it, and they are being utilized in the rural areas, and there are units, we will keep filling these units. It is not that we are on a mandate of total dissolving of all of our assets.

Our primary function as public housing is to supply housing to people on an affordable basis. Ms. Cerilli: Well, it is kind of concerning because, similar to the issue I was raising in the House during Question Period, the government is deciding on the amount of social housing or public housing that they are providing based on, to a large extent, the vacancy rate. It sounds like it from what you were just saying. There may be all sorts of other problems that are related to that vacancy that should be dealt with prior to just declaring those properties surplus.

I mean, I realize, particularly in rural Manitoba, that there is a declining population in a lot of communities, that the population is not growing, but there certainly are numbers, thousands of families and seniors in our province that need subsidized housing. That is why I am so concerned about the response here today and your approach to determining to declare them surplus and try and sell them off. * (1510 ) You know, I do have a list with me of the properties from '95 -96-I guess this list is from-and at that time there were 10 units under consi deration for possible sale and relocation.

I am not sure if that is across the whole province. There were some that we re temporarily rented, 13. There were 71 that were in the process of public tender for sale, and the units that were sold and lost from the social housing portfolio were 89. I am wondering if this year-how much those numbers have changed. You can also respond to my other points that I made about the way that this is being done and the whole problem of sort of the lowest common denominator approach.

If there is no one wanting to move in, even though you have got all these different issues around why there is a vacancy rate, it seems that the bottom line becomes, you are losing money, there is a vacancy rate, so let us see how we can put them up as surplus. Mr. Reimer: The member was referring to the need for social housing in the various sectors of our population, whether it is the youth or the social housing-pardon me, not the youth, but the seniors and social housing.

I guess our mandate has always been that we would try to accommodate and utilize our units because if they are not being filled or being occupied, naturally the costs are still there, the fixed costs, and the maintenance costs are fixed towards these units, so it is better for us to have them occupied. We talked the other day about the rental committee that was formed to try to market these units, and we have had some very good success with these initially as pointed out with Osborne and Carriage Road in attracting tenants there. This is something on a learning curve in a sense with this marketing committee.

We are monitoring it fairly close to see whether we can sort of expand this or how we can better utilize getting more people into our units. We have also gone to a trial basis of some market rents in a few areas. We have done it here in the city of Winnipeg at Columbus Courts. We have done it in six towns in rural Manitoba looking at market rent so that we could attract people in some of the smaller towns, where the town's council and local town people have told us that there are units there.

Based on the G&R- RGI, pardon me, that people do not want to live in them, we implemented market rent in some of these six towns just to see how we can utilize them. We have done some upgrades in Rapid City to utilize some of

13 48 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14 , 19 97 our housing stock in that town, converting some of the units, the bachelors to one bedroom, so we have been able to try to get better usage that way. These are some of the things that we are trying to do to get better utilization of our stock. We have the stock there . We have the ability to put people in them. It is just a matter of people having the confidence that the housing stock that we have for them is of a quality that they would want to live in. It is something that is ongoing. We continue to work towards that.

The member mentioned about an updated list for the surplus. We can provide an updated list on that which she has, whether there are any new units that we are looking at. So these are some of the other areas that we can work towards. Ms. Cerilli: How quickly can you get me that list? Mr. Reimer: We should be able to have it within a week for sure. Ms. Cerilli: One of the other areas that is a real concern in this whole issue of privatizing or selling off what is deemed surplus properties is what seems to be a real focus and trend on getting rid of the single-family or dupiexes.

I am wondering if that is a specific policy objective and if the minister has concerns about that, if he has discussed this with any of the community groups that have been dealing with this and he can share with me his perspective on that. Mr.

Reimer: One of the advantages of being the Minister of Housing and also the Minister of Seniors is that I get a chance to do some touring around to some of the seniors groups in seniors homes and seniors projects in various parts of Manitoba and various towns and also meeting, at the same time, with some of the local town's council and town's alderman or reeves and talking to them. Naturally when they find out that I am Housing minister, they will always direct their comments to some of the housing stock that may be in and around their town.

