Manitoba Hansard — 10 June 1998 (Sitting 62, 36th Legislature, 4th Session)

36-4-62

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session- Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVIII No. 62 • 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 10, 1998 ISSN 0542-5492

Member ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Alben DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FAURSCHOU, David FILM ON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATH LIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEWMAN, David, Hon. PENNER, Jack PITURA, Frank, Hon. PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RADCLIFFE, Mike, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack, Hon. RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis SALE, Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON. Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON, Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Rob! in-Russell Selkirk Concordia Anhu r-Virden Steinbach Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Interlake Brandon East Ponage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norben St. Johns Elmwood Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Osborne Assiniboia St. James River East Riel Emerson Morris Lac du Bonnet River Heights Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupensland Gladstone Crescentwood Broadway Kirkfield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Rossmere Tunle Mountain Fon Garry Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C.

P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. Lib. Lib. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

4229 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, June 10, 1998 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources Second Report Mr. Peter Dyck (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources): I beg to present the Second Report of the Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources presents the following as its Second Report.

Your committee met on Tuesday, June 9, 1998, atJO a .. m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider the annual reports of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal years ended February 28, 1997, and February 28, 1998. Previously, your committee had met on Tuesday, May 13, 1997, atJO a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider the February 28, 1997, annual report. At the June 9, 1998, meeting, your committee elected Mr. Dyck as its Chairperson. Mr.

Jack Zacharias, president and chief executive officer, provided such information as was requested with respect to the annual reports and business of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation. Your committee has considered the annual report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the year ended February 28, 1997, and has adopted the same as presented. Mr. Dyck: I move, seconded by the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the commit tee be received. Motion agreed to. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 204-- The Graffiti Control and Consequential Amendments Act Mr.

Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford), that leave be given to introduce Bill 204, The Graffiti Control and Consequential Amendments Act;

Loi sur Ia lutte contre les graffitis et modi fications correlatives, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Mackintosh: This is deterrent legislation to deal with the growing assault on our neighbourhoods and properties of graffiti by providing such consequences for offenders as graffiti removal and cover-up, a minimum fine, restitution, a minimum number of hours of community service, as well as suspension of driver s lic ences and parental responsibil ity where restitution has not been made. Motion agreed to.

Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members firstly to the Speaker's Gall ery where we have with us today Mr. Zhou Xingbao, Consul General of the People's Republic of China.

4230 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June I 0, 19 98 On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. Als o seated in the public gallery, we have twenty three Grade 9 students from Rosenort School under the direction of Mr. Grant Plett. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Mi nis ter of Government Services (Mr. Pitura). We also have twenty-five Grade 5 students from Lord Roberts Community School under the dir ection of Mrs. Terry Welsh. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford).

Also, thi rteen Grade 5 students from Sis ter MacNamara School under the direction of Ms. Karla Yall its. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Broadway (Mr. Santos). And sixteen Grade 5 students from Sis ter MacNamara School under the dir ection of Ms. Louise Chudy. This school is also located in the constituency of the honourable member for Broadway. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. * (1 335) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Elected Speaker Government Support Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the Speaker belongs to all members of the House, not just the government but also to all opposition members. In 19 97, the Al berta Legisla ture proceeded to have an ele cted Speaker with the secret ballot, and just a couple of weeks ago in 19 98, Nova Scotia proceeded to have an el ected Speaker through a secret ballo t.

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier: will he support the election of a Speaker in this Chamber, and will he support a private member New Democratic bill that will bring us into the 21s t Century for an elected Speaker in the Chamber? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I am on record as saying that I believe that that is a matter that should be the subject of a policy announcement prior to the next election campaign, that that is something that I am open to consideration of.

I understand that it can be accomplis hed in Manitoba by a simple change of our rules, so there is no need even to pass legisla tion. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the United Kingdom, England, has an elected Speaker in their Chamber. The House of Commons in the late '80s moved towards an el ected Speaker. It is now a race between Manitoba and Newfoundla nd to be the last province in Canada to move away from a patronage Speaker to a duly ele cted democratic Speaker. I would like to ask the Premier, because it is now before the election I would suppose, to have an elected Speaker by secret ballot of all MLAs.

What is the Premier waiting for? Does he want to be last to move into an el ected Speaker and keep a patronage Speaker in place? Mr. Filmon: I remind the member opposite, and theatrics aside, that our Speaker has been sel ected in the same fashion as all previous Speakers in the his tory of this Legislature. Indeed, my recollection is that you, Madam Speaker, were elected unanimously, and in fact, I was very proud to escort you to your chair with the Leader of the Opposition on the other side, demonstrating the support of all members for your selection.

So I think we should elim inate the theatrics and deal real istically with the situation. Mr. Doer: We look forward to being the second-last province. Hopefully the Premier will not wait much longer, Madam Speaker. Winni peg Child and Family Services Workload Review Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I have a new question to the government. Madam Speaker, we have been raising the issues of workloads in Child and Famil y Services for the last four years, and we have been raising the issues of the workload and stress with Crown attorneys over the last year.

We have called on an external operational review for Crown attorneys, and yesterday in the House, although the mi nister did not proceed to our recommendation, he did say he would

June 10, 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4231 be meeting with Crown attorneys to try to deal with this situa tion. I would like to ask the Premier: will he ask his Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) to meet with the front-line social workers in Child and Family Services to deal with the crushing workloads that these workers have, to deal with the crushing challenges that our kids have in our communities? Will he take some initiative to deal with the workloads of Child and Family Services workers, and will he make that commitment in the Chamber today? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the member opposite makes the case, as usual, by fuzzifying the facts. There is a vast difference between the Crown attorneys who work directly for the Department of Justice, our civil servants whose ultima te authority in management is the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews), and the Child and Family Services agencies which are independent agencies funded by government, with not only their own management but their own board of directors who select that management.

So the employing authority for those social workers, for those front-line workers, is in fact the management and the board of that agency. That has been explained to the members opposite when they have raised this issue over the past week, that that agency is undertaking a strategic pla nning process that will involve the management, the directors and indeed the employees of those Child and Family Services agencies, and that is the way the process should be.

We know what things were like in the old days when the members opposite from the cabinet room used to set the A utopac rates, used to get into the involvement directly of management of the corporation, where the mini ster was the chair of Autopac. That is why the taxpayers are faced with a $2-million lawsuit because of the manner in which they handled things by political ly making decisions that were inappropriate. We have a proper system in place, and we will follow the lines of responsibil ity and authority . *

(1340) Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, it is this Premier who brought in legislation to deal with the creation of the existing Child and Family Services branch of Winnipeg. It is this Premier who took all the communi ty-based wings of the Child and Family Services of Winnipeg with hundreds of volu nteers and combined it into one agency. It is this Premier who has been responsible for 71,000 kid days in hotels and short-term shelters in the last year. It is this Premier who is responsible for the care and custody of children under The Child and Family Services Act.

He cannot wash his hands of his responsibility, and I say shame, shame on him for washing his hands-for the kids of this province. I would like to ask the Premier: does it not make just as much sense to show urgency, to deal with the crushing workloads of caseloads for Child and Family Services workers and have a solution in place in two to three weeks, as we alle gedly will have for the Crown attorneys? Does it not make just as much sense to have prevention, to prevent kids from being taken into care, to prevent kids from having to go to the courts?

Does it not make more sense or equal sense to have those resources in place in the next two to three weeks with leadership from this government, which is sadly lacking by this Premier? Mr. Filmon: Well, Madam Speaker, I remember when the member opposite was the president of the MGEU, and he was a very significant critic of the former New Democratic government's experiment, which he called the Philadelphia model, of decentralizing Child and Family Services.

He used to tell me what a terrible system they were creating by foll owing the Philadelphia experiment in those days, and now he is holding that up as the model that we should go back to. That is the kind of two-faced approach that we get from the Leader of the Opposition who says anything any time, if he thinks he can make some cheap political points out of it. That is not the way we are going to go in this province. Mr. Doer: The Premier did not answer the question, because I asked a very serious question about the issue of kids in care, the 71,000 child days in short-term shelters and short-term hotel stays.

I asked questions and we have been asking questio ns for the last three or four weeks about the crushing workloads.

4232 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10 , 19 98 I am pl eased the Premier has now decided to stand up and answer questions on this issue, because he has been ducking for some three to four weeks.

Now that he is answering questions on the issue, which we think is a step forward, will he not acknowledge that preventing kids from coming into the justice system through having enough resources to allow chil dren to stay and have adequate care in the community, to have enough resources for proper workloads for our Child and Family Services agencies makes just as much sense as putting the resources in place to ensure that our justice system operates in an expeditious way in our system? Mr.

Filmon: Madam Speaker, I may not have answered dir ectly the member's question, but I certainl y identified his two-faced approach to issues, and that is what is embarrassing him right now. Madam Speaker, indeed * (1 345) Some Honour able Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, plea se. Mr. Filmon: Still in the lead, Gary. Madam Speaker, indeed this government believes that it is important to set up a system that serves the needs of our children and our families in Manitoba and that protects those indivi duals. It is a very impor tant responsibility which we do not take lightly.

