Manitoba Hansard — 23 October 2007 (Sitting 24B, 39th Legislature, 1st Session)

39-1-24b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LIX No. 24B – 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, October 23, 2007

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P.

DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P.

SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

1567 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, October 23, 2007 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 216–The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), that Bill 216, The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act;

Loi sur la réduction du phosphore dans les réseaux municipaux d'alimentation en eau, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, this legislation would provide for the elimination of the practice of municipalities adding phosphorus to their water systems in order to prevent leaching of chemicals from the pipes. There are now safe and adequate alternatives. The phosphorus is no longer necessary. It is causing a problem, as we well know, in Lake Winnipeg.

It's time to change this practice and reduce this amount of phosphorus which is, at the moment, contributing to the algal bloom problem on Lake Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed] PETITIONS Neepawa, Minnedosa and Areas–Local Hospitals Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Residents of Neepawa, Minnedosa, and the surrounding areas are concerned about the long-term viability of their respective local hospitals.

Impending retirements, physician shortages, and the closure of many other rural emergency rooms have caused residents to fear that their health-care facilities may also face closure in the future. Local physicians and many residents have expressed their support for a proposed regional health-care centre to service both communities. It is believed that a new regional health centre would help secure and maintain physicians and would therefore better serv e the health-care needs of the region.

The success of other regi onal hospitals, such as Boundary Trails Health Centre, has set the precedent for the viability and success of a similar health centre in the Neepawa and Minnedosa area. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald), to consider the feasibility of a joint health centre, including an emergency room, to service Neepawa and Minnedosa and the surrounding area.

To urge the Minister of Health to consider sustaining health-care services in this area by working with local physicians and the Assiniboine Regional Health Authority on this initiative. This petition is signed by P. W. Snedden, Wayne Nelson, Wayne Zalluski and many, many others. Public Meeting–Premier's Attendance Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba: The background to this petition is as follows: The Premier (Mr. Doer) has been silent on the issue related to serious allegations with respect to his office.

The Premier is not answering questions related to the said issue inside the Legislature. There is no indication that the Premier is enforcing Manitoba's code of ethics for political parties. Based on the 1999 Monnin report inquiry, leaders of political parties are obligated to enforce the code of ethics. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier to consider attending the November 5 public meeting at the Munroe public library, which is located in his constituency.

1568 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 This is signed by James Cotton, Jasminder Brar, Kuljit Brar and many, many other fine Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. COMMITTEE REPORTS Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development Second Report Ms. Erna Braun (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development presents the following as its Second Report. Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development presents the following as its Second Report. Meetings: Your committee met on Monday, October 22, 2007, at 6:30 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building. Matters under Consideration Bill No. 4 – The Real Property Amendment Act (Wind Turbines)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens réels (éoliennes) Bill No. 10 – The Family Maintenance Amendment and Inter-jurisdictional Support Orders Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'obligation alimentaire et la

Loi sur l'établissement et l'exécution réciproque des ordonnances alimentaires Bill No. 21 – The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act (Fund for Housing Revital- ization)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Société d’habitation et de rénovation (fonds destiné à la revitalisation des logements) Bill No. 22 – The Medical Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi médicale Committee Membership Committee Membership for the meeting: Ms. Braun (Vice-Chairperson) Hon. Mr. Chomiak Mr. Dewar Hon. Mr. Mackintosh Hon. Ms. Oswald Hon. Mr. Rondeau Ms. Selby Mr. Cullen Mr. Hawranik Mr. McFadyen Mrs. Mitchelson Ms. Braun resigned as Vice-Chairperson of the committee. Your committee elected Ms. Braun as the Chairperson. Your committee elected Ms. Selby as the Vice- Chairperson.

Public Presentations Your committee heard three presentations on Bill No. 21 – The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act (Fund for Housing Revital- ization)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Société d’habitation et de rénovation (fonds destiné à la revitalisation des logements), from: Sandie Matheson, The New High School Lobby Group Doug Forbes, Private Citizen Elizabeth Fleming, Provincial Council of Women in Manitoba Your committee heard one presentation on Bill No. 22 – The Medical Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi médicale, from: Dr. William D.B. Pope, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba Written Submissions Your committee received one written submission on Bill No. 21 – The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act (Fund for Housing Revital- ization)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Société d’habitation et de rénovation (fonds destiné à la revitalisation des logements), from: Jennifer Zyla, Private Citizen

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1569 Your committee received one written submission on Bill No. 22 – The Medical Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi médicale, from: Todd Campbell, Canadian Medical Protective Association Bills Considered and Reported Bill No. 4 – The Real Property Amendment Act (Wind Turbines)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens réels (éoliennes) Your committee agreed to report this bill with the following amendment THAT the proposed subsection 112(6), as set out in Clause 3(4) of the Bill, be amended by adding "pipeline" before "agreement" wherever it occurs. Bill No. 10 – The Family Maintenance Amendment and Inter-jurisdictional Support Orders Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'obligation alimentaire et la

Loi sur l'établissement et l'exécution réciproque des ordonnances alimentaires Your committee agreed to report this bill, without amendment. Bill No. 21 – The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act (Fund for Housing Revital- ization)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Société d’habitation et de rénovation (fonds destiné à la revitalisation des logements) Your committee agreed to report this bill, without amendment, on a recorded vote of yeas 6, nays 4. Bill No. 22 – The Medical Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi médicale Your committee agreed to report this bill, without amendment. Ms. Braun: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Southdale (Ms. Selby), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. ORAL QUESTIONS Manitoba Hydro Power Line Government's Policy Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, in this morning's newspaper there was a very good advertisement run by Manitoba Hydro. The headline on the ad says: "I want to be Power Smart. You can be too." It's with Shea Kelli, the host of Shea's Rockin' World Tour, who is a constituent of mine and a very fine individual. The ad goes on to say: "Some of the places I visit on Shea's Rockin' World Tour don't even have any electricity. In Manitoba, we have lots, but we shouldn't waste it. A really easy way to use less electricity in your home is to replace your regular light bulbs with compact fluorescents." Now, Mr.

Speaker, there was an old joke at one time, one that I would never tell, about how many NDP ministers does it take to change a light bulb. I want to ask the Premier this question: How many light bulbs are going to have to be changed to make up for his dim NDP Hydro policy? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the 120 megawatts that we have saved by closing the Selkirk coal plant, which was spewing emissions under their regime when he was chief of staff, would deal with thousands and thousands and thousands of light bulbs. I'll go on further about energy smart when members opposite stop heckling, Mr. Speaker.

Line Loss Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Premier's directive to Hydro that they add more than 400 kilometres to the line from the north is at a very conservative estimate, even at 28 megawatts of line loss, going to require Manitobans to change 1,495,609 bulbs in order to make up for the lost power. So I want to ask the Premier: If he can ask Manitobans to change $1.5-million light bulbs in today's advertisement, why doesn't he take Manitoba Hydro's advice and make a right decision when it comes to the impacts of his daffy detour on lost electricity in Manitoba? Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, under his–thank you very much, it's okay–assumptions on line loss and, of course, the new line will save more than the existing line over the status quo, which is clear. Secondly, under his assumptions, you would have four times greater that amount of money or megawatts saved with the coal plant, and the 300 megawatts we have already saved with Power Smart, a program that was not in place when members opposite were in government, the 300 megawatts on Power Smart and the 100 megawatts on,

1570 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 120 megawatts on the coal plant are just two examples of where we have saved 20 times the number the member opposite just used, Mr. Speaker. The existing line has an existing line loss greater than the proposed new line, and I say proposed line because it has to go to the Clean Environment Commission. Mr.

Speaker, 420 megawatts, clean energy coal plant, that's just the beginning of it in terms of energy efficiency, 20 times the number the members opposite had just cited is the already existing savings of energy under our intelligent strategy which has been recognized. I might say, Mr. Speaker, when the member opposite was the chief of staff, Manitoba's energy efficiency rate was No. 9. The energy efficiency program in Manitoba, the 300 megawatts we've saved, is No. 1 in Canada for megawatts saved. * (13:40) Manitoba Hydro Power Line Reasons for West Side Location Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr.

Speaker, the NDP decision to run a hydro transmission line down the west side of Manitoba will lead to increased losses of precious clean electricity because of the additional 400 kilometres of line required in this route. Experts predict this loss will be equivalent to at least 28 megawatts of power. If this energy were not lost, it could be used to offset coal production by our export customers, potentially displacing almost 250,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions each year. Mr.

Speaker, given that between 2004 and 2005 Manitoba had a 20 percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions, why is this NDP government still entertaining the idea of running a hydro line down the west side of our province? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the members opposite were handing out that garbage in the election campaign. Environment Canada, and this is recycled so I give you credit for that, but Environment Canada has identified that the emissions went up by 2 megatons, in fact, 2.3 megatons between the year 1990 and the year 2000. Mr.

Speaker, they have identified further that the megatons have gone up .13 in the last six years. Now we still say we have work to do but that is, again, 20 times better than members opposite in terms of emissions. That's why our energy efficiency program has been rated No. 1 in Canada. The energy efficiency is the first strategy any province has to put in place. Ninth place under the Tories, ninth out of 10. First place under our government. We're not perfect, but we're 20 times better on energy efficiency than members opposite. Mrs. Stefanson: Well, he got one thing right, Mr.

Speaker, that they're not pe rfect because they sure are when it comes to the in creases in greenhouse gas emissions in this province. Mr. Speaker, actions speak louder than words, and their record on this is abysmal. Experts have said the extra 400 kilometres of line required for Doer's daffy detour could equate to a loss of at least 28– Mr. Speaker: Order. I remind members again that all members in this Chamber are honourable members. I ask the honourable Member for Tuxedo to withdraw that comment. Mrs. Stefanson: I withdraw it, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable member. Would you please continue.

Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, experts have said that the extra 400 kilometres of line required for this daffy detour could equate to a loss of at least 28 megawatts of clean energy power. This precious clean energy could be used to offset coal production, displacing nearly 250,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year. Mr. Speaker, when will this NDP government stop with the photo ops, stop with the empty rhetoric and start to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this province? Hon. Greg Selinger (Min ister charged with the administration of Th e Manitoba Hydro Act): Mr.