A lot of the direction is towards the local town wanting to buy the stock, buy the single-family homes or the duplexes that are in these towns, and I have no problems with that if the local town wants to take it upon themselves to provide a place of residence for some of their senior citizens or some of their townspeople to stay in their town. They look at it as an asset that they can utilize instead of its being vacant which sometimes it is because of our restrictions because of the RGI. A lot of people will not live in those units.

So they say to me, well, can we buy these units and then we can do whatever we want with them. I am of the opinion that, if it is for the betterment of the town and the townspeople feel that they can rent them out to people who are in need, whether it is seniors or young families that are wanting to move to the area, we should try to accommodate them.

Our first option in any type of sale of a piece of property is usually to the person that is living in it, and if they do not want it, why then we will offer it to I believe it is the neighbour next and then from the neighbour it will go to the town for a decision and then it will go to one of our government departments, like Natural Resources or Highways or something like that. They may want to utilize it for a residence maybe for part of their work crew, and then we will post it ourselves, I believe, public tender. Then from there, if we do not get any response, it goes to a listing.

It goes to at least half a dozen various channels before it becomes listed with Royal Lepage or something like that. It has been pointed out that it is following what is similar in all government departments, under the general manual of administration. * (1 520) Ms. Cerilli: I appreciate your telling me this sort of process that you go through, but it still seems like the issue is that the government is initiating this process, that you are the ones that are looking to divest the single-family dwellings as a priority.

That is what I am wanting to confirm, if that is what is happening, if you are initiating this and if you are trying to focus on these kinds of properties because you think they are easier to sell. What is the policy direction here? Mr. Reimer: No. it is not targeted towards one specific area or whether it is single-family units or duplexes. We will review all our portfolio in all components, but it is not geared towards one particular area. - -

April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 49 Ms. Cerilli: You have gone into some description about the way it has been handled in rural areas where the municipality is approaching you with some interest, and I have here a whole range of communities, Birtle, Cartwright, Churchill, Manitou, all sorts of communities. But then we get to Winnipeg and there are a lot more single-family units, and I cannot imagine that the City of Winnipeg is knocking on your door wanting to buy these properties. So what is the story on the city ofWinnipeg?

There are 18 -t his is again from '95-single-f amily units in the Wolseley area, 14 in Brooklands-actually more than that in the Wolseley area and then some out in sort of the north end. Who is purchasing these properties in Winnipeg? What is the policy direction in that area? What is your goal in this area? Mr. Reimer: The units that have been referred to are usually very small homes, very old homes, where the maintenance and the upkeep on them have become very high.

The realization of continuance with these homes, the decision is made that we will offer them for sale, and if there is an interest in them, then we would sell them. What I can do for the member is also provide an updated list. I was asking whether we had a number on the amount of units that we have sold since the list that you have. We can get that list and get an updated list for you. The numbers that are there may still be fairly the same, because I do not know how many of these units here have sold. But we can find out, and I can get you an updated list as to the numbers that have sold.

I have been told that usually these are fairly old, tum­ of-the-cen tury homes. In fact, not-tum-of-the-century, I guess they are very old-' 50s and '60s. In fact I think we have some homes that were just after the Second World War, wartime houses they are called, and those are being sold too. Ms.

Cerilli: I guess that the concern in this area, particularly in the areas that I described-Brooklands, the W olseley area and the north end-where there is a real problem with stability for family housing, when you have public housing that provides for low-income families to be able to have some ability to stay in that area, it is very important to the community. I know that I have sent letters and drawn this to the minister's attention on a few occasions. I visited the homes around the Arlington area, in particularly Evanson. There were a number of properties that were being sold, and they had tenants in them.