That is why, having given the authority and the responsibility to Child and Family Services agencies to develop not only the network, the plans and the foundation for serving those chil dren's needs, we ought to make sure that we observe their strategic planning exercise and that we ensure that, in taking our evidence and in taking our direction, we use the best infonnation possible, that infonnation that will come out of the strategic plann ing exercise that will then di ctate what dir ections we take and indeed what resources we apply to the task at hand, and that is what we will do.

Winn ipeg Child and Family Services Workload Review Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): I would like to remind the Premier and the Minis ter of Family Services that the reason we are asking these questions is that a child died and there is an inqu est going on, and it has been very clearly shown in testimony that one of the reasons that this child died was that front-line workers have too many cases. The Premier refers to the strategic pla nning process.

The workers asked the CEO of Winnip eg Child and Family Services to have a workload review and they were told, no, that that was not part of the strategi c planning process. So I would like to ask the Min ister of Family Services: will she initia te a workload review, because it could save lives in the future and because the testimony suggests that that is one of the reasons that this child died? So will the Minis ter of Famil y Services init iate a workload review? Hon.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I thank my honourable friend for the question, but I would like to caution him that we are in the process of an inq uest, and I am not at liber ty to discuss any issues around that inquest. I cannot take the lib erty that the member for the- Some Honour able Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Mrs. Mitchelso n: I want to indic ate again that I am not at liberty, like my honourable friend is at li berty, to take certain pieces of an inquest and speak publicly on those issues.

I, as the min ister responsible, have to wait for the final report from the inquest and the recommen dations that mi ght come forward from that inquest, but, Madam Speaker, we have not been standing still. In my department, we have restructured and reorgan ized and certainly have rewritten standards and ensured that there is a greater compliance focus from my department on the Child and Family Services ag encies. I know that there is new leadership at the Winnip eg agency, and they are going through a strategic plan ning process.

I know that the new CEO of the agency wants to ensure that chil dren are protected in all cases, and he is working towards the end result of better services for chil dren and families in Winnip eg. Mr. Martindale: I would like to ask the Min ister of Family Services if she is saying that not only will she

June 10 , 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4233 not comment on the inq uest but that she is prepared to do absolutely nothing, ins tead of imp lementing a workl oad review which would be an internal process. She does not have to say anything; we just want her to do something. Will she do it now? Mrs. Mitchelson: I think I have tried to indic ate in my answers over the last several weeks that indeed there is a process in place to look at the way child and family services are del ivered in the city of Winnip eg.

Another piece that has been ongoing since February is a bringing together of many members of the aboriginal community, given that the high numbers of child ren in the city of Winnip eg are of aboriginal background and ortgm. We have brought together the AMC, the Manit oba Metis Federation, the Social Planning Council, the Aboriginal Council of Wi nnipeg, the Winnip eg Child and Family Services agency to look at more appropriate ways to deal with the issue of increasing aboriginal children in the agency. So, Madam Speaker, we are not standing sti ll.

We are moving to try to ensure that the services and the appropriate services are there and available for chi ldren and families that need them. * { 135 0) Mr. Martindale: Madam Speaker, will the Min ister of Family Services who surely knows that, since baby Sophia 's death in January 19 96, 16 childr en have been killed in Manitoba, 11 of them at the hands of parents or guardians, is she saying that things are so bad and the caseload is so great that there are legal foul-ups in the process and the result is that people are getting custody of child ren where they should not get custody?

Is the minis ter saying she is willi ng to do nothing about this, in stead of having a workload review? Mrs. Mitchelson: I can ind ica te to my honourable friend that the new CEO at the Winnip eg age ncy is very aware of the issues in the Child and Family Services system. I have said many times, Madam Speaker, that, no, we do not have a perfect system. I beli eve that the agency, with its independent board, does need to make the strateg ic planning decisions that will im prove the services for child ren and families in Winnip eg. I am confident that they are working towards that end goal.

Post) Report Recommendations Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): When the Chil dren and Youth Secretariat was created approximately four years ago, the original mandate was to implement and co-ordina te the impl ementation of the Postl report. This government is picking and choosing which recommendations to impl ement, and the recommen dations they are not imp lementing are turning out to be lif e-and-death recommendations.

I want to ask the min ister to explain why her depart ment has not follo wed the recommendation of the Post I report to increase the prevention expenditures to 10 to 15 percent and the family support expenditures to 35 to 40 percent of the budget. These were not to be pilot projects; they were to be system changes. Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I thank my honourable friend for that question.

I know that we are going to be into the Estima tes of the Child and Youth Secretariat later on today, and we will have an opportunity to di scuss in detai l the accompl ishments of the Chi ldren and Youth Secretariat, the number of recommendations from the Post) report that have been imple mented and the action that we continue to take. I want to ind icate that over $20 milli on that was put in this year's budget for childr en and famili es on the prevention and early intervention side is new money and new initiatives.

My honourable friends sometimes criticize pilot projects, but we have indic ated that those pilot projects are projects that are starting off with stable funding that will be continued year after year. But the reason they are pilo ts is that we want to eval uate, on an ongoing basis, how well we are doing, what the outcomes are, how families are being served better. If we need to adjust the way we do those programs- Some Honour able Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minis ter, to quickly complete her response.

4234 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June I 0, 19 98 Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Our government has clearly indi cated that those will be ongoing programs, but we want to evaluate and measure the outcomes on a regular basis. The imp ortant piece for our government is that the programs work. . Winn ipeg Child and Family Services Caseloads-Protection Ms.

Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): I would like to ask the minis ter if she will acknowledge or does she know that what is actually going on in her department in Child and Family Services agencies is that staff intended to do prevention work and family support are being drawn into protection work because the caseloads for protection are so high. Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I know that in the past the whole focus on prevention has been with the Child and Family Services agencies.

Madam Speaker, our Families Fir st document and the consultation we did with the community indi cated that community wanted to take a greater responsibili ty, that there were many people out there in our communities that had some of the answers around how to prevent and do early intervention so that childr en did not need the services of the Child and Family Services system.

The new money that we have put in is going to community, based on-and I know my honourable friends may be critical, but I know in many of their constituencies there are community organizations that have received the funding from the $20 mil lion that we have put in place to do the early interventi on and the prevention. We have to ensure that the Child and Family Services agencies are working with those community organ izations.

The prevention is the responsibil ity for all Manitobans, not just one segment of Manitoba, and we need to work together to ensure that the new programs are complementing what the agency is doin g. * (1 355) Ms. Cerilli: My final question for the same min ister is: will she admit or does she know that any budget increases in her department intended for prevention are being spent on protection work, in hotels and for the hig h caseloads for the numbers of cases of kids in care and protection in Manitoba? Mrs.

Mitchels on: I want to indic ate that we are funding the Winnip eg agency at $63 mil lion this year, signi ficantly up from when the NDP were in govern ment, over double - Some Honour able Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Mrs. Mitchels on: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

We have over doubled the amount of money that we provide to the Winnipeg agency in the years that we have been in government, but over and above that this year, there is another $20 milli on in new money for community organizations, many times in partnerships with our Child and Family Services agenc ies, to do the early in tervention and the prevention that is needed to ensure that children get off to a healthy start to life, chi ldren have the opportunities, even when they come from disa dvantaged famil ies, to grow and thrive, enter our school system ready to learn and become contributing members of society.

Education System Fund ing-Property Taxes Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Min ister of Finance. Yesterday I was quite dis appoi nted in the Mi nis ter of Education's (Mrs. Mcintosh) response to the question. In essence, it reaffirmed the government's position of do nothing and defending the great status quo with respect to the school divisions. There are many inequities that are there as a result of this government's inaction. I am asking and appealing to the Minis ter of Fin ance to address one of those.

Over the years, north end residents have paid mil lions of dol lars more in property taxes as a di rect result of this government's inaction. Because the Minis ter of Education refuses to take any action, is the Minis ter of Fina nce prepared to address that particular issue? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Mini ster of Finance): Madam Speaker, the member for Inkster has asked similar questions in the past, and we have had discussions

June 10 , 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4235 about the make-up of our property tax bills in Manitoba, in his constituency. I think, as he knows, about half of the property tax bill does rela te to education tax, and of that education tax, rough ly half of it is levied by the province through the education support levy. We have basical ly maint ained that levy at the same amount over the last many budgets. We have not increased the education support levy at all in the province of Manitoba.

The other half is the special levy which is levied by the individual school divisions, and those are decisions that the individual school divisions make in terms of the programs they feel they need to offer, the priorities that they put in place. In this last budget, we did increase funding for education in Manitoba, we did increase funding for those school divisions, and that is obviously of benefit to those school divisions. * (1 400) Mr.

Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, what I am asking the mi nister is to recognize that there are a number of people that live in the north end, all north end residents almo st, that are paying a dispropor tionate amount of money towards school division tax. My question to the Minister of Finance: because the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) and this government are not taking action on the school division issue, is the Minister of Finance prepared to address the inequities of the tax burden that north end residents are having to pay because of this government's failure to address this issue of division alignment? Mr.

Stefanson : Again, Madam Speaker, I believe the education support levy, which is under the jurisdiction of the provincial government, is levied uniformly across Manitoba. It is the special levy. It is a decision of the individual school divisions based on their priorities, their expenditures, their coll ective bargaining with the teachers and other emplo yees, the programs they want to put in pla ce and so on.