Speaker, as early as 1990, members opposite, when they were in government, it was recommended that they do something about increased reliability. What did they do? Absolutely nothing. In 1996 they had a loss of some towers for hydro transmission. What did they do in the subsequent three years? Absolutely nothing. We have picked an option here that will reduce line loss out of the existing bipoles, out of the existing bipoles of existing generation by 75 megawatts. That's what bipole 3 will do going down the west side.

It will increase the energy efficiency of what we're generating by 75 megawatts, more than three times what members have said would be the losses over their hypothetical alternative which is not viable.

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1571 Environmental Enhancement Loans Program Program Status Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, in her remarks to the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce this morning, the minist er responsibl e for rural initiatives and agriculture acknowledged that her program, environmental enhancement program, is a failure. In Estimates, she acknowledged that no one has taken advantage of the program. This initiative has now added to the minister's record of failed, dismal projects. I will review them, Mr.

Speaker: Ranchers Choice, failed; hemp processing, failed; cattle check-off, going to buy cattle for Saskatchewan slaughter plants; Winkler environmental, failed. Now the environmental enhancement program has failed. Why will this minister not revamp this program but continue this dismal record of failures in this province, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, I didn't realize that the Member for Russell was at my speech this morning at the Chamber of Commerce, but if he was he would know that is not true. That is not what I said at all.

I will stand by our record of what we have done for growth in rura l Manitoba by theirs. I am sure he is not very proud of some of the investments that he made when they were in opposition, Mr. Speaker, projects like Isobord that had failed dismally. But I would ask the member opposite, too, if he really cares about the livestock industry in this province, whether it be pork or beef, that he for once stand up and say he supports increasing slaughter capacity, rather than bad-mouthing the industry when they want to see more slaughter capacity. Mr.

Derkach: Enhancing slaughter capacity in Manitoba is hardly a program which buys cattle for slaughter plants in Saskatch ewan, as this minister is doing right now. Mr. Speaker, this morning she said that she will not be able to spend the $2.5 million that was allocated to this program. So, I want to ask the minister if she will go back to the drawing board, work with agricultural producers and come up with a program that truly recognizes the need for environmental enhancement in agriculture. Will she work with agricultural producers to bring a program that in fact will be useful and productive in this province?

Mr. Wowchuk: Again, I would say to the member that whoever was taking notes for him should be more accurate. I did say, Mr. Speaker– An Honourable Member: You weren't there? You weren't awake, were you? Mr. Speaker: Order. Ms. Wowchuk: Our government recognizes, as we make changes to manure management regulations and make changes to protect our water supply in Manitoba, that there are going to have to be changes.

We have committed $2.5 million, and I said to the producers this morning that we probably won't spend all of it this year, but we will have to increase the amount in future years as producers ramp up the steps that they are taking to improve the environment. Again, Mr. Speaker, the member should get his facts straight. Hollow Water Cottage Barricades Government's Response Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): The Minister of Conservation yesterday made the comment that the barricades put up by Hollow Water were put up by the chief, that they were unnecessary and illegal. Mr. Speaker, we all know that.

We've been telling the minister that for the last four weeks. So I ask the Minister of Conservation, and really the relevant question is, and I hope he listens to this one: What is he going to do about the illegal barricades? Hon. Stan Struthers (Min ister of Conservation): The Member for Lac du Bonnet has a long list of bad advice that he has given to members across the way. He can just add this to his list as well. Last week he advised me that I should just write a cheque for all of the damage that's going to occur in cottages there. You know what, Mr. Speaker?

There was a better way to do it, and we did it a better way. We made the commitment weeks ago to work with cottagers, to work with their associations to put a plan together. We made that commitment and we followed through on it. Almost 35 cottagers got in on the weekend, winterized their cottages, and we have a couple more now who have asked to go back in.

1572 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 We said we would do it, and we did it, despite his bad advice. Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, and the barricades are still there. So, the Minister of Conservation has stated that we're doing all that we can do from our side of the barricades. Cottage and homeowners are being denied access on a public road, and now obviously the Minister of Conservation is also being denied access. As a result, the minister is respecting the authority of Hollow Water over a government-owned public road. I ask the Minister of Conservation: Who has authority over that public road?

Is it he as minister of the Crown or Hollow Water who put up the barricades? * (13:50) Mr. Struthers: More bad advice from the Member for Lac du Bonnet, Mr. Speaker. Over and over and over again the member insists that we put ourselves in place of the RCMP and we do something draconian with the barricades. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Let's have a little decorum here. I need to be able to hear the questions and the answers. The honourable minister has the floor. Mr. Struthers: Mr.

Speaker, the Member for Lac du Bonnet can sing, row, row, row your boat all you like, which is what he was doing, and he can belittle the efforts that the people in the Department of Conservation made to get those cottagers in to winterize their cabins. Cottagers sent us e-mails congratulating us on doing that and thanking us for the service we provided. Or we can sit back, like members opposite, and simply give bad advice. I'd rather take action, which is what we did, and we'll continue to do that. Economy–Manitoba Labour Migration Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr.

Speaker, if the Minister of Finance was running in a marathon, he would be at the starting gate and everybody else would be at the finish line. The Chartered Accountants of Manitoba has now released a second

section of their report, their annual MB Check-Up. The research shows that Manitoba posted the lowest job growth, the lowest wages and the lowest post-secondary education attainment rates. As a result, Manitoba is losing our skilled and educated workforce. Our sons and daughters are leaving to pursue better opportunities, higher wages, improved economic opportunities elsewhere. Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Finance satisfied to occupy the lowest rung in the ladder and watch skilled and educated Manitobans flock out of Manitoba to other provincial provinces? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Let me just put the record right for the member opposite. Between 2001 and 2006, the growth in real wages in Manitoba was among the highest in the country. We admit that we started from a low base in the '90s when disposable income and wages were stagnant, but they've been coming up ever since we've been in government, Mr. Speaker, and they will continue to go up. With respect to post-secondary education, we actually recognize that there's more to Manitoba than just Winnipeg and you cut it off.

We actually built and constructed University College of the North, which is in 17 communities in the north, educating people in the north. We've doubled community college expansion opportunities. We're doing a major project in his own constituency that his party voted against. When it comes to educating Manitobans, enrolments are up over 30 pe rcent. When it comes to wages, they're the second-best growth in the country, and there's more to add on the next question. Mr. Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, obviously, the minister didn't understand that.

Okay, we've got the lowest job growth, lowest wages and lowest post-secondary education attainment rates in western Canada. That's what we've got. The business community is now saying we have to, in Manitoba, increase the net pay to our employees, and the way we do that and what they're asking for is a reduction in income tax rates and an increase in the personal basic exemption, Mr. Speaker. This weekend, B ob Silver, the owner of Western Glove, announced that his company is eliminating 100 production workers.

When is this minister going to wake up and realize that if Bob Silver, the co-chair of the Premier's Economic Advisory Council, can't keep jobs in Manitoba then the problem is real? Is the minister embarrassed by this abysmal performance,

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1573 or is he going to continue to duck the issue and rely totally on political spin? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, when it comes to hot air, the member is rapidly moving into first place, and it's got nothing to do with reducing greenhouse gases, I might add. Now, let's talk about jobs. We have the highest participation rate in western Canada in the labour market, over 68 percent. We have the second-lowest unemployment rate in the country at 4.3 percent, and we have the second-lowest unemployment rate for young people in the country.

These measures indicate that we have high participation in the labour force, and we have low employment rate. Mr. Speaker, let's not forget there's only one party in this Legislature that's committed to increasing the minimum wage. Not the Conser- vatives, not the Liberals, only the NDP is committed to increasing the minimum wage in this House. Winnipeg Regional Health Authority Privatization Costs Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): A year ago today, the NDP announced that it planned to privatize part of the WRHA: payroll, human resources, finance and supply management.

This work was going to be outsourced to a private for- profit company. I'd like to ask the Minister of Health if she can confirm that the privatization costs currently under discussion will be $30 million annually for a 10-year contract. That amounts to $300 million over 10 years, and every 10 years th ereafter. And is this the largest privatization of health care in Manitoba's history? Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): It hasn't been done. Mrs. Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, while the NDP are privatizing part of the health-care system, and the discussions are underway, they have done the opposite in other areas of health care. They bought the Pan Am Clinic, they built a sandwich factory. Yet, at the same time that they said they were going to privatize the back part, the backroom, of the WRHA, they at the time went out and bought the private MRI clinic at the Maples Surgical Centre so that it would come into the public system. I would like to ask the Minister of Health if she could tell us why privatization is good in one part of health care but not in another. Ms.

Oswald: I used to think that the member opposite and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) didn't talk very often about their stance on privatization of health care because they couldn't sell it. It's clearly because she doesn't get it. The very fundamental principle of the work that is being done with the Pan Am Clinic, with the Maples clinic, is that there is one line for service. That service is based on medical need, not on the size of a person's wallet which has been advocated time and time again by the member opposite.

So not only does she not understand what's going on in Manitoba, not only is she somehow raising the issue of privatization that previously she's tried so desperately to conceal whether it's privatization wholly, their privatization of home care, but now she's just getting it completely wrong. It's a bit mind-boggling. Mrs. Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, perhaps the Minister of Health didn't get a good briefing from the previous Minister of Health who I would indicate announced to the media a year ago today that the Province was going to privatize city hospital services–headline in the Winnipeg Free Press, Monday, October 24. So I would like to ask the Minister of Health if she could please tell us where the negotiations for this have progressed to, considering that the previous minister that was in that position of Minister of Health had already started down this road a year ago. Could she give us an update as to where those negotiations are at? Ms.

Oswald: I honestly have never been so happy to stand up in Question Period and answer a question in my life. I was pretty happy on the day when the member opposite wanted to ask me about the firing of nurses. That was a very happy day for me to get up and remind members opposite that they fired 1,000, and we've got them back plus 500 more. But today the member opposite wants to get up and talk about our party's opposite stance on the privatization of health care. We believe in public health care. They're on the record supporting private health care. And in answer to her question: It has not been done, Mr.