The tenants did not want to move. The whole issue-! think the minister even raised this in his opening statement-the importance of having stable housing so that kids can stay in one neighbourhood, go to one school for a number of years, and how that adds to their quality of life, their health, their education, their whole future. When I just add up the number of single-family units, there are 55 units from that one year that were being divested, and how many of those are in some of those neighbourhoods? That is having a real impact on those neighbourhoods.

These inner-city areas want to have low-income, family-sized dwellings so that they can maintain a support for those families to stay in those communities. There is the whole problem in some areas of the kids transferring enrollment in a school by 10 0 percent. In some inner-city schools, their entire enrollment turns over in one school year, and it is all related to the availability of having housing for the size of some of these families to meet their needs.

So I think that is the argument for maintaining some of these single-family dwellings in the Winnipeg areas, especially when we know that there is no new money for social housing coming down the pipe, especially when you are also eliminating funding for some of the rent supplement programs. So we are running into a situation where there are going to be fewer options for low-income families, especially if they have more than two children, two or three children. I guess what I am doing is trying to make a plea or a pitch to have that considered.

I know that there are a number of community groups in that area now that are concerned about this. They have contacted me, and they do not want to lose any more single-family dwellings that are owned by MHA in that community. If this is being considered at all in your department as you are setting your priorities-! mean, you have talked about what your mandate is and we have talked about issues around safety. Well, if there are certain neighbourhoods where there are no criteria on who buys these kind of properties and they are bought up and they are divided into smaller suites or bought by

1350 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April l4 , 1997 people who want to use them as a rental property and then they are divided up and rented off as boarding houses or even just small apartments, that is going to contribute to the kind of decay in some of these core area neighbourhoods, where we want to see some families be able to stay in there and stay involved in schools and all the other things I have described. *

(1530) Mr. Reimer: I think that the member is alluding to a lot of things that we talked about before as regarding the stability of the community, and one of the things naturally with any type of sense of community that is built is the residents themselves and the fact that they stay in the one particular area and they become part of the community. The units that have been alluded to are units that are not tom down. They are units that stay within the community's single-family dwellings, and they become still part of the community.

It can give enhanced community values when you have people who take ownership of their dwelling and they become part of the community that way, too. But anything that enhances community development or a sense of community is something that I think we look as positive aspects of a community, because you do not get this high turnover in schools and you do not get this constant migration of the young people from school to school. I would think that in social housing we have always tried to accommodate people in part of the community.

We are looking at trying to go to possibly even a market-rent type of philosophy with some of these units to encourage people to stay in there, so it is the role models of people who can get out and work, get a job and show their neighbours that there is a better way to do things. So there are different ways to promote community unity. I think we can try to work towards those things in utilizing our housing stock the best way we can. Ms.

Cerilli: Can the minister tell me if they have done any tracking of some of the properties that have been sold in the past, just specifically the single-family dwellings, to see how many of them have been bought and are now being used as rental property, and if they are being divided into a number of suites? I mean, I am not suggesting, as the minister said, that they are being tom down, but I think that would be interesting to find out. Mr. Reimer: It has been pointed out, we have never really done a follow-up in the sense as to how that property has evolved since or if it was sold.

So we really do not have that type of information to give any type of definitive answer as to how it ends up, where it ends up, whether it gets subdivided, or how it is utilized after it is sold. A lot of these are very small units, small homes. Some of them would most likely still be single­ family homes. Ms. Cerilli: I was just saying the ones that I have been in, particularly in the Wolseley area, are big homes. They are single-family dwellings, but they have four bedrooms and three storeys. Maybe some of the ones in the rural areas are different; they may be bungalows and smaller. I am not disputing that.

Considering that the minister is also the Minister of Urban Affairs. I mean this is a real big issue. I was going to get into this sort of later when we are talking more about the research division. The whole concern is that there is not a lot of attention being paid to certain neighbourhoods in the core area. Even in other parts of the city where there is an increase in the number of properties that are slum housing, they are scooped up by absentee landlords to become rental properties, divided into small apartments.