So those are decisions made by individual school boards right across this province, and I am wondering where the member for Inkster is heading and what individual suggestions he has in this area if he is suggesting there are inequities. Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Finance to acknowledge the way in which we finance health care, as an example, if you like, and education is another social service that is being provided.

There are mechanisms that this government has, and my question is: why, through the years, has this government refused to acknowledge those mechanisms and address this very serious issue where north end residents are paying an unfair portion of financing education? Why is this government refusing to use those mechanisms? Mr.

Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, I would welcome the suggestions from the member as to what mechanisms he is referring to, but I again remind him that, of the education levy on our property taxes, roughly half of that is the education support levy, and we have not increased that levy over virt ually all of our budgets. So, again, the decision that we directly impact in terms of the education support levy, that levy has been held uniform for the last several budgets. It has not increased the property taxes of individual Manitobans or the people in his consti tuency.

The special levy, rough ly 25 percent of our property taxes, is the levy that is there for the autonomy of individual school divisions to give them a revenue source for the priorities that they believe need to be addressed. Again, if there are adjustments taking place rela tive to the school division he represents to other school divisions in Winnipeg or across Manitoba, many of those are reflected as a result of the individual decisions being made by that school board. Pharmaceuticals Costs-Charge to Manufacturers Mr.

Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, we have before the Legisla ture two bills that provide the Department of Health with the authority to charge manufacturers costs. In the province of Ontario, the Ontario government has put in pla ce a regu lation that permits the government to charge to manufacturers of drugs the cost of any projected overruns in the use of drugs that are on the formula ry in Ontario. My question to the Minister of Health: is the Minister of Health anticipating planning or is it part of his process that the government of Manitoba is

4236 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June I 0, 19 98 simi larly planning to charge manufacturers costs for overuti liz ation, overuse of drugs that are lis ted on the formulary or are listed in a plan by manufacturers that goes to the Province of Manitoba. Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member's reference to the bills in the Legislature with respect to the cost of processing their appl ications to be incl uded in our formulary is part of the cost-recovery process there. The question with respect to the policy announce ment in Ontario was a very apt one.

That has not been a matter that we have contempla ted in our plannin g. This is a policy init iative in Ontario that is somewhat new. We have not had an opportunity to discuss it with the Ontario Health min ister as to their rationale, logic and detailed planning behind it. But I can tell the member at this parti cular time, it is not a particular matter that has been under study or review within the Min istry of Health. Pharmaceuticals-Multiple Sclerosis Coverage Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my suppl ementary to the mini ster with respect to pharmaceuticals.

There is no doubt there has been a major delay with respect to the util ization and getting the Betaseron program off the ground and running, doing a disservice to those patients who requir e it. Regardless of who the minis ter blames for it, can the minis ter outline for me whether or not he will now put in place a plan for those other MS drugs that are coming on stream so that those victims and patients who require those drugs will not have to go through the delays in order to get the much-needed drugs that they requir e with respect to MS, or for that matter, other ailmen ts, Madam Speaker? Hon.

Darren Praznik (Mini ster of Health): Madam Speaker, I apprecia te the question from the honourable member for Kil donan with respect to Betaseron. It is not a matter of blaming any individual groups. The plan, of course, was to have the MS Clinic host this particular process. They have one physicia n; when we started. they had two. That has created some difficulty, because the case with Betaseron and with other potential drugs that may have approval for the formula ry is that they do require a physician to be involved in the process.

Part of the challenge that our department is working on with the MS community today is to ensure that we have sufficient physicia ns who are part of these program s. I am sure the member would agree, that is, the recruitment to the MS Cli nic is not a particular matter over which he or I haye dir ect control, but it is the area that has to be addressed. We hope that there will be sufficient resources to deal with future drugs that may be approved. Mr.

Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my question then for the mi nis ter: is he putting in place a process at the department and through the formulary program to ensure that these new drugs that are coming on stream can be expeditiously approved and a system put in place so that we do not have the wait not only for the approval that took a long time, but as well as for the implemen tation that is also taking a long time? Mr. Praznik: Madam Spea ker, the concern that the member has in this area is one that I certainly share.

That is why, in fact, we have made changes to the formula ry approval process that has allowed for a greater number of approval time periods during the course of the year so that we can make adjustments on a much speedier basis. That is also the reason why we imple mented a yellow lig ht approval process for drugs that are in that gray area, in essence, of not knowing whether they should be approved or not. The comm ittee then can recommend a test or pi lot. Betaseron is the first.

One thing that we are learning out ofthis is we obviously have to have a host for those pi lots that has a sufficient physician base to handle the demand, and that is something we are attempting to work on with the appropria te bodies. But I apprecia te the member's concern. It is one that I share. Man itoba Telecom Services Rural Service Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, evidence mounts daily that the government misled Manitobans seriously in their promise of no harmful conseq uences from the sale of MTS. The CRTC has said what every broker knew, that the company was

June 1 0, 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4237 sold much too cheaply. We learned a couple of weeks ago that rates are going to have to go up $38 milli on, $6 a phone, just to cover the income taxes as a result of priva tiz ation. Now it is clear that our concerns about service to rural and northern customers of the telephone compa ny are being realized. They face ruinous increases. I want to- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Hon.

James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I think I cannot be accused of intervening too often in this place with respect to the management of the Question Period, but honourable members know, on both sides, that there are Question Period guidelin es: We are reminded about them almost every day. I could be talking about the honourable member who is on his feet now or one or two others this afternoon who have been asking questions. There is a tendency not to follow the guidelines. One ofthose guidelines calls for a well -drawn sentence as part of your

preamble, or another one calls for not being repetitive when it comes to asking the questions, asking one question at a time and not- sometimes we have heard as many as three or four or five questions at one issue. I think the honourable member here-[inter jection] The honourable member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) says he has not got to his question, but he had comple ted three comple te state ments before he even- An Honour able Member: It was one sentence. Mr. McCrae: No, it was not. It was three separate sentences. I was counting them, and Hansard will bear me out.

Are we going to get three questions to follow? Madam Speaker, that is my point of order. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable government House leader, indeed, I would agree. Our question, accord ing to Beauchesne 409, should be a question, should seek information, be brief and comply with the rules and practices of the House. *** Madam Speaker: I would ask that the honourable member for Crescentwood ple ase pose his question now. Mr. Sale: I will try to be brief.

Will the Mi nister responsible for telecommun ications tell the House why he did not even bother to go to Thompson to represent the needs of northern Manitobans and remote and rural users of the telephone system when the Mi nis ter responsible for the Saskatchewan system was there in person? Why could he not even drive down the street and use the video link? Hon.

Glen Findlay (Mini ster of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, I am sure the member will agree we had a very reasoned and responsible submission to make to CRTC with regard to hi gh-cost areas, and a staff person, the Telecom policy officer, made the presentation. It would have been no different if I had been there. The position was thoug ht-out, presented on paper and submit ted to the commission, which they will review and respond to over the course of time. * (1410 ) Mr.

Sale: In the presentation, why does the minis ter feel it necessary to say, and I quote: No less impor tant to the interests of those living and working in rural and remote communities is the knowledge that the deliv ery of their service will not be terminated. Why is he concerned that their service may be termina ted, Madam Speaker? Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, I am sure everybody in this House is concerned about where costs will go in terms of delivering services, basic services and high quality basic services, to citizens all over Manitoba.

I do not think it is fair that MTS or other Stentor companies should be required to pay the extra costs to get the last mile. All pla yers in the telecom ind ustry should be part and parcel of paying the costs to do that, because they want to run their messages over those lines. So that is why we are making the presentation, to be sure that both the basic telecom providers and the citizens receiving that telecommunication service are treated fairly and reasonably in the overall evolution of the telecommun ications ind ustry in Canada.

4238 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June I 0, 19 98 Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, is the government, then, finally acknowledging that its theories that markets can do everything, that there is no problem when we just pri vatize, everybody will get service, were in fact wrong, that we need to find ways of providing fair, equitable and affordable services for all Manitobans and that the market cannot do that? Is he now finally admitting that? Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, the answer is an emphatic no.

Because CRTC, as a regulator, has introduced competition to the country which has led to a 70 percent reduction in long-distance rates which every consumer benefits from, it is in the process of rebalancing. I can guarantee you, compare apples to apples across this country, Manitoba citizens, whether in the city of Winnipeg or rural locations, have the lowest total cost telecommunication services in the country when you consider the reduction in long distance along with the increased cost for local service. The evolution has been positive for the consumers of Manitoba.

Desktop Management Services Bidding Process-Vendor Presence Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Min ister of Government Services and concerns the $I 50-million computer contract between this go vernment and SHL and the hardware contract for the 7,000 computers. Unsuccessful bidders are looking for answers from this minis ter as to how vendor presence was defined, which accounted for 25 percent of the points assigned.

They want to know why vendor presence counted for 25 percent of the points, which heavily favoured IBM, and the price of the equipment provided counted for only 15 percent, which again favoured IBM, which was one of the hig hest-priced bidders. Will he now come out of hiding and give the bidders in this House a definition of vendor presence so we might try to understand why IBM was given such a helping hand? Hon.

Frank Pitura (Mini ster of Government Services): I would just like to clarif y for the honourable member's information that he has indica ted that cost was a 50 percent requirement; it is actually a total of 35 percent of the total evaluation criteria.