Speaker. Government Operations Carbon-Neutral Government Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, sadly one of the most effective parts of the

1574 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 government's climate strategy seems to be the increased sequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide into algal blooms in Lake Winnipeg, but we clearly need a better a pproach than that. And changing the way we do things means showing some government leadership. During the election campaign earlier this year we called for the provincial government to move to become carbon neutral in its operations. I ask the Premier whether he will commit today to operating a carbon-neutral government by the fiscal year 2008- 2009? * (14:00) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, we have flattened out the carbon emissions for the whole province. We have plans to close the second coal plant as long as we can have the proper transition for employees, the 64 employees working at that plant in Brandon. To reduce, again, emissions considerably will get us below where we were in 2000 when we came into office, when we do that. We have a continued strategy on renewable energy, wind, geothermal energy-efficiency to continue to work towards a target that is consistent with what we have to do.

The member opposite, when he was in the federal Cabinet, they pledged to join Kyoto between the years '93 and '97. When he was in Cabinet, emissions went up dramatically in Canada. We certainly are targetting legislation that we will introduce in the House and debate in the House to attempt to reach the Kyoto targets of 6 percent reduction by 2012. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategy Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, the sad reality is that in Manitoba the emissions, the greenhouse gas emissions are still going up and they're still well above where they were in 1990.

We look forward to the targets because we've been waiting for them for many years. Today the Premier announced that he will be working with other governments to design a multi- sector market-based mechanism to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Can the Premier indicate what he's doing in this respect, and indicate why Manitoba-based offsets are presently much less readily available than purchased offsets in other jurisdictions? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, Mr. Speaker, what we've done is that we were the first jurisdiction in North America to join public sector jurisdiction.

Hydro joined the Chicago commodity market and had carbon credits attained by Manitoba. In fact, when we closed the Selkirk coal plant down we actually gained money from the action that took place, and we also reduced emissions by 124 megawatts coming from a coal plant. It was the largest emitter, and the member opposite was the chief of staff, the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Manitoba. I would dare say it was spewing pollutants all over, especially northeast Winnipeg and northeast in the Capital Region.

So we're pleased that we have taken both those actions and the answer to the question is we're already registered. Actually, we joined up five years ago. Public Meeting Premier’s Attendance Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, it's proving to be a challenge to get this Premier (Mr. Doer) to recognize that he does have an obligation to be accountable to his own constituents. Mr. Speaker, as we try to put up posters and leaflets and we have a radio campaign that's being planned, we want the Premier to come out to his own constituency. I know he doesn't reside in the area.

I know he doesn't believe he has to go into the area between elections. That's what he believes. We believe that he does have a responsibility to tell Manitobans and to take a position as to what's been happening in his office. My question to the Premier is: Will the Premier ensure that if he is unable to attend the November 5 public meeting that he will have any one of his 33 NDP MLAs, that are prepared to clap their hands at his beck and call, to be there in attendance in his place? Will the Premier at least make that commitment? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, the Member for Inkster continues his one-person campaign in Manitoba after he had promised the Legislature that should Elections Manitoba find no wrong-doing, he would publicly resign. After having said that, and not doing that he continues his one-person campaign against the Member for The Maples (Mr. Saran) who won in a nomination.

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1575 I don't know how the Member for Inkster had his nomination. In fact, I don't know how the Member for Inkster has time to do his work in his constituency, since he's running around with radio ads and running around putting up posters in the Premier's constituency when we have duties that are given to us by people that elect us in this Legislature. I would ask the member to live up to his pledge that he made here, and that is to resign and do the right thing so the people of Manitoba will know that he lives up to his word.

He said if there's no findings, he would resign. We're waiting for him to do that. CancerCare Manitoba Updated Equipment Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): Mr. Speaker, early detection plays–[interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for St. James has the floor. Ms. Korzeniowski: Mr. Speaker, early detection plays a vital role in effective treatment of breast cancer. Can the Minister of Healthy Living inform the House of recent develo pments that will provide updated equipment to CancerCare Manitoba? Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Healthy Living): Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to thank the Member for St. James for this great question. We do know that early detection for breast cancer is essential for increasing the survival rate. That's why today, our government announced $271,000 to replace two mammography diagnostic units at CancerCare Manitoba. I was very proud to be joined by many cancer survivors, staff, as well as volunteers of CancerCare Manitoba to make this great announcement at the HOPE Centre.

The HOPE Centre is a very vital part of our system which provides information, education, hope, and most importantly, strength, to fight the battle of cancer for women. I think that it's very important that we continue to support prevention initiatives as well as early detection and treatment. School Taxes Farm Property Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, not only is this NDP government applauding itself for refunding taxes that shouldn't be collected in the first place, they are charging Manitobans $1.5 million to do it.

The administrative cost is 3 percent, the same administrative costs of payday loan companies to cash a cheque. Only this NDP government would think that this is a good, sound policy–to collect the tax, then rebate the bulk of it and then charge Manitobans $1.5 million to do it. Mr. Speaker, when is the NDP government going to stop wasting taxpayers' dollars on needless administration charges a nd do away with school taxes on farmland property? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Imagine this, Mr. Speaker.

When the Conservatives were in power, they increased the portioning on agriculture land. They increased taxes on farmland by some $7 million. We came into office, we made a commitment to reduce education tax on farmland. We started with 20 percent, we went to 50 percent, we are up to 60 percent. Keep waiting, Mr. Speaker, we are going to reduce those education taxes on farmland by 80 percent. Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, we would have eliminated it already, not just made rhetoric. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Eichler: Mr.

Speaker, if this NDP government truly believes $1.5 million in administrative costs to administer the rebate program is acceptable, this is just bad policy. Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister again: When will the smoke and mirrors go away and this minister stop wasting taxpayers' dollars? Ms. Wowchuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, under the previous administration we saw education tax on farmland go up. Under this government we put in place a policy to reduce education tax on farmland, and what did they do? They voted against every budget that we brought in that would reduce education tax on farmland.

They talked about it, but they did absolutely nothing and then they voted against it when we brought forward a policy. * (14:10) Rural Health Care Doctor Retention Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, 14 rural emergency rooms throughout Manitoba

1576 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 remain closed because of this minister's mismanagement. This includes the ER in Wawanesa. On October 4, in Estimates, the Minister of Health led us to believe that the Assiniboine Regional Health Authority was aggressively pursuing negotiations with Dr. Nick Abell, of course, in hopes that he would come back to the community to work. Can the minister give us an update in terms of how those negotiations are going? Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, again, the single most important thing that a regional health authority can do in co-operation with a government is to increase human resources in rural Manitoba, in urban centres and in the north. As I said to the member in Estimates, it was our understanding that the Assiniboine Regional Health Authority was going to make contact with Dr. Abell, in addition to other efforts that are being made to bring resources to rural Manitoba.

We know that by increasing our spaces at medical school, by being aggressive on international medical graduates and working hard and committing to bringing a hundred more doctors to Manitoba, we can work to achieve that goal. Again, I have to ask the member opposite: How many doctors did they promise during the election? It was zero, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Cullen: Mr. Speaker, the fact remains Dr. Abell not very long ago was actually practising in Wawanesa. He left because this minister and her government failed to give him a good reason to stay.

I'm not surprised the minister doesn't know why he left or where to find him. She isn't willing to learn from those doctors who have left the province. That's why we keep losing them. Last week, we on this side of the House received an e-mail from the RHA asking for Dr. Abell's contact information. Can the minister say: Are they aggressively pursuing this doctor? And at the same time, are they really trying to retain doctors in Manitoba? Ms. Oswald: Mr.

Speaker, again, on the specific issue of that specific doctor, our information tells us that the Assiniboine Regional Health Authority was going to be in contact with him, in addition to a number of other recruits. The simple fact is, Mr. Speaker, that since 1999, we have a net increase of 235 doctors here in Manitoba. That's 86 doctors for rural Manitoba. We know that the College of Physicians and Surgeons posts a 10-year high increase in doctors in Manitoba at 54. Ten years ago, it was also a high. The highest loss of doctors, and that was 74. Ethanol Plants Hartney and R.M. of Cameron Mr.

Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, on September 20, the Minister of Agriculture met with proponents, municipal leaders and supporters of the Clean Country Resources ethanol project in southwest Manitoba. The Town of Hartney and the R.M. of Cameron are putting up a hundred thousand dollars to show support for this project, and the minister promised a prompt reply to their inquiries. Has she replied, Mr. Speaker, and, if not, when can they expect a written response as she promised? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr.

Speaker, I did meet with this group when I was visiting in southwestern Manitoba, and my staff has been working with them and looking at ways to find the resources that they need in order to complete the work that they want to do this fall. Permits for Water Tests Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, just looking for a reply so that they could have one, but these Clean Country Resources proponents and many municipal officials requested the government's assuranc e that permits for water tests would be allowed this fall before freeze-up.

With trials required to be pumped for 72-hour periods, will the minister indicate what steps she has taken, or will take this week, to support this testing before huge ice rinks resu lt from having to perform these tests in the rigours of winter, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to the member, staff from my department and the department of STEM have been working with this group, and it is my understanding that resources have been put in place and the testing that they are wanting to do this fall is going to be able to be done.

But I can follow up with the member should there be some outstanding issues. The information I have is that my staff has dealt with them, and they are able to do the testing that they want to do this fall.

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1577 Bill 21 Request for Withdrawal Mrs. Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): Mr. Speaker, my question's for the Minister responsible for Housing. Last night at committee we heard three very good presentations from individuals and organizations that were opposed to Bill 21 and felt that this was just smoke and mirrors, a piece of legislation that was being put forward by this government, and that if the government had the political will to renovate and fix up inner-city housing, they would do it through appropriation and not through legislation. Mr.

Speaker, will the minister, as a result of those presentations, consider withdrawing Bill 21? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Well, here's a chestnut, Mr. Speaker. I've got two bills here. One says Bill 38; one says Bill 21. I've checked both bills and the only difference between these two is the number. Now, I don't know what explains the opposition having said for Bill 38: There are good intentions here to allocate money into economically less viable areas of the city. It's very important that we recognize the need for housing in the inner city.

Their spokesperson said: This bill, this one here, is a good bill. Perhaps the members opposite might want to try and muster some credibility and explain why now they say on Bill 21: This bill is bad law. Good bill, bad law. Good, bad. Good, bad. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Pembina Constituency College Partnerships Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Today I would like to acknowledge an important partnership between Garden Valley Collegiate Technical Education Campus and Assiniboine Community College.