In many instances, the owner, the landlord, is bringing in rent from low­ income people more than twice what they are paying on the mortgage. This is how a Jot of people are making a lot of money on the backs of people who are really economically disadvantaged. I would hate to see that Manitoba Housing Authority is contributing to that by selling them properties that are, prior to that being Jived in by families who are low income or are using all of those five bedrooms for their family. So I would like the minister to respond to that to make sure that is not happening.

I am going to get into this a bit more in the research area. I think this is a whole other area that someone in the government has to look at, either through Urban Affairs or through Housing to try and deal with this trend. There are all sorts of other options we could talk about in terms of how to provide affordable housing for families, because that is not a way to do it by having that kind of model - -

April l4, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 1351 where it is these landlords that are able to really not maintain their properties. Oftentimes it is millions and millions of dollars in social allowance that is going into these housing apartments or into these inner-city neighbourhoods. That money is not stay ing in that neighbourhood, it is all leaving, because the landlords certainly do not live there and the owners of the properties.

As I said they are often taking in rent on those properties twice as much or more than they are paying on the mortgage because of the many apartments that they have got the house divided up into. What ends up happening is that people that are living there on low income, they have paid the mortgage. This is happening in Manitoba Housing Authority properties as well. They have lived there for 25 years; they have more than paid for the mortgage.

They have nothing to show for it, but it is a real concern if Manitoba Housing Authority is going to start contributing to that problem by selling their properties to individuals that are going to use them for that kind of entrepreneurial activity-! say with tongue in ch�:ek. Mr. Reimer: Well, I guess, when you look at the sale of some of the homes and units and things like that, to a degree you hope that it has been bought by people that are consciously wanting to stay in the area.

There is an awful lot of more private ownership that are using their units for subdivision-or not so much subdivision, but for multiple tenant use and things like that. We, in Manitoba Housing, naturally can use our guidelines and our parameters of occupancy in how many people are in our units. Once the unit is in private ownership, the only regulations that can dictate then are the City of Winnipeg's zoning regulations and occupancies of that line where there can be restrictions put on for use as a tenement house or a rooming house or something like that.

That would have to come into effect through the City of Winnipeg zoning applications. We are not slum landlords. We are very conscientious of the efforts that the staff and the department put out in trying to maintain the quality of our units. Once they move of f our stream of public ownership into private ownership, we do not have the authority to dictate who or what lives in there other than how that person so chooses to change it.

If he or she decides to change it and they want to make it into a rooming home, I would think that they have to go through the normal channels of zoning in the city and get applications. The neighbours have an opportunity for input, for public presentation and hearings on whether they want that particular building to make that type of change. I do not know how we as a government or as a Housing department can have that type of direct say as to what a private individual can do or cannot do with their home once they purchase it. * (1 540) Ms.

Cerilli: Well, I must say that after seeing what occurred with Behnke Road where you tore down perfectly good housing-or it has not been tom down yet, I understand it is still there-but, you know, it is going to be tom down so that Home Depot can build a parking lot, and it is perfectly good housing that had just had a few thousand dollars of renovations put in. I am not surprised by your answer, but I do not know if legally you could also put something in the offer to purchase or the sale agreement that required it to be maintained as a single-family dwelling to avoid the problem that I am getting at.

So really that is something else that you can look into, and I am wondering if you would agree to that. Mr. Reimer: Sure. Ms. Cerilli: I am wanting to get into a few specific questions then while we are talking about this whole area of sale of Manitoba Housing Authority properties. I have a few that have been brought to my attention. First of all, I will start with the rural area. I noticed from being in Portage Ia Prairie that, on the one hand, there was some very large modernization improvements going on. They seem to have a lot of social public housing in Portage la Prairie.