If the member is talking about vendor presence, there is also vendor stabil ity, there is level of technological in vestment, investment in research and development, del ivery capabil ities and commitments and perf ormance bonding, which all contributed to the general aspect of the general quali fications area, so vendor presence was a very small part of the overall general quali fications. I look forward to the member in discussion in Estimates and going through this in a much more detailed way. Bidding Process-Hardware Mr.

Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the min ister what he confirmed: that several companies, including at least one Manitoba company, quoted lower prices than IBM for the actual hardware provided. Hon. Frank Pitura (Mini ster of Government Services): With regard to the overall contract, I have to remind the honourable member opposite that the Province of Manitoba entered into a contract with System house for the provision of services, and that is totally a desktop management service.

With respect to the contract that was signed between Systemhouse and IBM, that was a separate contract and is part of their ongoing comm itment or their commit ment within the contract to the Province of Manitoba to supply the province with the necessary hardware to make sure that we had a totally managed desktop environment. Mr. Maloway: The minis ter just refuses to answer any of the questions. I would like to ask him a final supplem entary. Some Honour able Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Will the honourable member ple ase pose his question now. Mr.

Maloway: I would lik e the min ister to tell this Ho use whether he can confirm that a B.C. company was actual ly the lowest-priced bidder for the actual hardware provided? Mr. Pitura: I would just like to re-emphasize again for my honourable friend that, with regard to the overall

June I 0, 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4239 contract that was issued with the Province of Manitoba, that contract is between Systemhouse and the Province of Manitoba. Systemhouse- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Dave Cbomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, I cite Ci tation 417 - Madam Speaker: On a point of order? Mr. Cbomiak: On a point of order-that ind icates answers to questions should be concise and not provoke debate. Madam Speaker, I have patiently li stened through three questions by the member for Elmwood, which the min ister has refused to answer.

The mini ster may not have to answer the question, but he should not go off and provoke debate. I remind you of your earlier ruling with respect to questions by our members when you admonished us to get to the point and get to the question. I ask you to call the government to order and ask the mi nis ter to do lik ewise. Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order? Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Yes, Madam Speaker.

I too was lis tening very carefully, as was the honourable member for Kildonan, and frankly at the moment he rose on his point of order there was no dis order in this House. People were listening carefully to what the honourable minis ter was saying. He was not provocative. There was no debate that was being provoked, certainly not by what the Min ister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura) was saying. The Min ister of Government Services was indeed dealing with the issue being raised by the honourable member for Elmwood. I find no point of order here, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Order, please.

On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Ki ldonan (Mr. Chomia k), indeed the honourable member did have a point of order. I would remind the honourable min ister to respond to the question asked. ••• Madam Speaker: The honourable min ister, to complete his response. Mr. Pitura: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would just add to my honourable friend across the way that we are in the middle of the Estimates process, and I look forward to having further discussion during that process with my honourable friend. Mining Reserve Fund Headquarters- Lynn Lake Mr.

Gerard Jennissen (Fiin Flon): My question is for the Minis ter of Energy and Mines. The min ister will recall I wrote him a month ago sugge sting that the Mining Reserve Fund account could be headq uartered in Lynn Lake. Since then he and I have received support for this proposal from many sources, and the min ister has said he was seriously considering the proposal. Contrary to the suggestion made yesterday by CIBC PR officers, Lynn Lake is not about to get a private A TM and still Lynn Lake needs banking service, not extra charges to cash cheques.

Could the min ister suggest what progress he has made regard ing the proposal to move the Minin g Reserve Fund to Lynn Lake? Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, on the face of it, it sounds lik e a nice convenient and efficient solution to the di lemma of attracting a financial institution to the commu nity. The rationale, of course, behind the threshold amount for deposit by the credit ·union movement is that they want to ensure that there is sufficient capacity for the community to, in ef fect, own, operate and support in local community building ways, the financial institution.

So to simply move money in is not the answer, but if they were close to a threshold and a modest deposit, or what would be a relatively signifi cant deposit were to be made, we are prepared to look at that as part of the overall solution, but it is a complex problem.

4240 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 1998 Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. *(1420 ) Committee Changes Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Point Douglas with committee changes. Mr. George Dickes (Point Douglas): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Broad way (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) for Elmw ood (Mr. Maloway); Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) for Osborne (Ms. McGifford), for Thursday, June 11, 1998, for 10 a.m. Motion agreed to.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Gimli with committee changes . Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments for Thursday, 10 a.m., June 11, 1998, be amended as follows: the member for Rossmere (Mr. Toews) for the member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings); the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) for the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey); the member for Gimli (Mr. Helw er) for the member for Springfield (Mr. Findla y); and the member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr.

Faurschou) for the member for Riel (Mr. Newman). Motion agreed to. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Arborg Early/Middle Years School SEEDS Canada Foundation Award Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, yesterday I was ple ased to be a part of what was a commemorative day for the Arborg Early/Middle Years School as the students and staff officially cel ebrated a mi lestone in their environmental endeavours by being officially designated as an Earth School by the SEEDS Canada Foundation. The school received this prestigious status after completing and recording 1,000 environm ental action projects.

Arborg Early/Middle Years School is only the third school in Manitoba to receive this recogn ition and in fact one of only 97 across all of Canada to reach this level of success. Under the SEEDS Canada Foundation program, students undertake projects, which are designed to enhance the environment, and receive recognition as they proceed through the program.

Arborg Early/ Middle Years School enrolled in the learners in action program in the fall of 1992 and since then have progressed through the green school, jade school and emerald school levels to the point where they have now achieved the hig hest level of achievement possible in this program. Over 4,500 schools across Canada have registered in this program, and less than half are expected to comp lete 100 projects because ofthe huge amount of work and organization that is required.

This fact illu strates what a tremendous accompl ishment it is for the students and staff at Arborg Early/Middle Years School to complete 1,000 projects and to be acknowledged for this accomplis hment by receiving the Earth School status. Madam Speaker, I know that all members here in the Legisla tive Assembly would want to join me in offering our sincerest congratulations and say how proud we are of the Arborg Early/Middle Years School for this tremendous accomplishment. Manitoba Baseball Hall of Fame Mr.

Edward Helwer (Gimli): This past weekend I had the pleasure of attending the Manitoba Baseball Hall of Fame induction banquet in Brandon, an event which recognized the men and women who helped build this fine sport in our province. As the member for Gimli, I was delig hted to see several Interlake residents indu cted. For example, for more than half a century, Teulon resident George Ledochowski has been a commanding

June I 0, 1998 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4241 presence when it comes to local baseball. In addition to his years as a player and coach, he played an integral role in the development of the high-quality Green Acres Park. Stonewall resident Gladwyn Scott's ongoing involvement in baseball has also benefited others. Whether it was playing with teams in Cardale, Foxwarren, Hamiota, Miami and Carman or coaching and managing teams at the local, national and inter national level, Scott's dedication to the game of baseball has been exemplary.

Baseball has always played an important role in the life of Winnipeg Beach resident and former journalist John Robertson, who became the first media inductee in the Hall of Fame. Baseball fans in Winnipeg, Regina, Montreal and Toronto long enjoyed his coverage and support of the game.

I would be remiss if l did not mention the Fort Whyte Baseball Club as well, for a number of lnterlake players spent time with this team and provided a great source of entertainment to many fans over the years Once again, congratulations to the organizers of the Manitoba Baseball Hall of Fame for recognizing the province's outstanding baseball players, promoters and supporters. I know they have set a fine example for others to follow as the game continues to flourish in Manitoba. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Westman Child and Family Services Mr.

Doug Martindale (Burrows): I rise to pay tribute to Child and Family Services of western Manitoba who held their dinner and annual general meeting at Brandon University on Thursday, June 4, which I had the pleasure of attending. An impressive 180 people from many communities in western Manitoba were present, a testimony to the widespread community support given to their agency. The meeting was conducted efficiently and with a sense of humour by the outgoing president, Maggie Ramsay. During the meeting, staff and volunteers were honoured for their long service and dedication.

Volunteers provided an amazing 4, 779 hours of service in 1997 and '98. The agency had fewer children in care year over year and are very supportive of prevention, including their Elspeth Reid Family Resource Centre and the Victoria Day Care Centre which they operate. While there are still some outstanding issues between the agency and the provincial government, their main funder, Westman Child and Family Services, their executive director Mr.

Kenneth Knight, the board, staff and volunteers are to be congratulated for doing such a fine job on behalf of children and with such widespread community support. 70th Ann iversary-Ladies Auxiliary Brooklands Weston Legion Branch No. 2 Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): On Sunday, May 31, I was privileged to participate in the 70th anniversary of the Ladies Auxiliary of the Brooklands and Weston Legion Branch No. 2.

Since 1928, the Ladies Auxiliary has provided support to servicemen, to victims of the 1950 flood, to the Salvation Army and the Heart Fund, to the Shrine Circus, to Poppy Day, to visiting veterans and auxiliary members in hospital. As well, they have donated a wheelchair, player piano, recreational equipment, suction cart and cash to the Deer Lodge Centre and Veterans Manor, to the Children's Hospital, the Seven Oaks Hospital.