The campus in Winkler is an important regional centre for technical-vocational education and training. They have continued their exceptional dedication to education, helping to train students for careers and advance their entrance into the job market. Assiniboine Community College offers a two- year program that aids in filling the demand for trained heavy-duty technicians. With this agreement, five spaces will be reserved for qualified graduates from Garden Valley Collegiate.

But the truly exciting part of this co-operative effort is that students who meet the requirements of Garden Valley's diesel technology program can transition directly into the second year of ACC's heavy-duty equipment technician program. These young people will enter the job market sooner as skilled workers. I am pleased this initiative will open educational and career opportunities for the young people of the Pembina constituency. It will reward the hard work of students and en courage post-secondary education. This partnership is helping to fill the demand in the trade sector, and, Mr.

Speaker, I can assure you that some of the hardest working and most talented workers in Manitoba call our constituency home. I'd like to congratulate Principal Dan Giesbrecht of Garden Valley Collegiate and President Joel Ward of Assiniboine Community College, as well as all the staff and students of both institutions. For all their hard work and being not only proactive but innovative in dealing with the demands of education today, I must thank the Garden Valley School Division, including Superintendent Vern Reimer and board chair Kelvin Dyck. Finally, but most importantly, Mr.

Speaker, I wish the students who participate in this initiative the best of success. I hope they will enjoy a bright future and a fulfilling career. Thank you. Inwood School Grand Opening Mr. Tom Nevakshonoff (Interlake): On October 22, the MLA for Gimli (Mr. Bjornson), our Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth, and I had the distinct pleasure of attending the grand opening of the new Inwood School, a 24,166 square foot replacement structure which cost a total of $5.4 million to build.

The design includes five classrooms, a kindergarten, gymnasium, library, multipurpose room, science lab, resource room, computer room and life skills area which will provide core facilities for 135 students from kindergarten to grade 12. Since 2000, this Manitoba government has provided in excess of $378 million in capital program funding for the public education system, an

1578 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 increase of nearly $200 million from the previous seven-year period. Cooper Rankin Architects and Red Lake Construction are to be commended for their good work on the project which recognizes the importance of energy conservation by incorporating Power Smart technologies and ince ntives. This project can be viewed as the culmination of many years of re- investment in the facilities of the Lakeshore School Division which recognizes that there is a clear limit as to how far our children can be expected to travel to get to school each day.

It also incorporates th e ideology that as many communities as possible in rural Manitoba should have, at the very least, one good school to serve the needs of the people. Adequate public infrastructure is key to the maintenance of vibrant rural communities and the economic health of our province as a whole. This NDP government knows that rural Manitoba is and will continue to be the base upon which our home and native land will thrive as long as investments of this nature are made.

I congratulate the people of Inwood and thank, on their behalf, the provincial government and the Public Schools Finance Board for addressing the needs of the Interlake region. * (14:20) Louie Tolaini Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I'd like to extend my sincerest congratulations to Mr. Louie Tolaini, the founder of the TransX Group of Companies. He has recently been named the Ernst & Young Prairie Entrepreneur of the Year. For Mr. Tolaini this award only further confirms his position among the most successful and hardworking Manitobans. Part of his success is that Mr.

Tolaini has always applied the same optimism, vigour and diligence that marked his earliest achievements. Mr. Tolaini came to Canada as a hopeful 19-year-old with visions of earning enough to return to his native land and purchase a farm. However, the intervention of fate quickly rerouted the young Mr. Tolaini's plans. His hard work allowed him to establish a small trucking company out of Virden. Today the TransX Group of Companies based out of Winnipeg stretche s across North America and has an annual sales figure of more than half a billion dollars.

The company employs over 2,500 people and hopes to become a one-billion-a-year company by 2014. As economists of all stripes have long noted, entrepreneurs are the engines of the economy, and fortunately for Manitoba, Louie Tolaini has under- stood this quite literally. While his accomplishments within the business community are foremost, we should also not forget his contributions as a citizen. Taken together, both the economic and social contributions that Mr.

Tolaini has made to the local community, the province and nation quite clearly have exceeded anything he could have imagined as a young Italian immigrant with no knowledge of English. Mr. Tolaini has been repa id for all his hard work by finally realizing his original dream that he carried out upon his arrival to Canada. He now owns a small vineyard in Italy. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to conclude by again congratulating Louie Tolaini on receiving this prestigious award of Prairie Entrepreneur of the Year and thank him for the benefits that his vision and his work have contributed to the social and economic life of Manitobans. Public Accounts Committees Conference Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to attend the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees conference in Victoria from August 19 to 21. I was joined by the Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach) and the Clerk of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

Every year legislators and staff from federal, provincial and territorial Public Accounts com- mittees from across Canada meet in conjunction with the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors. These very useful meetings are used to discuss matters of mutual interest relating to financial accountability. It is an exciting time for people interested in accounting and auditing. The conference allows participants to network an d share experiences while exploring new and innovative ways of operating.

During the conference we had the opportunity to discuss important issues facing our committees with both the federal Auditor-General as well as provincial auditors general. All participants were able to gain excellent insight into the various ways that committees operate. There was an excellent discussion on the relationship between Public Accounts committees

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1579 and auditors general. I raised the issue of televised or Web-broadcasted meetings and discovered that this is happening in Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and British Columbia. I have served on the Public Accounts Committee for a number of years and most recently as its Vice- Chair. It is truly an honour to serve the Legislature by sitting on this committee, and I look forward to continuing to do so. I want to thank the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia for their outstanding job as hosts of this year's conference.

Their warm and open welcome made the conference a wonderful way to share and learn from participan ts on a topic that is of paramount importance to us all. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Canada Wings Aviation Training Centre Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, as the Member for Portage la Prairie, along with the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) and the Member for St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski), I was very pleased to attend the opening ceremony for the Canada Wings Aviation Training Centre at the Southport Aerospace Centre located just south of Portage la Prairie.

This impressive new training facility is indeed remarkable and will be used to train Canadian Forces pilots as well as the military pilots from around the world for decades to come. In 2005, the federal Department of National Defence awarded Allied Wings Flight Training Services a $1.77-billion contract that will have the centre conduct pilot training for the next 22 years. The No. 3 Canadian Forces Flying Training School uses the facility with 70 students currently attending, and it's anticipated that more than 300 could eventually be attending at any one time.

Using the most advanced technology in the world, students experience the inner workings of the cockpit through flight simulation before they actually take off. Using the virtual technology, trainees can be transported to airports around the world. These simulators also introduce trainees to dangerous situations and bad weather conditions without ever leaving the ground. Two of the four units even have the ability to imitate an aircraft's movement involved in a crash. All of this results in a better prepared pilot trained to the highest of military standards.

As a young man I had a pilot licence, and it was wonderful to experience it again when I flew the King Air Turbo Prop during a simulation at the new facility. At the opening ceremonies, the outstanding records of two pilots that were highly decorated during the Second World War were recognized. The on-the-ground pilot training facilities are situated in the newly christened Hilly Brown Building. This is in recognition of Brown's impressive flying record as a fighter pilot during the Second World War.

The main theatre in the training centre was named the Glen Ellwood Theatre, who survived more than 100 combat missions, most as a navigator with the famed Pathfinder Squadron during the Second World War. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Allied Wings Flight Training Services and to thank all the current and former board members of Southport Aerospace Centre and members, current and former, of Canadian Forces personnel whose foresight and hard work saw the creation of this state-of-the-art military pilot training facility. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. GRIEVANCES Mr.

Speaker: The honourable Member for Russell, on a grievance? Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Yes, Mr. Speaker, on a grievance. Each session, Mr. Speaker, every member in this Legislature is given the opportunity to grieve, and this is a process where perhaps we can express our frustration with the administration of government and perhaps with the policies of a government as well. Today, I stand in my place to grieve against the government, Mr. Speaker, in terms of what mis- management has occurred not just in one area, but in many areas of their administration.

The latest and the largest mismanagement issue, of course, that's been highlighted across newspapers and across the media and has been brought to the attention of Manitobans largely by our leader, Mr. Speaker, is the whole issue of where the bipole line is going to be constructed in Manitoba.

1580 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 Mr. Speaker, when you look at the fact that Manitoba Hydro, who should have the responsibility to decide where this line should be, who have expressed their view and their option, their first choice as not being on the west side of the province, we have a Premier (Mr.

Doer) who has decided to overrule common sense, overrule science, overrule the professionals and announce that the line will be built on the west side of the province despite the fact that it's going to cost a significant amount of money more to all rate users, and taxpayers for that matter, of Manitoba. Also, the amount of line loss that will occur is fairly significant and something that should be taken into account when one considers the construction of a new bipole line. * (14:30) Now, added to this, Mr.

Speaker, the fact that people who live on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, I think, for decades have been awaiting this type of an announcement to be made and hoping that this kind of an initiative would impact on them in a positive way. I say that because people on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, northern Manitoba, have largely been isolated from the rest of society in our province because they do not have access by road to the capital city of our province. They do not have the opportunity for jobs.

A bipole line constructed on the east side of Lake Winnipeg would have given them those opportunities, opportunities for jobs, oppor- tunities for access to, if you like, the rest of the world, the rest of the province, the hope that their children would have a future, one that could be somewhat brighter than it is in their isolated circumstances today. Mr. Speaker, this Premier single-handedly has decided to take all of those hopes and dreams away from those people on the east side of the lake. There are many reasons why we object to the route that the Premier has chosen.

We object to the process that he has taken, has followed, because it is a process which was not inclusive. It did not include the discussion of job opportunities to the people on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. It did not involve the consultation of people who live on reserve lands on the west side of the province, and it did not even involve a consultation process with people who live in southwestern Manitoba. So, Mr. Speaker, this is a high-handed approach to a development that is going to impact the lives of thousands of Manitobans for a long, long time.

We are going to take up this fight on behalf of those people, on behalf of Manitobans, on behalf of the people on the east side of the lake.

We are going to take up the fight and make sure that they are given a second chance, make sure that they are given an opportunity not only to voice their concerns, not only to voice their vision in terms of where a bipole line should be, but I guess, in an attempt to get the Premier to listen to reason, the Premier to listen to what people have to say about this initiative, and the fact that this is not a decision that should be considered lightly because of the impact it's going to have on many, many Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, that's one area of grievance that I would have.