Then on the other hand there were a whole two streets I believe that had been sold, and I am just wanting for the minister to confirm if that is the case and if he can tell me who those properties were sold to and what the value of the sale was. Mr. Reimer: I believe the units that the member is referring to are what they call Chelsea Terrace in Portage la Prairie, and that was 77 units that were sold at that time. They were a complex that was built in the 19 60s. There were also, I believe in the 19 80s, some

13 52 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April l4, 19 97 sold to the Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council. There were II units sold at that time to the Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council. Are there any other questions on that? Ms. Cerilli: So what was the vacancy rate in that complex prior to it being sold? Mr. Reimer: You know, this complex here was operating under what we ref er to as market rate rental and not RGI. The vacancy rate at the time was somewhere around 4 or 5 percent vacancy when it was sold.

It was scheduled, as mentioned, being a fairly old complex built in the '60s, it was requiring more and more maintenance and upkeep. So there was a decision made to see whether there was the possibility of realization of moneys owing against it and whether there was an interest. It was put through the process of offering for sale, and there was a purchaser that came forth and bought it from us. the units that are still under the RGI formula, so they would stay under that formula while they are still in residence at this complex.

The vacancy rate that the member mentioned, too, as talked about before, was part of the decision making in looking at coming to decisions on this property , but also other factors were brought into play. One of the factors was the fact that the maintenance and upkeep on it was very significant, and it was felt that was a prime consideration in looking at some sort of proposal for devolution of this particular unit. So it is a combination of events.

It is not only the vacancy rate, but it is also the market conditions, the building conditions. the maintenance program that is associated with the building, the upkeep. There are many factors that are brought into consideration before it is considered for sale. Ms. Cerilli: Okay. but my question was, at least 21 of Ms. Cerilli: Besides the Ojibway Tribal Counc il. the units are still the existing tenants that were there when the sale took place, but there was a total of 77 Mr.

Reimer: Yes, that is true. units, so it sounds like there could have been a lot of other tenants that moved after this. or some of them Ms. Cerilli: Could you tell me who that other may be there but now they are just- purchaser was? Mr. Reim er: It was a numbered company. Ms. Cerilli: Who were the principal owners? Mr. Reimer: I have been told that we were dealing with an agent. We do not have those names here, but I imagine we can get them for the member. Ms. Cerilli: I would appreciate that.

The tenants, there was a fairly low vacancy rate there then when it was sold, so your whole sort of formula or rationale that we just discussed in terms of declaring units surplus seems to not completely apply there. I mean, 4 percent vacancy is not too bad, so I am wondering what happened there in terms of the criteria or the assessment process and what happened to all those tenants. Are they still there? How does the rent compare now for those tenants now? Mr. Reimer: I have been told that the increase in rents would fall under The Residential Tenancies Act, so the rent is controlled to an extent that way.

There are 20 of Mr. Reimer: No, I have been told that the existing tenants are still there. The number that I was referring to, the 20, was 20 of them are still on the RGI formula. * (1 550) Ms. Cerilli: Well, this is really getting confusing because I thought you said that one of the reasons that this developmen t was sold was because it was on a market-rent system. Mr. Reimer: I should have been a little bit more definitive. It had a combination of market rent and RGI. I just alluded to one of them. Ms.

Cerilli: Okay, well, let us go through the same series of questions then in terms of some of the properties in Winnipeg: 15 85 Notre Dame A venue, Milton Court, I believe it is called. It is four apartment blocks that each have 15 units. Has that been declared surplus? What is the situation there in terms of vacancy, and is it in the process of being declared surplus? - -

April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 13 53 Mr. Reimer: No, it has not been declared surplus. Ms. Cerilli: But is it in the process of being consid ered? Mr. Reimer: No, not at this time. Ms. Cerilli: How long does it take for something to go from not at this time being considered to being sold, or to being consid ered and being declared surplus? Mr. Reimer: Well, that sounded like a bit of a vague question when I said, "not at this time," but we have no immediate plans to declare 15 85 surplus or to go through the procedure .

The member must remember that, even though sometimes these units may have a designation of being surplus, that does not necessarily mean that they will be sold because market dictates will say whether there is a sale for it.