Cash donations have been made to various charities, including the Cancer Society, the Heart Fund, the Rainbow Society, Ronald McDonald House, the CJOB shut-ins fund, the provincial council scholarship fund, the Legion sports foundation, Legion housing, the Shrine Circus Daddy Club, the joint hospital and metropolitan committees and various other in memoriam contributions. As well, they have presented annually two scholarship awards to students at Cecil Rhodes and Brooklands Schools in the community. They have donated, as well, cash and furnishings over $60,000 to the local branch during these 70 years.

They actually have one remaining member of the charter legion in 1928, and that is Mrs. Mary Blundell, of the 13 who started the Legion Auxiliary. I know all members will join with me in recognizing the women of the Ladies Auxiliary who carry on the tradition of hard work, sheer determination and benevolent donating of funds to ensure the continued support of veterans, auxiliary members and their families, who never forget the auxiliary motto of Service not Self.

4242 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA June I 0, 1998 ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Ron. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I have a number of housekeeping matters related to the business of the House. I would like to obtain the unanimous consent of the House, not withstanding the sequence for consideration of Estimates as outlined in Sessional Paper 142 tabled on March 24, 1998, and subsequently amended, to consider in Room 255 the Estimates of the Children and Youth Secretariat following completion of the Estimates of the Department of Housing.

This change is to apply until further notice. · Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to alter the sequence for the consideration of Estimates in Room 255 for the Estimates of the Chil dren and Youth Secretariat to follow the completion of the Estimates of the Department of Housing, this change to apply until further notice? [agreed] Mr.

McCrae: I wish to obtain the unanimous consent of the House, notwithstanding the sequence for consideration of Estimates as outlined in Sessional Paper 142 tabled on March 24, 1998, and subsequently amended, to consider in Room 254 the Estimates of the Department of Finance following completion of the Estimates of the Department of Government Services. This change is to apply until further notice.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to change the sequence for consideration of Estimates in Room 254 to allow the Department of Finance to follow the completion of the Department of Government Services Estimates, this change to apply until further notice? [agreed] *

(1430) Mr. McCrae: I believe yesterday the House gave its consent to waiving private members' hour today, but we also went on to talk about what would happen tomorrow, that being Thursday, and I think we talked about the potential or the possibility of having private members' hours tomorrow morning, but there have been further discussions, and instead of doing that, there seems to be some agreement that we should deal with bills for the two hours between I 0 and noon tomorrow morning and thereafter it would be the intention to proceed to the consideration of the Estimates.

We are getting close to the end of the Estimates, and I know that this will be a great disappointment for the Leader of the Opposition (M r. Doer) and perhaps one or two others. I do not know anybody else, though. We will look at the situation respecting private members' hour tomorrow afternoon at some point tomorrow. I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Labour (M r. Gillesharnmer), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair, and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. *

(1440) COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) GOVERNMENT SERVICES Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this

section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Government Services. When the committee last sat, unanimous consent had been granted to have all questions and answers considered under line 8. 1. (

e) Information Technology Services. Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): At the outset, I would like to ask the minister if he has any of the information that was asked for at previous sittings. Ron. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): I think the last time we sat I indicated to the honourable member that we were at least within a week to two weeks of getting most of the information that you wanted back, so I trust that he will have patience with us until the time he gets that information. Mr. Maloway: Could the minister explain in detail the relationship between his department and the Depart ment of Finance as it relates to things like the Y2K

June I 0, 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 4243 problem, as it relates to things such as the computer contracts, the flow of money for the computer contracts? Mr. Pitura: I am advised that the chief inform ation officer, the CIO, has the overall responsibility for informa tion technology issues right across the provincial government. The four areas that are basically addressed under the CIO is the area of better systems, better methods, desktop, and the year 2000. So different groups are in charge of implementing the different initiatives.

For the part that Government Services and the role that Government Services plays, we are involved with the implemen tation of the desktop. The other three areas are found nested in different comm ittees under the CIO. Mr. Maloway: How long has this arra ngement been in place? How long has the chief information officer been in charge of these areas ? Mr. Pitura: At the outset of this process, which would go back a couple of years , the Informa tion Technology Review officer was couched in the Treasury Board area.

Starting in January of 19 98, a chief inf ormation officer was put into place which then took the position out of Treasury Board and placed it under the Information Technology area as a chief information officer. Mr. Maloway: So the chief informa tion officer then would be in charge of dealing with the payments for the purchase of the computers? The chief officer would be involved in the financing of the computer contract, would he or she? Mr.

Pitura: The one-time cost associated with purchas ing of the computer hardware is being financed through the organized corporation that is called GISMO that we talked about the other day, and so the funding is coming through that corporation for the purchase of the hardware . Mr. Maloway: Could the min ister describe the operation of GISMO as to when it was set up, who the board of directors are, and how it is operating at the current time? Mr.

Pitura: I think that the best advice I can give my honourable friend on this is that that would be a question that would be best asked of the Department of Finance as this corporation is under their purview. Mr. Maloway: The reason we are doing it this way though is that in a way I would like to have both departments in the same room at the same time, because my previous experience has been such that when you go to Finance, they refer you back to Government Services. When you go to Government Services, they refer you to Finance.

It seems to me that the two groups are simply conspiring together to hide the information. No one wants to accept responsibility for any of this information, it has been my experience, so that is why I would like to find out exactly what it is you know about GISMO and how it operates before we go into Finance and ask the same questions. Mr.

Pitura: My main role as Minister of Government Services and having the responsibility for the Desktop Management initiative is from the standpoint that there is sufficient financing, financial dolla rs or dolla rs available to make the purchases of the hardware and that these dolla rs will flow from the departments to Government Services in regard to the supply of the hardware to their desks, and then in tum we have our contract with Systemhouse .

We are dealing with them on the supplying of the hardware, so that the overall essence of our responsibil ity in Government Services is to ensure that the Desktop Mana gement initiative takes place and it takes place on

schedule and it does everything it is supposed to do for the corporate structure within government. Mr. Maloway: Well, the min ister will know that back in I believe it was January his department had just paid for the first 500 units, I beli eve-was in the process of paying for the 500 units. Can he tell me where the money came fr om, the path of the money, I guess, to pay for those first 500 units? Mr. Pitura: Well, those dol lars flow out of this corporation, GISMO, which is the corporation that was put in place by the Department of Finance for the purposes of funding the Desktop Management program and, I guess, the other three initiatives as well.

4244 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10 , 19 98 Mr. Maloway: The minis ter has had pl enty of time to discover informa tion that has been asked many times now, and that is who the lowest price bidder was for the actual hardware provided. Would he answer that question now? Just minutes ago in Question Period he said that he wanted to answer it in the Estima tes. He has all the high-priced help here right now to provide him with the actual answers. We know what the answer is.

I ju st want him to put it on the record, and, as the minis ter responsible for this depa rtment, I want him to put it on the record as to who the lowest price bidder was. * (14 50) Mr. Pitura: Well, I think I will respond to the member this way because he indicates that he has the answer to the question he is asking. To me, that is in itself, I do not know, questionable antics, I guess.

I give him an example ofthis, that if we were going into the leasing of building space and we wanted 10 ,000 square feet of building space and our lowest price bidder came in and gave us the lowest price and said we have 9,000 square feet, so we go to the bidder that gives us 10 ,000 square feet but it is at a higher price. So of what worth is it then to know that that was the lowest price bidder because you were not getting the full amount of the specs within your request from that low-price bidder? So I have to tum around and ask the honourable member: what is the value of knowing who the low cost bidder is?

Besides, he says he knows already. So if the rest of the RFP proposal was such that the bidder came in short on the rest of the requirements and, as a result, did not get the bid. Mr. Maloway: Well, the suspici on-and well founded, I migh t add-is that the entire process was rigged to favour high-price providers, that the lower price local providers were cut out of the system. I guess the min ister could solve the problem by simply revealing the point system, the definition of terms that made up the point system, and the order of ranking.

I think that would solve the problem, because I can tell you that a number of the bidders are prepared to accept that they lost the contract fair and square. It is ju st they do not believe that it was fair and square, and I think I know enough of them to know that they are realistic. They are business people; they have a long experience in the business.

They know when they are being had, and they know when they lose contracts that it is ju st part of a day's work, these things happen; but, when the original specif ications were drawn up in such a way that one could see the writing was on the wall from day one, then clearly there is a suspicion there that it was not handled properly. I want the min ister to come clean with us and tell this committee and give us all the facts so that we can let these unsucces sful bidders know that they, in fact, lost fair and square. Mr. Pitura: Mr.

Chairman, I think, ag ain, I have to remind the honourable member that the Department of Government Services has a lot of contracts, a lot of consulting contracts, a lot of contracts awarded for building construction, building renovations, cle aning contracts, amongst other things. I would ju st like to share with the honourab le member that very often the companies who do not win the contracts often are upset because they do not win the contracts, and so what they will do is tend to say, well, you know the contract bidding process was not done right because, if it had been done right, I would have won.

Well, I am sorry but that is not the way it always works. I know, and the member knows, that when you go out seeking employment in the world, in the job market that, when you go for an interview, there is going to be one successful person for that interview and the rest of them are going to be unsuccessf ul. I have been in that position where I have been unsucces sful, and when I found out who got the position, I said, well, I am just as good as that person is, if not better. Why did I not get the job? But that is what happens. One is selec ted and the rest are not.