The other area is the way in which this government has mismanaged the whole area of social services. When we see the deaths of children because of inattention by an administration who should take that responsibility seriously, one has to think that something is amiss in the ranks of government. Mr. Speaker, children continue to die. Children in care continue to die in Manitoba, and that just should not be. We have heard and listened to the frustration of front-line wo rkers who say that their workload is simply too heavy to be able to meet the needs of those children and those Manitobans in care.

They have expressed not only to us but to government that more resources have to be put in place to deal with the issues that are before them. It's okay for us to sit in administration, to sit in this House, Mr. Speaker, and point the finger at others. When it comes to decisions and when it comes to policy, that finger has to point back at oneself. It has to point back at those who have responsibility for setting policy, for leadership in this province. That is what is lacking, Mr. Speaker. We have a lack of leadership in this province.

We have a government that continues to point to other people, people who are working their hearts out to make this a better province, and yet they are bearing the burden of blame when it comes to issues like social services and the care of children. Now, Mr. Speaker, a great deal has been made about devolution, and I will not forget how this whole process started. It was Tim Sale who, I think, was in charge at the time when devolution all started. Of course, this was his mantra to devolve social services.

Not that devolving social services is a bad thing, but it's the how and the preparedness of being in a position, of being able to accept that

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1581 responsibility, to accept that burden of responsibility by those who have not been in that position before. Yes, at the outset, it seemed like everything was going to be going along just fine, and then the problems started to occur. Mr. Speaker, you cannot blame those who have received that responsibility. You have to blame those people who were in charge of the policy decisions, the people who were in charge of taking the action without having people properly prepared.

Therefore, chaos ensued, and that's what we have witnessed with the social services program, the child welfare system in this province. It's been a ch aotic process, a chaotic experience by many, not just children, but families, families who have been impacted by this wrong- headed approach because proper preparation was not done by those who were in charge. We go on and I look at where we are in the whole area of rural development and agriculture, and the responsibility that I have for in terms as a critic.

I have to say that in rural development and in rural communities today we have seen communities regress in terms of being able to address the issues that they have before them. Why? Again, because of a government that just can't get its act together, a ministry that can't get its act together and policies that are wrong-headed, policies that don't really hit the nail on the head when it comes to addressing the issues that are before people and Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, in 2003, we saw how BSE impacted on the economic growth in this province, the economic sustainability of our rural communities.

The minister at that time promised that we would have slaughter capacity in this province, expanded slaughter capacity in this province and she made a big to-do about the fact that we were going to have additional slaughter capacity in short order in this province. Well, it's been four years-plus and we don't have expanded slaughter capacity in this province. As a matter of fact, the newest initiative undertaken by the minister is to grant money toward the purchase of livestock that are going to be processed where? In Manitoba? No, they're going to be processed outside of our province, namely in Saskatchewan.

Under this cattle enhancement loan program that was given out, the minister made an announcement about it, but she didn't tell Manitobans the full story. We only learned the full story after prodding into the initiative and finding out that indeed this money is not going to enhance slaughter capacity in Manitoba, it's going to enhance the ability of people to get their cattle out into the Saskatchewan slaughter plants and have them processed there. How does that address the issues that this minister was talking about? How does this address enhanced slaughter capacity in Manitoba?

How does it address economic development? How does it address the creation of new jobs? Well Mr. Speaker, it does not. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Derkach: I regret that my time is up, but I could go on and on and on about the issues that we have with this government. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to announce that Wednesday, October 24, will be Concurrence, and, following Routine Proceedings, we'll call the following ministers in Concurrence: Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr.

Mackintosh); Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives (Ms. Wowchuk); and Minist er of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux). Mr. Speaker: It is announced Concurrence for Wednesday, October 24. Following Routine Proceedings, the following mi nisters will be called for Concurrence: Minister of Family Services and Housing; Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives; Minister of Infrastructure and Trans- portation. Mr. Chomiak: I'd also like to announce that an Opposition Day will be scheduled for the House for October 31 and will be provided for in this House by agreement, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: It's been announced that October 31 will be an Opposition Day by agreement. Is it agreed? [Agreed] Mr. Chomiak: Finally, for now, would you call bills in the order that they were established earlier today? [interjection] Yes, Mr. Speaker, for clarification, the same rotation that they were provided for– [interjection]– starting with 15 and proceeding there, just for–

1582 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 An Honourable Member: 19, 20, and then 5. Mr. Chomiak: 19, 20 and 5. We have one other announcement, thank you. My second, finally, Mr. Speaker, is I'd like to announce that the PMR for next Tuesday; that is, the private member's resolution for next Tuesday will be our resolution on diabetes. Mr. Speaker: The resolution for next Tuesday, for private members' hour, will be the government resolution on diabetes.

Now, we're okay, so we'll resume Debate on Second Readings in the order–we'll start with Bills 15, 19, 20 and 5. * (14:40) DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 15–The Biofuels Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: I'm calling Bill 15, The Biofuels Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Faurschou), who has 20 minutes remaining. Is there will of the House to keep the bill remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Portage la Prairie? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: No, it's been denied? It's been denied. Are there any other members wishing to speak?

Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is Bill 15, The Biofuels Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to– [interjection] Order, please. I was putting the question on Bill 15, The Biofuels Amendment Act. The Member for Inkster wishes to speak? Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Yes. Mr. Speaker: We have to put it to the House because I was already put ting the question to the House.

So, if the Member for Inkster wishes to speak, can I have leave of the House to allow the Member for Inkster to speak, and then I will continue putting the question? Is that agreeable? [Agreed] Okay, it's been agreed to. Mr. Lamoureux: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in this day and age what we find is that there is a great deal of interest by the public to look at issues that are more environmentally sound in terms of government policy. I can recall, back into the early '90s, when the issue of ethanol was actually really being discussed in a very strong fashion.

In fact, I think actually one of the first speakers I heard talk on this issue was the current Leader of the Manitoba Liberal Party, where he talked about how Manitoba has a great deal to be able to contribute towards ethanol and that it's a win-win situation. Mr. Speaker, I think that, all in all, what we want to be able to do is to see, where we can, ethanol and the production of ethanol increase. The reason for that, I believe, is driven for a couple–you know, there are a couple of reasons why we're seeing that public pressure to address this issue. The primary one is that of the environment.

The idea of taking gasoline and having a mixture which makes the exhaust that much more clean and better for our environment is a positive thing. I really think that Manitobans look to government to come up with initiatives that will, in fact, make a difference for our environment. It's one of the reasons why I believe that we have seen a number of private members' bills that have been brought forward from the Leader of the Liberal Party, everything from the banning of phosphates in dishwasher detergent to the discussion of the banning of plastic bags.

These are the types of issues which I believe you're going to see more and more brought to the attention of this Chamber, in good part from the Manitoba Liberal Party because we want to ensure that the government is actually taking tangible actions to protect our environment. The government in the past, I think they somewhat assume, they somehow make the assumption that, because there's this New Democratic Party title, they have ownership of the environment. I've made reference to the fact before that, you know, today's NDP are not NDP. Their behaviour, Mr. Speaker, in many ways, in many ways, do not reflect it.

You know, they will talk about the environment and, ultimately, and I'm going to go to that phosphates bill for the dishwasher. Mr. Speaker, if they pass that bill, what would happen is that it would have more of a positive impact on Lake Winnipeg by passing that bill than any other measure that this government has done since it has taken office. What does the government, or how does the government respond to it?

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1583 Well, they have their own ideas. This is one of their ideas, ethanol, and trying to promote ethanol. But if they can't assume or take 100 percent credit of the idea, then, quite frankly, they don't want anything to do with it, whether it's better for the environment or not. The best example I could come up with was the day in which I asked the Premier (Mr. Doer) the question about supporting the Liberal bill. The Premier says: Well, Ottawa's going to do it. But don't worry, if they don't do it, then we'll do it. Well, Mr.

Speaker, can you imagine if the government applied that same principle on every initiative that's out there? As the Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire) points out, well, that's leadership. He makes it in tongue-in-cheek, of course. This government has a serious problem with taking ideas no matter where they come from and doing what they can to enact them. This legislation that's being proposed, that was brought forward by the Leader of the Liberal Pa rty (Mr. Gerrard), should have been accepted.

But now what we hear is that the government, who knows when, will come in with its own legislation, because it doesn't appear as if it is going to be happening in Ottawa, so they are going to come up with their own legislation. Of course, they don't want to be overly embarrassed, so they'll try to bring something else to the table. So they'll say well, our bill does more. Well, Mr. Speaker, the government has the chance to do something. The government does have a chance to do something positive today, but it chooses not to.

Bill 15 and th e principle of Bill 15 in terms of going to committee and hearing what presenters might have to say–I understand that my leader might have already spoken to this bill, so we have a sense in terms of what it is that we feel on this very important issue. I felt that it was important to stand up, primarily because I believe that we need to do what we can in terms of environmental types of issues and be aggressive in addressing them.

So, if there's a bill like Bill 15 that's before the Legislature, that all members attempt to understand it and look at ways in which we can accommodate passage of progressive legislation that's going to have a positive impact on the environment, and that is the No. 1 issue in regard to this piece of legislation from my perspective, Mr. Speaker. There are other issues as a direct result of this bill.

The benefits, and hopefully there will be benefits to many of our friends in the agricultural community that have life investments, that are in essence banking on the government to do the right things in regard to the ethanol industry by the creation of the fund that the minister is hoping to be able to ultimately put together. * (14:50) So there are a number of reasons why it is that I think that this particular bill should be going to committee, but I did want to take, you know, this opportunity because I thin k it's important that the biodiesel sales, whether it's ethanol or the future of that whole market area or that industry, are being looked after in a way in which we'll see significant improvement in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker, when the government comes up with legislation that can make a positive difference, you will see that we would be prepared to, at the very least, allow it to go to a committee where we would be afforded the opportunity to maybe better understand the intent of the legislation, and if there's a need for some amendments or some amendments do come to the committee, that the government would be open to it as opposition quite often witnesses government bringing forward amendments in committee to its own legislation.

So, whether it's the committee stage or third reading, sometimes there is a need for us to make the changes. Having said that, you know, the essence of Bill 15 is a bill in which we don't have a problem in terms of going to committee. As I indicated, I just want to have the opportunity to speak on this very important issue and look forward to it being brought to a committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to put a few comments on the record regarding Bill 15. Basically, the intent of this bill is something that is positive.