More importantly, the pragmatic approach is that we are not in the business to just sell things just for the sake of getting rid of them, because, as pointed out, a lot of these units have a tremendous amount of mortgage applied against them and we have to be able to justify any type of large discrepancy between what has come forth as a purchase price and what is on the books as an outstanding mortgage. Government prudent management dic tates that we have to pay of f that mortgage because CMHC wants their money.

So, even though we theoretically, and just hypothe tically if we had a unit that all we can get for it is, say, $400,000 and it has got an outstanding mortgage of $650,000 or $700,,000 still on it, common sense would say, hey, we cannot eat that amount of money. Our Treasury Board will not allow us to just go out and holus-bolus sell of f these properties. There has to be either a break-even, or a very, very close break-even, point or realization of the monies that we are asking for and what are coming back.

There are not that many units that can carry themselves in a sense of being in a position where the mortgage is paid off. There are not that many because with a portfolio of approximately 18 ,000 units and an outstanding mortgage of $350 million when most of them were built in the '70s, there is still an awful lot of money owing on an awful lot of our properties. So it is prudent for us to get the best utilization from those monies, and the declaring of surplus is not something that is going to be a great source of revenue for this government because there is just too much money outstanding.

The long-term mortgages that are outstanding, and the fact that the CMHC wants their money, no matter what happens, their first dollar out, makes decision making in selling units very, very tenuous at times as to try to ra tionalize selling things just for the sake of selling them when there are such huge losses, potential losses that can be associated with trying to clear the mortgage off. So being declared surplus and actually being realized on a sale sometimes are far, far apart. Ms.

Cerilli: I guess I would add to that, it is hard to rationalize these decisions, or make these decisions, when there is also such a large need for low-income housing. I am going to ask a couple of questions here maybe that are more policy related then and not so much just dealing with the whole privatization and the specifics that we have been, but how then does the government deal with a position put forward by an organization like AIM, the Apartment Investors Association of Manitoba? They see Manitoba Housing Authority and Manitoba Housing as in competition with them.

They see it as an unfair competition, that subsidized housing is unfair competition in the market housing. How does the minister respond to that? Mr. Reimer: I guess, government will always have a social responsibility to look after people that cannot look after themselves. One of the responsibilities of government is to be there for the people that are in need, or that are in a destitute situation, because of circumstances either controlled or uncontrolled that they find themselves in a situation where they have to have housing or lodging.

Through the last while, through governments, we have been there to provide housing. In the '70s and '80s when the federal government was involved on a 50-50 cost-shared basis and there was an expansion, public housing was there set up as a vehicle for people to get into housing as they move through their economic cycle of life, to move on to better housing, upgraded housing or a different type of housing. Public housing was there as a vehicle to move

13 54 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA April 14 , 19 97 through. What has evolved is that public housing has become more social housing. I believe almost 65 or 70 percent of our housing stock is with people on social assistance. An even higher percentage is single parents, usually the female as the head of the house in our housing. In fact, I think I alluded to statistics in my opening comments. Our position has been that there is a need, there is a value for government, to be there in this time of personal crisis or family crisis in providing housing. We do not shirk our responsibility away from there.

I think what is coming to fruition in extent is the fact that we are now faced with a situation where we have an awful lot of units. We have about 18 ,000 units under Manitoba Housing. * (1 600) We have been faced with the fact that the federal government is now wanting to devolve itself completely out of their social housing. They are wanting the Manitoba government to take over their 17 ,000 or 18 ,000 units and a mortgage portfolio of around $650 million.

We are looking at a potential of a portfolio of over 36,000 units and an outstanding mortgage of about a billion dollars that the taxpayers of Manitoba would take on as their responsibility for fulfilment. These are enormous challenges and changes that the taxpayers of Manitoba have to come to some sort of reckoning on. I guess, what we are doing is we are taking a position of standing back for a moment and saying, where is the best utilization of these units? We are recognizing the fact that there is a need in Manitoba for social housing, but to what degree, to what depth, to what involvement and to what time?