I would also like to remind the member that with regard to the contract that Systemhouse let for the procurement of computer hardware, each and every individual who bid had the opportunity and was invited to come and have a discussion with Systemhouse as to why they did not get the contract. As far as that is concerned, that is a very open system. They all had that ability to have that discussion, and Systemhouse would have met with them and had that discussion. Mr. Maloway: Well, that is not in fact what ha ppened. In fact the

definitions of such things as vendor stabili ty

June I 0, I9 98 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 4245 and presence were not provided. So the people were not app rised of how many points would make up these particula r classifi cations, categories. I would like to ask the minister agai n: would he give me a definition of vendor presence? I would like to hear that one agai n. That was a good one. I would like to hear that one a second time. Mr.

Pitura: In response to the honourable member's question, probably one part of the process that he may not be aware of is that when the RFP, the request for proposal, is put together, when there are, as in this par ticula r case, II companies that-or actual ly there were 39, I guess, that originally requested the papers, the RFP to quote on-each and every one of them are invited to a bidders conference.

So the very question that the member is asking about vendor presence is a question that the potential bidder could ask of the potential contractor, which was Systemhouse, who, at that time, with all the bidders in the presence of them, would be able to explain what the definition was and what they were looking for within the RFP with regard to vendor presence.

I am sure that within the RFP proposal itself that the criteria, and I am not fam iliar with the criteria of vendor presence, that those kinds of criteria would be spelled out in the RFP proposal so that the potential respondent to the RFP would have a knowledge and have the same knowledge as any other company bidding with regard to what it meant. Mr. Maloway: Well, they did not have a definition of what it meant and you do not have a definition of what it meant. I would like you to put it on the record. Give me a copy of this definition of vendor presence. What does it mean? Mr. Pitura: I have with me a

section in the request for proposal that was put out by Systemhouse. It states here that an imp ortant aspect of product selection is choosing manuf acturers that are stable, with continued good prospects in the industry to protect technology investments. As product features le apfrog each other, it is imp ortant to focus on long-term prospects of the man ufacturer and their products. Please provide the manuf a cturer financial information and corporate profile informa tion related to market trends and app licable product acceptance. Independent references would be an asset.

So I do not know if that gives the member the proper definition or not. I would point out again that within the general qualifica tions area, vendor presence is just one small part of that, that the other areas such as research and development are important. The level of technological investment is important. The del ivery capabilities and commitments and performance bonding all make up that. So if you are taking the general qualifications at 25 percent, you are looking at about 4 percent of the overall qualifi cations attributed to vendor presence. So it is not a huge factor in the weighting average. Mr.

Maloway: Mr. Chairman, I think the min ister should ju st come out and admit that vendor presence, which is blue sky, was just another way for IBM to rack up some points against some of its competitors. * (1 500) I would like to ask the minis ter then, regarding Fleet Vehicles, in the bidding for the cars, what sort of criteria are used there? Is vendor presence a consideration? Mr. Pitura: I am advised that with respect to the question of fleet vehicles, there is a different process in place with respect to the purchase of fleet vehicles.

I will try to explain it, and I may have to ask my deputy minister to help me out as we go along. When the exact specifica tions of a product are known, i.e., the colour, length, horsepower, all those technical specs are known. Then it could be put out in what is called a tender process. The tender process asks for a response back to the tender for those specs. Then price becomes the bottom line of choice.

Now, when you get into an area where the actual technical specifications are not known, then you go into an area of a request for a proposal document which then the different areas of the document have to be assessed. So you get into not so much the technical aspects of the document as much as the areas that we

4246 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 1 0, 19 98 are talking about with regard to the evaluation criteria of product quality, general qualifications, technical specs and cost. Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, will the minis ter tell us then why the specifications were not known when it comes to this computer contract? And if they are not known, why were they not known to each of the people who were bidding? Mr.

Pitura: Well, in answer to that, the reason that technical specs were not put into the RFP and then converted to a tender is a fact that as the desktop rollout is taking place-and do not forget that this rollout is taking place from October or November 1997 to March 31, 19 99-that indeed over that period of time-and I think the honourable member, if I can quote him correctly, said that the maximum time for inventory on a shelf was something like 18 days, if I am not mistaken. An Honourable Member: Eleven. Mr. Pitu ra: Eleven days.

So that in terms of the product specs having an ability to change rapidly over that period of time allows for that change to take place. So we knew that when we started off the process-if you were getting Pentiums, just as an example, and then by the time the process was done you are into Pentium II, that change was allowed to take place.

Whereas in a tendered document, that would not take place. The total delivery would take place at that time. Mr. Maloway: I cannot really believe that the minis ter is saying this. It was a complaint from the unsuccessful bidders as well that there was a lack of technical specifications. I fail to understand how it could be any different from quoting for the automobiles. It is very easy. We do this every day. We write down a list of specifications we want for a computer, we send it out to two or three companies and ask for quotes. What is so difficult about that? That is technical specification; that is the same.

All you did was you required those technical specs to be quoted on for the first 1, 000 computers of the 7,000 in total. So what do you mean you did not use any technical specs? Mr. Pitura: Just to clarify for the honourable member that there was a minimum hardware configuration within the RFP, but then it was open for the responses to come back with whatever they saw fit to be in excess of that. There was a minimum configuration that was required; beyond that, the door was wide open. Mr. Maloway: So, Mr. Chairman, were there extra points given if they provided better hardware and better specifications? Mr.

Pitura: From that point of the evaluation, that was part of the ongoing requirements with regard to the cost. It was placed in that area in terms of evaluation_ Mr. Maloway: I still do not understand why with a contract this big that you could not provide for technical specifications? Why would you not do something like that? I heard that mentioned to me that the

definitions were not there for market presence and vendor stability and these other kind of nebulous terms that they were using. I understood those were not there, and I just did not believe. I thought it must have been a mistake when I was told that there were no specifications, or the specifications were not properly laid out. I ju st thought that was probably not really believable, but now the minis ter is confirming it that there were no specifications. So how the heck did these people know what they were actually quoting on in the first place? Mr. Pitura: Mr.

Chairman, here are the minimum hardware configurations- Point of Order Mr. Maloway: On a point of order. Does the minister have another copy of that so we can sort of go through it as he reads through? Mr. Chairperson: The honourable member for Elmwood does not have a point of order. *** Mr. Chairperson: The honourable min ister, to . continue with your response.

June 10 , 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4247 Mr. Pitura: I will just share some of the specs with the honourable member, because it is quite lengthy. For example, the processor has to be base configuration of 166 megahertz Pentium with MMX technology; power configuration, Pentium 233 megahertz with MMX technology. If you take a look at the diskette drive, it is a 3.5 and a 1. 44 megabyte. The video on board, one megabyte RAM, PCI 64-bit 1024 x 768, which would be the whatever it is called- pixels. [interjection] Everybody got a copy of this.

This is the RFP, request for proposal, by Systemhouse that everybody got. So that minimum configuration was there. Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. If the minis ter is going to read the whole document then, I would ask that he table it for the committee's benefit, unless you are going to conclude your response at this point. * (15 10) Mr. Pitura: It is concluded. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, thank you. Mr. Maloway: Mr.

Chairman, so if that is the case then, I fail to see why it is any different than his assertion that the car companies ask for quotes based on the year, model, colour, different features in the car, and that they all compete against one another. The key is then price. Now what is the difference? When the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) and myself send out requests for bids to Dell and Gateway, and other people for Powerland, Mind, for quotes on computers, we do exactly what he ju st read. We specify what it is we want. Sometimes we specify brand names of hard drives and so on.

We ask for quotes, and price becomes paramount. Price is the only thing that really matters in that case. What is the difference? Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I think the honourable member and I can probably enter into this debate for a long period of time. The honourable member is saying that, when he orders computers, he specifies what he wants exactly and that cost is the only factor that is involved in the purchasing of that computer.

But I would like to ask the member, I guess, if you get a computer that has an enhanced capability over the quote, the technical specs that you are asking for, and there is a slight incremental cost, whether at that point cost is that factor, as opposed to also whether you are purchasing a computer as an ongoing--do not forget, when you are purchasing that computer, in the case of the provincial government, we are purchasing on the basis of a 66- month ongoing contract with this particular company.

Their responsibili ty to us is to ensure that we have a system that will be in place, that will transfer data, that will give us the ability to do one stop shopping for customers and the taxpayers of the province of Manitoba, and it is important for those computers to be operative. They have made the choice that to deal with who they thought would be able to give them that assurance that they would be able to have a product that would perform that job. When we are buying an automobile, we are not entering into a 66-m onth contract with the automobile manufacturer.

We may be entering into that type of a contract with the financing arm of the company, but we are not obligated to enter into that kind of a long-term contract with the automobile manufacturer. But in the particula r case of the provinc ial govern ment-and I reiterate-our contract is with Systemhouse. Systemhouse has the contract to deliver a certain product to the provincial government. If they do not, there are penalties to be paid, and the ultimate penalty is that they do not have the contract anymore.