On the other hand, though, when the government of the day comes up with a bill and says that they're going to be putting this into action as well, it sort of reminds me of the term that we have used numerous times within this Chamber, and that is, there is more talk than action. I think what we would like to see, Mr. Speaker, is that within the rural community and in the commercial industrial community, we would like to see real action taking place. That is where producers who want to get into the processing business of ethanol are actually given the tools whereby they can do the work.

That is something that is lacking with

1584 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 this government, and we see this time and time again. Yes, the minister got up yesterday and indicated that there were five plants going in the province. I wish that they would be named. I think we would all like to know where these five plants are. Yes, they tout the fact that Minnedosa has been expanded, no thanks to the government of the day. They were already in business and certainly they have expanded what they were doing. However, this is something that we would like to see and it's an economic dr iver within the province. It's a value-added industry.

I believe it's something that we need. It's good for those who are producing and who are growing the product for the ethanol and the biofuel industry. However, we need to have the processing out there and have it take place. So I'm sorry to say, but this is a government that is sorely lacking in action. They put forth bills time and time again. They put legislation forth; however, they don't act on it. So, Mr.

Speaker, it is sad to see that we sit here and we stand here, we debate the issues, and yet when it comes to putting things into action out in the field, out in the province of Manitoba, this is not taking place. Now, in 2003, The Biofuels Act through Bill 15 should assist the move toward renewable energy. Now this would have broadened the types of fuel that would be included but again it has not taken place. So I just want to put a few comments on the record. I believe it's good, No. 1, for the ag industry to be able to use their product for the biofuel, the biodiesel, the ethanol industry.

It's a good value-added industry and, of course, you can take the by-products of that and they are used in the processing or rather for the growth of, in the feed supplements for livestock, as cattle, hogs are able to utilize the by-products of this, but further, it also enhances the clean energy within the province. The minister, of course, has indicated today that they're going to be moving towards, I believe it is 2012, where they're going to have certain requirements in place regarding the environment, regarding the toxic emissions.

However, this would be something that would help to assist them in moving in that direction. However, again, we are extremely sceptical on this side of the House as to the direction that this government is going because, as I said right at the outset, the actions speak louder than the works, and the works have not been taking place. Thank you. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I, too, am pleased to be able to put a few words on the record with respect to Bill 15, The Biofuels Amendment Act.

Certainly, members on this side of the House are, in principle, supportive of some of the aspects of this bill, but we wonder why the NDP has not proclaimed several sections of the original Biofuels Act, leaving it, for all intents and purposes, fairly hollow. The encouragement, obviously, of biofuel production like ethanol and biodiesel is essential to rural Manitoba and, indeed, to all Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Yet the NDP seems fine to drag their feet on proclaiming The Biofuels Act years after it was passed, and I recall being in the Legislature when it was passed back in 2003.

So my colleague from Pembina (Mr. Dyck) has me ntioned already there's all talk and no action when it comes to members opposite, members of this government, with respect to this very important issue and with respect to issues of the environment. We do know that, in several cases, with respect to greenhouse gases back in 2004-2005, Mr. Speaker, the greenhouse gas emissions were up 20 percent in this province alone.

It's an absolutely abysmal track record for this government, this NDP government, I might add, when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions in our province–and I think, again, it's just indicative of a government that has completely mismanaged this whole issue, that sees fit time and time again to talk the tough talk but that they're not prepared to walk the tough walk. I think it's rather unfortunate for people in our province who see this as a very important issue when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions and issues relating to the environment.

So, again, we've seen this happen back in 2003; we brought that forward, Mr. Speaker. How many more times do we have to go back and revisit this act before this NDP government will get it right? Having said that, I know there are a number of my colleagues who are interested in saying a few words on the record as well, so I will leave it at that, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I, too, want to put a few things on the record in regard to Bill 15.

Like the Member for Tuxedo, I reme mber very clearly the first year I was elected, in 2003, that the government came forward and said they had to bring in this legislation in order to move forward on ethanol and biodiesel. To my disappointment, here in 2007, we

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1585 have yet anything to see as a result of the bill going through in the fall of 2003. I know that the government probably rushed in order to try and get this bill through and obviously we're paying for it today. We have lack of ethanol and biodiesel today in the province of Manitoba as a result of that, and unfortunately we see the changes that they're bringing forward in Bill 15 and it says that it's going to broaden the scope of the 2003 Biofuels Act to include biodiesel and other emergency biofuels.

Also, it's going to harmonize Manitoba's ethanol mandate and incentive program, focus on fuel quality, framework for our future biodiesel sales, and on and on, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair We find it a pretty sad day whenever the government messes up and never does their homework. They have the expert staff that's there at their disposal in order to move forward on some of these initiatives, but, unfortunately, the government hasn't done their homework on this particular issue. I know that we on this side of the House have been very aggressive.

In fact, the Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach), yesterday in Question Period, asked a very specific question to the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) in regard to two projects that have been on the go for quite some time and have yet to see daylight within the province of Manitoba–who asks nothing other than infrastructure and the guidance of which this government has not done in order to move forward on these two particular projects. * (15:00) Today in the House, the Member for Arthur- Virden (Mr.

Maguire) asked specifically about a project in his area, and the minister gave him some hope that the department's looking at it. But we need to do more than look. We need action. We don't need smoke and mirrors. We need some action that's going to be taking place within the province of Manitoba. If we're going to add more value-added to this province, we need to do it through initiatives such as ethanol and biodiesel. We know that the communities work hard in order to bring forward rural initiatives, more value-added, in order to make their communities grow and prosper.

We all can't live in the city of Winnipeg, nor do we all want to live in Winnipeg, Madam Deputy Speaker. We want to make sure that our children have jobs in rural Manitoba, that they're able to stay within their own communities, provide education for their children, hospitals, doc tors and nurses and also things that are very important to them, and that's the small rural towns and small rural communities. We can do that through harmonization with new businesses such as ethanol and biodiesel.

We also have another aspect that we have to look at is the by-products that come as a result of these products, Madam Deputy Speaker. We need to make sure that we have the livestock sector in place whenever we're talking about the by-products that come as a result of these.

With the high cost of inputs on behalf of the livestock producers, we need that consultation process in order to take place which, again, we're hoping that the Minister of Agriculture and her staff have moved forward, in order to make sure that these in fact will be in a position to help those producers, especially this time, of which the cattle producers and hog producers are very low margins. We know that they need any help that they can get in order to be competitive in a way that would be meaningful for them to compete in the marketplace as a whole. The framework for a future biodiesel mandate.

We know that we have met with the trucking industry from time to time. They've talked about this particular issue, and we want to make sure that it's very compatible for their in dustry. I know that they are certainly looking forward to moving forward on this initiative. We certainly hope that the government has this bill right. We hope the amendments that they brought forward are right, and we look forward to this bill going to committee in order to make sure that we have the inputs from the various organizations that are so important to consultation when it comes to making sure that the amendments are in line.

So, with those few short words, Madam Deputy Speaker, we'll move forward on seeing this bill go to committee. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is the second reading of Bill 15, The Biofuels Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]

1586 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 Bill 19–The Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act Madam Deputy Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Labour (Ms. Allan), Bill 19, The Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act. Is there unanimous consent for the bill to stand in the name of the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik)? Some Honourable Members: No. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I am pleased to speak on Bill 19, The Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act.

We know that the purpose of this bill is to ensure that regulated professions and people applying for registration to practise these professions are governed by registration practices that are transparent, objective, impartial and fair. Of course, Madam Deputy Speaker, I don't think that anyone would argue with those words, but on the intent of the bill, as I've spoken to some of the professions that would fall under this legislation. Of course, they tell me that they practise this already and feel that this is what they do now.

Madam Deputy Speaker, we don't have a problem with that particular portion of the bill. In fact, I have to say that during the election, our leader did make a commitment as well to look at bringing forward this kind of legislation. We recognize that it's very, very important to have people that are coming into this province, for them to be recognized in their chosen professions. We want them to come here. We want people to come and be able to practise in the area that they are skilled and trained. There's no question about that.

I think that the regulated professions, right now, are doing a very good job of that, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think that some of them, though, I do know, have some concerns. But I also just want to say, when you think about the number of people that have come into our province, it's wonderful. We welcome everybody that wants to come into our province of Manitoba and add to our Manitoba mosaic and our multiculturalism here in the province of Manitoba.

Certainly, we want them when they come to this province to stay in this province, to be able to practise, to be able to put their professional skills and expertise to use. We want them to be able to do that in a fair–be treated fairly and openly and transparently in the professions that regulate, and, certainly, we know that many of the professions already have said this is exactly what we do. I think what our leader was working toward in his commitment in the previous election campaign was we know we need to address this. We know that there are steps that need to be taken.

We know that the process is one of consultation and one of meeting and speaking to groups to make sure that everybody is comfortable and happy with the legislation that would be put in place that would govern these bodies. There are a number of bodies; I think 30, so far, proposed under this legislation. Speaking to some of them, some of them are quite happy with the way the wording of the bill has been put forward because they feel that they already do this. So they just feel that they will be able to–in the words of one of them: Well, if the government needs to do this, fine, but we're already doing it.

So we can live with it because we're already doing it. I think, though, there are others that have brought forward some concerns that we need to specifically have a look at. I've spoken to a few groups and, actually, in about an hour from now, I'm going to be meeting with several other groups because they have contacted me to speak about some of the concerns that they have with this legislation. So I know that perhaps they will bring forward their concerns, and they will come to committee and they'll discuss their concerns.

I urge the government and the minister to take these concerns under advisement, to look at them very seriously so that they can be incorporated; if there are amendments that can be brought forward, that they would be incorporated, and to strengthen this legislation and make it good for all of the bodies that would be governed under this legislation. I have spoken with some groups and I just want to say some of the things that we want to raise as points of concern that I think should be addressed before the legislation would go forward.

One of the things was, yes, we support, and one of the groups said to me, yes, we support the idea of transparency, objectiveness, impartiality and fairness. I don't think that anybody would say those are bad things to support. Obviously, they're laudable goals. But some think, are we going to place an administrative burden on the organizations? Are we going to have to report to a fairness commissioner, and what are we going to report? How often are we reporting? What are the reporting requirements? What exactly is going to be built in, in terms of a bureaucracy with this fairness commissioner?