Wh at is the best utilization of our resources? Some of our resources are old. They are getting worn out. Some of them were built shortly after the Second World War, the so-called wartime houses, where they were just clapboards. A tremendous amount of cost involved with units in heating them and keeping them upgraded is just astronomical. You are dealing with people on fixed income; more and more people are moving into our social housing. So the evaluation of our social policy and our housing policy is ongoing. I think that it is just something that- Point of Order Ms.

Cerilli: On a point of order, I just want to bring the minister back around to my question, which is: How does he deal with the position of the Apartment Investors Association of Manitoba that are saying that Manitoba Housing is unfair competition? I do not know if this is the answer he gives to AIM when they talk to him, but I am just wanting to get him to specifically answer my question. Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable member for Radisson does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Reimer: I was trying to bring it into context, I guess.

Maybe I was getting on a little bit different direction. But I guess the association of apartment owners will always have a concern actually, because we are to a degree in the housing business, setting up with our rental progr ams and our facilities for utilization by people. I do not get lobbied or overly lobbied to an extent. I am not too sure what type of overtures they make to the department. I think that they recognize that our responsibility is geared towards a certain aspect of Manitoba population. I do not get that much exposure or criticism from them in the way we take in our social housing programs. Ms.

Cerilli: Given everyth ing that we have just been discussing though about the process for assessing the sale of certain properties that Manitoba Housing is responsible for and owns, what we were discussing as well about the problems in the inner city in providing low-income housing on the market, problems we discussed about some of the ways that I would say that low-income people get taken advantage of in the market. Basically, it is difficult to make a profit on housing low-income people if you are going to have housing that meets standards.

I am wondering if the minister agrees with that and sort of sees that way back when we first developed social housing in Manitoba and in Canada, it was because there was that recognition that the market cannot necessarily provide -

April 14 , 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1355 decent housing for a large segment of the population, whether they are seniors or single parents or disabled people or other families that qualify for social housing. Mr. Reimer: I guess the history of public housing is something that is a study in itself as to why government got involved with public housing. I believe it is along the lines of trying to fill a need and a purpose in the community for giving people this opportunity to have housing.

How it has evolved and when it was first brought into the market, I believe it was along the lines of what the member is referring to. There was a void, if you want to call it, in the housing market where there was no adequate public housing or people that could not afford to gf�t into their own homes or their own accommodations. This was their stepping stone, if you want to call it. If you get into public housing, you are into it for so many months or yea rs.

Then what it does is it gives you the stability to build your economic base, so that you can possibly move on to a bigger and better home, and to accommodations that you want as your own. So I guess that is more or less the philosophy of public housing in all areas, and this is how they got into it. When there was a lot of money around in the '70s and there was the ability to build and there was the ability to have partnerships with the federal govenunent, there was a natural fit for the expansion of this, you know, public housing. So it worked well at that time.

Times change, dict ates come forth that say that you cannot do that anymore, you cannot afford to be the sole provider. You can be there as the safety net, and I think this is why public housing is changing so much where we now have a lot of elderly people in there, we have a lot of social allowance people in public: housing. These are the areas that, especially with seniors, are going to grow and are going to take a new-not so much a new-but a recognition that that is the need of these people that we in public housing are going to have to try to accommodate. Ms.

Cerilli: I wonder if that is when you do get called by AIM if that is what you are going to say, because I have talked to them and seen them at different events or met with them. Perhaps more of their pressure is being applied on the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Radcliffe) that deals with the Residential Tenancies Branch, but, you know, I think from this, from what the minister has said, it seems like some of the decisions that were made in the past, and the member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale) alluded to this the other day, that some of this housing was set up to be transition housing to sort of help people through a period when they were on a low income, thinking that they would somehow be able to sock some money away and then be able to get out and on to the market. That has not occurred to a large extent.