So their job is to ensure that they have a product that will be reliable, and it is their choice in the end as to how they procure that product. I would also remind the honourable member that, if you are looking at the terms of the Manitoba contractors, the suppliers, there are approximately 16 computer firms in the province of Manitoba that are now in the process of having subcontracts with Systemhouse to help in the Desktop Management initiative. These computer companies are spread out throughout the province. There is one in Dauphin, Swan River, Thompson, The Pas, some in Winnipeg, Swan River, Russell.

So they are spread out all over the province in terms of the subcontract supplies to Systemhouse for desktop initiative.

4248 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10 , 19 98 Mr. Maloway: How long a warranty did each of the computers come with or provided with from IBM? Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, the computers have a four year warranty. Mr. Maloway: I still fail to see a lot of difference here between the procurement of cars from General Motors or the procurement of computers from IBM. I do not really see a lot of difference. I think it is very easy to specify exactly what it is you want in the tender, the specifications that you want in the tender, whether it is cars, whether is computers, no matter what it is.

Then, it really does come down to a question of price. That is, price is the one common denominator that all of the bidders can understand. When you start giving 25 percent of the points to nebulous concerns, such as vendor presence, stability and so on, then you lose any kind of semblance of fairness in the process. I mean, if it were equal equipment, all provided, you know, 166 megahertz, and all the specifications were equal, then the bidders would quote their prices. Then it would be easy to make a decision as to which one was the best.

But that was not done here, and that was not done here because IBM has never been known as the lowest price provider of equipment. I mean, I know why it was provided, why it was set up the way it was set up. I mean, just on a price point, IBM would never win. I can pretty well guarantee that. They are not known as the low-price producer. So you worked up a system that would give IBM the edge here by coming up with nebulous

definitions of vendor stability and vendor presence, and there is a whole host of other ones that you have here. Certainly that is not fostering a positive view of how this government operates within the industry. The minis ter alludes to keeping the losing companies happy by giving them contracts. That is exactly what I said yesterday; that is exactly what you have done. When the losers, the nonsuccessful bidders complained, what you did was you gave them, in one case, the right to install computers in another corporation for IBM. You gave another one something else.

You have just simply put some grease in the squeaky wheels to keep them off your case. So I know what you have done; you cannot tell me any different there. I would like to get back to the whole question here about the Fleet Vehicles and ask a single question on that, and that is: do you still involve yourself in the practice whereby the manufacturer provides, I believe it is, $240 free monetary reward or inducement to each of the dealers, sort of to keep them happy and give them the right to put their nameplates on the backs of the cars?

Now I recall back to one other previous, glorious minister, here, of Government Services, one of this minis ter's predecessors, when we discussed this whole matter. One of the companies did not provide this incentive but certainly the other two did. I am not sure which one did not, but one of them provided, I think, $240. Another one provided $12 0. So what you had here was a spectacle of the car companies basically, gratis, giving the car dealer, in that case, $240 a car, for having done nothing, perhaps not even seeing the car, plus they put the name of the dealership on the car.

Then we got into the whole question about where the warranty work was being done and- [interjection] No, no, the warranty work was being done at different dealerships. At that time there was one dealer in particular who had very close connections to the Conservative Party who was doing the lion's share of the work. I do say that after those questions were raised two or three years ago now, the very next year the work sort of evened out a lot more, and that one particular dealer's share dropped substantially and others began to share in it. If the minister could update us on what is happening with that incentive.

Mr. Pitura: As I recall, I think we had this conversation last year as well, in terms of monetary credits. At that time, I am not sure, I think maybe one ofthe automobile manufacturers was involved with the credit system to their dealers. According to our information here, out of the big three, GM, Chrysler and Ford, Ford is the only one that awards a monetary credit, and that is a hundred dollars to their dealer as a

June I 0, 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4249 credit for the sale to put their logo on the back of the car. Mr. Maloway: I still have great difficulty under standing why this is done. Now let us get this straight. The Ford Motor Company of Canada pays the local dealer a hundred dollars for the right to put the dealer's name on the car. Let us get this straight. Ford has already got its name on the car, okay . So Ford is paying, you know, Bob Kozminski Ford or Cam Clark Ford or Mid- Town Ford, they are paying each one of these guys a hundred dollars to put Bob Kozminski's name on the car.

I would think it should be the other way around. It should be Mid- Town Ford pays Ford a hundred dollars to put their name on the car. I think this is a pretty crazy incentive program myself. Mr. Pitura: I guess I have to say I probably agree with the member on this one, that it is really something that is dif ficult to understand. However, that is the agreement that the automobile manufacturer makes with that dealer. I would suggest that, if he wants to pursue it any further, he might want to contact Ford Canada as to what their rationale is. * (1 520) Mr. Maloway: Mr.

Chairman, this minis ter is a little more sensible than the previous one that was here. I would ask him to contact Ford Canada and ask them if they might consider reducing the price of the vehicles to the government by $10 0 and forget giving the incentive to the dealership. I cannot see where this would make the Chrysler dealers and the GM dealers all that happy once they know that Ford dealers are getting this $1 00 freebie per car.

So I would think it should be the minis ter taking the initiative here and saying: Listen, Ford, if you can provide $10 0 to the dealer to put their name on these cars, maybe you could just reduce the price of the quote by $10 0 and let the taxpayers benefit. Good idea? Mr. Pitura: Yes, it is probably a good idea if that were in fact the case. I would say to the honourable member that it is probably a good idea that we do contact Ford to find out why they put the $10 0 credit on.

I guess the only qualification I would give to that would be that, indeed, Ford Motor Company of Canada might do this with all fleet sales across the country. It may be a standard policy of Ford Motor Company with respect to not only Manitoba but all the rest of the provinces. So from that standpoint, if that is the answer, I would get back. I would have to be satisfied with that as an internal policy with the Ford Motor Company, and there is not very much one can do about it to get them to change. Mr. Maloway: I appreciate that.

I wonder if the minis ter would endeavour to write the letter to Ford, and then let us know what the response is. Mr. Pitura: I will endeavour to do that. Mr. Maloway: Before we move on to line by line and enter Finance Estimates, I would like to ask the minister whether he has had the time to contemplate the questions about the Internet policy that he does not have currently in the department, whether or not he has been able to discover some policy here or formulate and promulgate some sort of policy in the last 24 hours, 48 hours. Mr.

Pitura: I guess, again, I have to go back to the honourable member and indicate to him that the chief information officer is ultimately the person who is responsible for a policy with regard to the Internet use and any kind of security policies with respect to the Internet. The Desktop Management Unit, we are simply the providers of the hardware and the enabling for this hardware to be hooked up to the Internet. So that is part of our responsibility with the Department of Government Services.

The overall policy with regard to use of the Internet, the security issues associated with the Internet, is to be dealt with and put into place by the chief information officer. Mr. Maloway: I am not sure whether the minister answered the question. Does he have a policy or has he had a policy all these last several years as it relates to the 900 Internet sites? He has had a few days now to check for this policy that he claimed that he did not have and to find out if there is one or not. It is either just a yes or no, and then we can move onto line by line. Mr.

Pitura: The use of the 900 sites that are presently located throughout government within the various

4250 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10 , 19 98 departments is a responsibility of each individual department with regard to the use of the Internet and the security issues related with the Internet by each department. Within the department of Government Services, our policy with regard to the Internet is that the time spent on a computer during the business hours of Government Services be used for business purposes only and not for personal use, and that has been our policy within Government Services. Other departments may, indeed, have different policies or may, in fact, have not had any policy at all.

That I cannot comment on. Mr. Maloway: Is this policy in writing, and can I have a copy of it right now? Mr. Pitura: I am advised that the policy in Govern ment Services is a broad policy for the provincial government; that is, the use of the Internet for personal use is not permitted on business hours. Mr. Maloway: Well, I would like to see where it is in writing. Where is it written down here that this is the case? Or is the min ister ju st making this up as we go along? Mr. Pitura: I am advised that it is not a written policy. Mr.

Maloway: I think that pretty much ends my questions on the DMU and Government Services for this year. We may be back at it in concurrence in a couple of weeks, so if the minis ter would lik e to make a note of that, that we could maybe get everybody prepared for another visit here and get all that information that we were asking for. With that, I would like to thank the minis ter and the staff for their efforts and their time, and maybe we could move on to the line-by-line now, and then on to Finance. Mr. Chairperson: Line 8.1. Administration (

b) Executive Support

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $389,600-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $69,200-pas s. Item 8.1. (

c) Fi nance

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $634,000 -pass;

(2) Other Expenditures $212,600-pas s. Item 8. 1. (

d) Human Resource Services (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits $438,50 0-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $1 57,300-pas s. Item 8. l .(

e) Information Technology Services (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits $370,200 -pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $2 11,1 00-pas s. Item 8. 1 .(

f) Lieutenant Governor's Office (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits $10 I ,500- pass;

(2) Other Expenditures $62,500- pass. Item 8. 1 .(

g) Land Value Appraisal Commission $27 ,400- pass. Item 8.2. Property Management (

a) Executive Administration ( 1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $16 3,600-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $30, 800-pass. Item 8.2.(

b) Physical Plant (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits $14 ,333 ,600-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $28,523,300. * (1 530 ) Mr. Maloway: We have a final couple of questions here on the disposition of the old equipment, because, admittedly, a lot of the old equipment is probably next to worthless, and it is quite old. On the other hand, some of it would be very recent and I note that as late as, what, last November, just when the contract was being let for the new equipment, there was new equipment being delivered.