These are questions that the people

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1587 ask. What is the fairness commissioner supposed to do, because each one of these organizations has a body that looks at the practices? They have to look at people that are coming in from other countries and other cultures, to look at the credentials that they have and their ability to integrate into the Manitoba work force. Certainly, that is everybody's goal because, as we know, we have a labour shortage in this province because of so many people that have left the province. * (15:10) So we do need to have people come and join our labour force here.

There's no question about it, and we do need to be able to facilitate that. But, as the groups are saying, they think that they're doing it already. So I'm not sure whether the minister thinks that they aren't capable of regulating themselves in bringing people into the professions through their own objective, fair, transparent and impartial ways, but certainly some of the professions feel that that's the way they've been treated. Another thing that I heard is, again, yeah, we support the act. We don't have a problem with the act.

This is coming from people that I've consulted with, but they say why do we need it? Why do we need it? [interjection] Well, exactly. That's why people are asking, why do we need it, because we are doing it already. The regulated professions say, well, we're doing this; we feel that we're doing a good job. So I don't know if the government doesn't feel that they're doing a good job of it, but they certainly, I think, believe they are doing a very good job of it.

Again, the other comment from this particular organization was, well, the fairness commissioner, is this a person that would interfere in any way in what we see as being appropriate in our profession? These are questions that I throw out because they are questions that have been brought up, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Now, I think one of the most significant concerns that has been raised to me is when the press release was issued on April 18 of 2007 about this legislation that would be brought forward–and the press release, it focusses on the internationally educated or out-of-province individuals that would be coming into the province or foreign-trained people. So this is exactly what we're referring to. The press release, what it says is different than what the legislation says.

So this is the first thing that was brought to my attention: Why does the press release focus on foreign-trained individuals and yet the bill does not specifically focus there? So they thought, does this mean that there is an intent to tell the regulated professions how to regulate the people that they regulate within Manitoba, because it doesn't necessarily say foreign- trained individuals, although that's what it says in the press release? But in the legislation I think it leaves it wide open, at least to their

interpretation. It leaves it wide open for this group to be actually regulated by the government. This raised some concerns. They felt that perhaps the legislation was done a little bit in haste, Madam Deputy Speaker, without full consultation, because when I asked them if they had been consulted they said, well, we were told the legislation was coming and we were asked, did we have any questions? So they feel that it was pushed a little bit upwards, maybe, because there was an election coming in the spring, and they thought that perhaps it was politically motivated in that regard.

They feel that they do a very good job of their profession and are wondering exactly what role the government is trying to assume here. I guess what they're trying to impress–I know that they will bring their concerns to committee, but what they're trying to say is if the legislation is meant to specifically speak about in ternationally trained, or foreign-trained credentials, is the government trying to then, in the bill, not put that in there on purpose so that there's a way to manage all of the regulated professions in the province?

If this was to happen, I think it would be kind of a slippery slope into government being able to dictate to professions who and who could not practise in that profession. I don't think that's where we want to particularly go. I know that this legislation has been modelled after legislation in Ontario. Certainly, in Ontario, they have gone further in their legislation and done more, but we also know that in Ontario this legislation has only been there for just over a year, and there's not been an annual report come available yet. So there's no way to measure how it actually was working in that province.

You know, to get things right, there needs to be a lot of consultation. There needs to be gathering of information from other jurisdictions to make sure that we get the best and throw out the worst, so we need to look at what other people are doing, assess their successes and failures and take that information and mould that into what is good so that we can

1588 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 learn. We can learn from what other people do, whatever other provinces do. We need to sort of look very closely at this. I know that in other pr ovinces there are services for people. In Alberta, th ey have an International Qualifications Assessment system. In Québec, for foreign professionals, as a regulated industry, all foreign-educated health-care workers must belong to a professional corporation which ensures that foreign qualifications are equivalent to Québec qualification.

Of course, in Ontario, they do have The Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act which they proposed and passed last year. Which brings me to another concern which has been raised. That is, is there a problem in any particular profession with not recognizing foreign credentials and foreign-trained individuals to work in that particular area of their expertise and skill? If that's the case, perhaps we need to be working with those organizations rather than taking a broad brush and painting it across all of the regulated professions, which has been suggested this is, maybe, what's happened here.

There are so me professions that need more help in this regard to live up to this standard, but maybe some of them, as they tell me, they're quite capable of doing it and are doing it. Another concern, as I think I've touched upon, is the idea of the fairness commissioner. What is the role of the fairness commissioner? Where is this fairness commissioner going to be located? Is this a fairness commissioner that is outside of the government, or is it somebody that works right in the minister's office, for example? What is the role of the fairness commissioner?

These are questions that need to still be answered, I believe. * (15:20) So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that we have heard from a number of people on this. We think that the intent of the bill and the wording of the bill, there's not a problem with that, but we do think that there may be some areas that we need to look at to be sure that the people that this affects are completely in agreement and happy with the legislation that they will then have to abide by and live with. What we do want to ensure, though, is that there's no more red tape that comes associated with this bill.

We know that there's a ton of regulations and regulatory requirements in regulations. As one person has said to me, the devil is in the details. The details are the regulations. In regulations, there are regulatory requirements and we know that there's a ton of those and we don't want to impose anymore restrictions on the people and their abilities to carry out their functions. So that's one thing we want to be very careful of that ther e's not an imposed burden with more regulatory restrictions.

I think that in the bill there's a requirement for the minister to consult during the process of the regulations, but one of the groups I spoke to just in the last couple of days said they are still waiting for a phone call. They were told that they would be consulted during the regulations, but I guess they haven't been consulted with yet, and they're eagerly sitting by their phone waiting for the call. But I'm sure that they will be presenting at committee and we'll be having that opportunity to hear what they have to say. I think that we don't want to build a bureaucracy here.

We don't want to have a fairness commissioner that has a half staffperson, and then has a full person and then has three people. You know, I think we have to be very careful of that. We need to specifically know what this person will do. If they're only going to require an annual report or biannual report from the professions, and have a look and just rubber-stamp and say yes you're doing your job–as they all are doing, I think, right now–then we have to say, well, do we need this?

On the other hand, if this person is going to require a lot of staff because there's a lot of paperwork and red tape and regulatory requirements, then that is going to impose burdens that the regulated professions would not, in my understanding, from what I've heard from them, they would not be happy with this. So I think that what we want to do is pass the bill to committee and look forward to having a number of people come forward to committee and tell us their views, and have the opportunity to ask questions and perhaps propose some amendments to strengthen this legislation.

I certainly urge the government to listen to the regulated professions. Listen to what they have to say. Take it step by step . Get it right, so that everybody is happy with it and certainly, recognize–I do want to again recognize the work of the regulated professions. All of the people in these professions, I think, do their utmost to ensure that they treat anybody that's coming into that profession with the utmost of fairness, transparency, impartiality and

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1589 fairness, and, certainly, know that they would strive to do that. Again, just say that we did make a commitment as well in the campaign of this spring, that we certainly wanted to have a look at this kind of legislation and take some steps toward it, certainly recognizing that this is what we want to do in this province to welcome our many different cultures that we have coming into this province from all around the world and hope that they add, and I recognize, of course, that they do add to our multicultural mosaic here in Manitoba.

With that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to say that we look forward to hearing what presentations there will be in committee, and I'd like to offer the floor to my colleagues. Thank you very much. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I, too, want to put a few comments on record. Certainly, I want to recognize the fact that th e area that I represent has been the recipient and the benefactor of many of those who are immigrating to this province so there are some things that are out there specific to the constituents that I represent, those who have moved into the area.

I know that over a period of time, I have raised a number of the issues and those, in some cases, have been resolved . In some cases, they continue to be concerns to those as they struggle to get registration for their specific trades that they are involved in. I want to also indicate that it was our government that put the nominee program in place, and I want to say, though, that I'm pleased that the present government has carried on with this nominee program because I believe it has been a very successful one.

Again, speaking specifically of the Pembina constituency, certainly the people who have immigrated and have moved into our area have added to our mosaic, have added to the culture of the area, and we are extremely pleased that they have come. Now, if I can digress just a moment on that, certainly it has added to some challenges as well because with them have come fairly large families who have small children. So, right now, we've got close to a thousand students in huts, and so we need to provide accommodation for them as well, but that is an aside to Bill 19 that we're talking about here this afternoon.

Some of the concerns–and I just want to express these–are as to the fact that how will this in the end result, how will it work out specific to the administration of some of the people who are registering in order to be able to get their credentials recognized by the existing bodies. We saw this afternoon that, yes, the government of the day is out there applauding themselves for having taken partial taxes, education taxes off of farmland, and yet, though, in conjunction with that, we see also that they've added some huge administration costs to that program.

So this is a concern that we have regarding this program as well. Are they going to be using this in an administrative fashion to add to the costs to those who are applying in order to be recognized and have their credentials recognized by the different agencies? I know that previously I talked to the issue and I still have a few calls; it's not as many, so I would indicate that it is improving.

However, when people have the qualifications when they immigrate to the province, they have the requirements in order to be able to fulfil the jobs that they have been hired for but cannot get the transfer of their credentials, it is a concern. So this continues to happen and it's a matter of the granting agencies or the individual bodies of our professions granting them and just allowing them to challenge the exams. I think that that is certainly the direction that we need to go, and I know that we are continuing to go.

Ongoing in my discussions with those people who have these concerns, they do indicate that they are quite prepared to challenge the exam, but they do not want to go back and take an extra three or four years of university education when they already do have the qualifications. Again, I would affirm the point that certainly we want them to be qualified to fill those positions; however, in many cases they do have challenges. They have concerns expressed by those granting the certification that they are insisting that they take upgrading.

Again, I would say that those who are applying and who are being denied the credentials don't have a problem with upgrading if, in fact, they do not have the knowledge and fit into the program. In many cases, they do have the knowledge; they do have the educational background and simply, as I

1590 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 say, they would love to challenge the exams. So those are some of the concerns that we have out there. * (15:30) The other one, as my colleague from Morris has indicated, the whole area of the fairness commis- sioner. Again, I don't have the knowledge on that one to indicate that there is something that is negative regarding it, but we do have concerns that this will, in fact, truly be a fairness commissioner and that this person will look at it independently of anyone else and respond in a fair fashion.