Actually, that policy obje ctive has been problematic when it has been tied to the rent geared to income, meaning that then those very people that are starting to be able to save some money, because they have gotten a job or a better-paying job, that does not happen because they lose the money to increase in their rent.

So those people move out, and then what you end up happening is this high turnover in some of these large developments which destabilizes the community, and we get into all those other issues we were talking about earlier. * (1610 ) The minister is nodding in agreement that this is a problem, and I am wondering what is going on in the department to try and deal with that, to address this, that there are two conflicting policy objectives here in the sense of the need to stabilize communities and have more success in managing this social and public housing, but then at the same time continuing on with the rent geared to income policy and considering to have the tenancies be temporary.

I talk to people in public housing often who have been there a very long time, and that was never the intention you are saying. So how is the department dealing with this? Mr. Reimer: Now I think that the conversation is a good conversation, because I think that I can agree with the member on that in the sense that you have people that because of their ci rcumstances they are moving ahead in their economic cycle, and they are able to enjoy more money, if you want to call it, in their income, and then, because of our formula, RGI, we charge more for their rent.

Especially in some of the large complexes, what you want to do is you want to build a degree of stability into that complex. If it means keeping that person or people around and they are making a little bit more money, I do not know why we are penalizing them in a sense because, if any thing,

13 56 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14 , 19 97 they set up a role model. They set up the ability for other people to look towards these people and, not only that, these people have the opportunity to partici pate more in that community. We are setting up a trial market rent here in the city with Columbus Courts, and maybe it is time we looked at expanding it to other areas of the city and maybe we look at an area like Gilbert Park or we look at an area like Lord Selkirk Park to build a sense of stability in there. Those are unique areas in Winnipeg-Gilbert Park, Selkirk Park, The Maples complex.

They are communities in themselves, and maybe it is time we look at setting up maybe a pilot project in one or two of those two projects with a market-rent formula to try to enc ourage not only people to stay in that area but to also give them the ability to be part of that community. I have no problem in possibly looking at something like that. I think that it is a good suggestion and something that I will be pursuing with the department to see whether we can expand on that.

I will have to get solic itation, to a degree, from my federal counterparts because of the fact that we are in partnership with our feds on these two projects, but I think that sometimes you have to be the instigator and the initiator of something like this. If there is a willingness to make it happen we should be try ing to pursue it, because I think that it is a valid, strong approach and a good approach that we should be taking with some of these areas, because sometimes these areas need different approaches than the norm.

If the norm is going to prevent a community from expanding and correcting itself and becoming a better community, then we should change our attitude and our direction so that we can try to accommodate that. I will be pursuing this further with the department to see why and how we can pursue it in the best way so we can get to some sort of resolve on it, because it is a good suggestion. Ms. Cerilli: Okay . I want to go back just asking about some of the specific communities, and I want to ask a little bit about Gimli.

It seems to be a region where there are some different things going on in terms of the Manitoba Housing Authority and management and maybe just to start up asking the general question of the minister. What is going on in Gimli? Mr. Reimer: What we have done in Gimli is we have moved that office to Selkirk. We have moved two staff to Selkirk. We have kept two staff in Gimli. They are working out of one of our complexes there. One is a maintenance co-ordinator and the other is the tenant relations officer in that area, but the office in Gimli per se has been closed. Ms.

Cerilli: It seems like there were a number of procedures that changed in this area. So the minister is telling me that basically four staff are responsible for that area Two of them are working out of Selkirk now. Two of them are working in Gimli out of one of the housing units. I guess, some of the questions that I have where some of the people that are working under them as caretakers, I understand that there have been some changes in the way that the contracts for caretakers are being issued.

I am wondering why the Manitoba Housing Authority changed the contract system of agreeing to contracts for two years to going to a one-year contract with the tendering process every year. Mr. Reimer: The feeling was that to have a live-in caretaker to get some sort of stability and sense of ownership, if you want to call it, in the complex that they are working with, it was better to offer them a two­ year contract. It gives the sense of stability not only