So, Madam Deputy Speaker, again, I want to indicate that we have concerns regarding this bill. Again, historically, when this government has put legislation in place, we see the legislation coming in place but we don't see it enacted and we don't see the results of this in so many cases. So this is a concern that we have. We continue to express that. I think as we were talking about the previous bill, I said in the comments that I made that we want to see action. We don’t want to just simply see words but we want to see this put into action.

So, Madam Deputy Speaker, with those few comments, again I do have some concerns about it, but I believe that we are heading in the right direction. I certainly hope that this will be imple- mented, that those who do immigrate to the province, that they, in fact, will be able to, as I indicated, challenge the exams that ar e out there, challenge the professions to make sure that they do have the knowledge, the background to be able to enter the professions that they are qualified for. We should continue, and I trust that we will continue, to work in that direction.

There are a few other of my colleagues who would like to put a few comments on the record, so, with that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank you. Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): I do appreciate the opportunity to participate this afternoon in debate on Bill 19, The Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act. I rise to offer concerns at present that perhaps may or may not be addressed by the legislation we have before us.

I am aware of a consideration, that as we provide more professional bodies with the opportunity to regulate entry into their particular professions here in the province of Manitoba, that the responsibility is given up by the Legislative Assembly to the professional bodies and organizations to provide for accreditation and entry into various professions. I think there are more professional organizations that want to be recognized with legislation from this Chamber so that their organizations can be recognized as well. So this is an expanding situation rather than a contracting one.

But, once the organizations have the respon- sibility for regulating the entry and membership into a particular professional body, there goes also the responsibility to make sure that those that are entering into that professional body are properly trained in the best interests of that particular profession. However, when we allow that to happen, the professional bodies then with this new power can, in fact, restrict entry into those professions.

If the entry into those professions is restricted, then perhaps some professional bodies may then try and garner a greater dollar from the marketplace, being that there are fewer professional individuals available to perform these duties. That's what I'm afraid to say has happened with a particular experience that was related to me. A young lady, after seven years of study abroad, accompanied her husband to Manitoba and landed here under the immigration nominee program. She felt that it was going to be a very quick entry into her chosen profession for which she was very skilled and trained.

However, that particular professional body chose that they would put up a number of roadblocks for her to start her practice, because I believe at that time that that professional body was trying to restrict individuals in that profession, because maybe, in their consideration, ther e was an abundance of professionals in this particular field. Now, I'm not naming this particular profession because I believe it is being looked at, and I hope that the consideration is addressed.

But the restriction, I felt it almost comical, because this individual was from the United Kingdom where, in fact, all of her training and all of her practice time was conducted in the English language. But upon entry into Manitoba here, do you know what, Madam Deputy Speaker? That particular individual was prevented from getting her accreditation because they wanted her to take English. This to me is beyond my comprehension as to why this professional body would require this young lady to take English before she got her accreditation.

We have to start wondering why, because, obviously, in speaking with the individual, there was no impediment to her speaking of the English language.

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1591 In fact, she was very, very understandable and very professional in the expression of her dismay as to the professional body to which she was attempting to join here in Manitoba. Now, earlier this year, during the election campaign, recognizing that we need to have an opportunity to review professional body deter- minations, it was our position that this could very ably be undertaken by the Ombudsman's office with the addition of professional staff to the Ombudsman's office.

It was certain, and I remain certain that that could have been the most cost-effective, efficient manner by which to address consideration regarding the concerns such as I've just made example of. However, in any event, the government has chosen to effectively create by legislation more bureaucracy than I believe would have taken place if our election promise–had we had the opportunity to fulfil our election promise.

Now, in examination of The Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act, I do believe there is merit, and I am looking forward to listening to individuals that will come forward during the committee process in address of this legislation. I do believe it has merit. It is perhaps a little bit more cumbersome than I would have liked to see or our party would have liked to see.

But I know also, too, that there are a number of yet to be recognized professional organizations that are knocking at the government's door asking for legislation to provide for their professional body to become the accrediting organization.

So we need to have some type of mechanism by which to oversee the entry into professional organizations and also to safeguard those individuals that are wanting to join professional bodies here in the province of Manitoba, thereby providing a fair and equitable assessment of their skills and abilities to the benefit of not only the professional organization but to the benefit of all Manitobans.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I personally support the undertaking of the government in this fashion, although I leave my debate this afternoon with the cautionary note as to whether or not this is, in fact, the most cost-effective and efficient manner in which to scrutinize the professional body's accreditation of individuals. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. * (15:40) Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): I appreciate the opportunity to put some comments on the record regarding Bill 19.

I do, certainly, recognize my colleagues put some very valuable points on the record regarding this proposed legislation. It appears to me that it is, in relative terms, a bit of a feel-good bill going forward. Obviously, it's intended to be umbrella legislation, if you will, to cover a number of the professions throughout Manitoba. I guess we know that that particular list, that

schedule that will appear, that particular list can be amended from time to time. So it will, over the course of time–eventually we'll be adding more and more professions that fall under this particular legislation. So that's always an interesting concept. You never know just exactly what organizations might fall under this umbrella legislation. It would appear to me from the outside that the province, the government, will now have an opportunity to keep a very close eye on these various regulated professions.

There will be, certainly, it looks like annual reporting requirements coming forward from the organizations. Obviously, the government will have an opportunity to address those particular professions, how they are regulated in terms of the scope of the regulations that they have. So, of course, we always have a little concern when the government gets involved in regulating any organization to some degree. The interesting thing, I believe, going forward here will be the actual committee presentation.

We certainly look forward to seeing how the organi- zations really feel about this particular umbrella legislation going forward. I think the key point here, too–and we look at the explanatory note dealing with this particular legislation–it's very important that the whole idea of transparen cy, the objectivity and the impartiality play a very important role in this legislation. We feel that's very important. The Member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Faurschou) talked about some different situations that come forward.

I think it's important that these organizations be very open and transparent in terms of their dealings with their members. The bill also makes reference to the appointment of a fair registration practices commissioner. I hope that that's not necessarily someone that will be there as in a regulatory capacity. I would hope that it's someone that could be there in a more positive role and that they could work with the various professions, the various practices and actually provide some positive information, some positive

1592 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 23, 2007 feedback so that it can facilitate the development of those particular professions. In looking at what Ontario is doing in regard to this particular situation in regulating professions, Ontario talks about establishing an access centre. I think this could be a very positive item going forward. I think it's something that we should consider here in Manitoba as we develop this legislation.

This access centre, my understanding is it will help foreign-trained professionals retain and get the information and, of course, referrals that they need to work in their profession. I think that's very important in Manitoba, in particular. We do have quite a variety of immigrants coming into the province a nd they do play a very important role in Manitoba. We know we are losing some people outside of Manitoba, a lot of professionals leaving the province. So it's important that we do whatever we can to get professionals back to fill those vacancies.

In particular, we know we've got a serious situation in the health-care field where there's just about every specialist and every specialty department that you can name having a chronic shortage of staff. So I think, if handled correctly, this could be a very important aspect to possibly retaining professionals and, furthermore, the other side of it, is actually getting professionals into Manitoba and getting them actively involved in the work force. The important part about getting them actively involved in the work force is the time line it takes to get them involved in the work force.

We know that there's a lot of red tape and regulations involved in terms of getting people here and then getting them actually into the work force. I'm hopeful, Madam Deputy Speaker, that this particular legislation will actually facilitate getting people here, qualifying them under whatever profession they will be looking for and then getting them, as soon as possible, into the work force because, as I said, we have a chronic shortage of some of these professionals.

Again, just getting back briefly to Ontario in terms of their access centre, they talk about it serving as a centre for excellence on internships and mentorships for educational institutions. Again, it can be an avenue to have an organization that can actually really do the groundwork, getting the people to where they want to be and dealing with education facilities and dealing with the business community, really to get them out there. This is kind of where the rubber hits the road, if you like, the actual getting things done on the local level. We hope that this process doesn't get tied up in bureaucracy.

We know it can be. This government has done in the past, brought out legislation that makes people feel good. They feel things are moving ahead, but at the end of the day we really have to make sure that these positions do get filled, that people do come to the province and they fill in with the roles that we need here in Manitoba. So I do think that this can be a very positive legislation going forward.

We hope that the government will certainly pay attention in committee when people do come forward and, again, make sure that the resources are there to help facilitate getting people into the proper positions and dealing with the regulations concerning the various professions as well. Just another cautionary note, I think, and the Member for Morris (Mrs. Taillieu) did raise it, sometimes we're a little concerned about the detail in regulations. Hopefully, there won't be too much there to make the process too cumbersome.

So those are just some of the issues that I wanted to raise for the government in moving this bill forward. We certainly hope things will work out, as we do know we have a shortage of some of the professionals in Manitoba, and we want to work wherever we can with the Province to try to address those and move them forward. So I just thank you for the opportunity to say a few words on Bill 19. Mrs.

Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Madam Deputy Speaker, I just want to take a few moments to put a few comments on the record about Bill 19, The Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act and indicate that the issue of recognizing foreign credentials is certainly not a new issue. We just go back a little in history and look at the reason the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation was changed to the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship back in the early '90s, was because we had a Premier that was very supportive of working toward– [interjection] The Member for Burrows (Mr.

Ma rtindale) indicates that I bet you were the minister, and, yes, I was, but the direction that I was given when the name of the department was changed was to aggressively pursue an immigration agreement with the federal government, so that we would have some control through a provincial nominee process of bringing immigrants to our province.

October 23, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1593 We worked very hard to accomplish that and we did manage to achieve getting that immigration agreement signed. I want to commend the govern- ment today for continuing through with aggressively pursuing immigration to our province. I think we've had considerable success, and it is as a result of that agreement being signed and Manitoba having some control over bringing immigrants to our province.

But, you know, back then, and that was 15 years ago, the issue of recognizing foreign credentials was a significant issue, and that was one of the issues that many new immigrants and those that were involved in bringing immigrants to our province had concern with. Here we are, 15 years later, and we're still discussing and still talking about the same issues and the same concerns. Very little progress has been mad

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-1-24b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 1st hansardpdf 24b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	babd4b6881e31ab9466f729898c89db459bce94f

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