I do not know whether it was being delivered as late as November, but, certainly, I think the minis ter will bear me out in this that there were deliveries in August of last year, probably in September. I think it kind of phased itself out by November, December, when the new equipment started, so that would be-you know, that is only six month-old equipment and even though it is not sort of high-tech stuff, I guess, it is still pretty good equip ment. So I am wondering just what the policy is for the disposi tion. Is it in writing and could the minis ter provide us with a copy of that? Mr.

Pitura: I am advised that there is a policy being put into place at the present time. It will be announced

June 1 0, 19 98 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4251 shortly, but I would share with the member that I think some of the discussion is around some departments of government that are out of scope at the present time and may be given priority for some of the equipment, but there is also the use of the equipment, for example, in schools that identified a major need for computers. So those kinds of things are being developed within a policy format and will be announced shortly, I am told. Mr. Maloway: Who will decide which schools get the new equipment, for example, versus which schools will get the old equipment?

Mr. Pitura: I think that in the past any time there has been surplus computers, they have gone through I think this organization called Computers for Schools and Libraries group, which sort of takes the school-by school basis and allocates the computers. I would not be too terribly surprised if this was not the group that was used to distribute. I believe it is a nonprofit volunteer education group whose responsibility is in that area. Mr. Maloway: Presumably the mini ster's announcement will be made public at the time as to how the disposition of the old equipment will take place.

I mean, if it is just going to be an edict by the mini ster, I would lik e to have a copy of it when it is made public. Mr. Pitu ra: I am sure when the policy is put into place, the announcement will be made at the appropriate time, because one of the important things is if there are groups out there that do have a requirement, they should be knowledgeable about that, so information will be out then. We will allow them to do that. Mr. Chairperson: Item 8.2.( b)

(2) Other Expenditures $28,523,3 00-pass;

(3) Preventative Maintenance $16 1, 000-pas s;

(4) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($27 ,000}-pas s. 8.2.(

c) Leased Properties

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $5 1 ,500-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $1 7,776,800-pas s. 8.2.(

d) Property Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $349, 800-pass;

(2) Other Expenditures $289,900-pass;

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($220,000}- pass. 8.2 .(

e) Security and Parking

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,83 1,1 00-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $624,000- pass;

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($ 1 ,633 ,000}-pass. 8.2 .(

f) Accommodation ($40, 799,000}-pass . Cost Recovery Resolution 8.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $22,456,400 for Government Services, Property Management, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 99. Item 8.3. Supply and Services (

a) Executive Administration

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1 76,600-p ass;

(2) Other Expenditures $24, I 00-pa ss. 8.3 .(

b) Government Air Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $4,209, 800-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $5,608,80 0-pas s;

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($9,8 I8 ,600}-pas s. 8.3.(

c) Desktop Management Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $676,000-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $4,968,900-pas s;

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($25,000}-pass. 8.3.(

d) Purchasing (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits $I ,097,30 0-pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $434,200-pas s. 8.3 .(

e) Telecommunications (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits $I, 047,700 -pas s;

(2) Other Expenditures $5,23 I, 800-pas s;

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($5,447, I OO}-pass. 8.3.(

f) Office Equipment Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits;

(2) Other Expenditures

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations-no amounts. 8.3 .(

g) Mail Management Agency-no amount. 8.3 .(

h) Materials Distribution Agency-no amount.

4252 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10 , 19 98 8.3. (

j) Land Management Services-no amount. 8.3 .(

k) Fleet Vehicles Agency-no amount. Resolution 8.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $8, 184,500 for Government Services, Supply and Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1999. Item 8.4. Accommodation Development (

a) Accommodation Development

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,022,400-pass;

(2) Other Expenditures $8 17 ,900-pas s;

(3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($495,000) -pa ss. 8.4.(

b) Workshop/Renovations

(1) Salaries, Wages and Employee Benefits $2,007, 500-pass;

(2) Other Expenditures $276,500-pa ss;

(3) Workshop Projects $3,075 ,000-pass;

(4) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($5,35 9,000) -p ass. Resolution 8.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,345,300 for Government Services, Accommodation Development, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1999. Item 8.5. Emergency Management Organization (

a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $668,900-pas s; (

b) Other Expenditures $407,400-pas s. Resolution 8.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 ,076,300 for Government Services, Emergency Management Organization, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 99. 8.6. Expenditures Related to Capital (

a) Capital Projects $1 8,275,1 00-pas s; (

b) Less: Recoverable from Capital Initiatives ($2, 1 00,000) -p ass. Resolution 8.6: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $16 ,17 5,10 0 for Government Services, Expenditures Related to Capital, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1999. The next item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Government Services is item 8 .1. (

a) Min ister's Salary. At this time we would request that the mini ster's staff leave the table for the consi deration ofthis item. Item 8.1 .(

a) Minis ter's Salary $26,300-pas s. *( 15 40) Resolution 8. 1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,700,200 for the Government Services, Administration, for the fiscal year ending the 3 1st day of March, 19 99. _ This now completes the Estimates for the Department of Government Services. FINANCE Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): The next Committee of Supply, the Estimates are for the Department of Finance. We would ask the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) to come forward and would call the committee to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of Finance, and does the honourable Minis ter of Finance have an opening statement? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister ofFinance): Yes, Mr. Chairman. It is my pleasure to present for your consideration and approval the Estimates of Expenditure of the Department of Finance for the 19 98-99 fiscal year. I do have a very brief opening statement, after which I would be pleased to respond to any questions that the members might have. The department proposes to spend $729.2 million in 19 98-99.

This represents a decrease of 0.2 percent or $1. 2 million under the 1997-98 Estimates. In terms of the area of Public Debt, with the era of rising debt behind us, we are building on last year's reduction of $55 milli on for Public Debt expenditures with a further estimated reduction of $5 million. This has been made possible due to lower borrowing requirements as a result of continuing improvement in the province's fiscal position, the relative stability of the Canadian and U.S. interest rates, and our province's declining debt burden.

June 10 , 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4253 Mr. Chairperson, we acted on the advice in council received from Manitobans during the consultations leading up to the provincial budget, and we increased our debt payment to $15 0 million. Our province's declining debt serves to relieve the next generation of the burden of accumulated debt and also supports immediate debt servicing savings as reflected in the department's Public Debt expenditures.

Notwithstanding 19 98-99 expenditure reductions, Public Debt remains the single largest component of the department's spending representing 71 percent of the department's budget and 8.9 percent of the entire provincia l budget. The magnitude of this cost under scores the importance to Manitobans of continuing to balance our books and to reduce the burden of debt.

In terms of tax credit payments, total expenditures for Manitoba's 1998-99 tax credit programs, which include property tax credits, cost of living tax credits, pension or school tax assis tance, political contributions tax credits, and the learning tax credits are estimated at $19 8.5 million. Ofthis amount, $15 million represents the learning tax credit which is part of the Department of Education and Training Estimates.

As announced in the budget addressed, the learning tax credit has been reconfigured as part of a comprehensive approach to supporting post-se condary education in Manitoba, which includes enhanced direct assi stance to students through loans and bursaries, interest relief, debt reduction and scholarships and bursaries initiatives, and increased operating support for post-seco ndary educational institu tions. Manitoba continues to be the only province in Canada to provide a refundable learning tax credit to encourage students to invest in their own education and training.

The Department of Finance's share of total net Manitoba tax credits will increase by approximately $1 million as a projected number of eligible claimants for the property and cost of living credits increases. The department has established the office of Information Technology. The province's chief information officer will bring greater focus and leader ship to government's major information technology initiatives and ensure the eff ective investment of information technology resources to meet the year 2000 and other technology challenges. Like most organizations, the year 2000 problem for Manitoba is pervasive.

The issue is the top priority of our information technology professionals. Manitoba has been very proactive in responding to this issue and has established the year 2000 office. A detailed examination of all critical systems has been undertaken and plans to ensure the timely co-ordinated replace ment and refurbishment of critical provincial systems are being implemented. Over a year ago, we completed assessments of our year 2000 problem for core government. Some systems have already been refurbished and are year 2000 compliant. The remaining assessments are being completed this summer.

A framework for prioritizing year 2000 work across government and a special consideration given to the unique technologies of the health care sector is being established to ensure that the year 2000 problems of systems most critical to program delivery are addressed in priority order. Our overall year 2000 initiative is broad based. It ranges from refurbishment of core government systems to awareness programs targeted at the wider business community. Manitoba has established a standing offer arrangement with the year 2000 suppliers to perform year 2000 inventory, assessment, refurbishment and testing.

This ensures that competitive market pressures are continually brought to bear to ensure maximum containment of costs. With those very brief statements, Mr. Chairman, I am more than pleased to respond to any questions. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the honourable minis ter for those comments. Does the official opposition critic, the honourable member for Brandon East have opening comments? Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Chairman, yes a few opening comments. As I have said on other occasions, the Department of Finance is a well established, well-run department. It has a reputation of

4254 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10 , 19 98 being very well-admin istered with loyal staff. I have had the pleasure of being on the government side of this Legislature as well as the opposition side, and as one who has had 15 years' experience on the government side and having dealt with that department and having seen it operate, I can tell you very categorically that it is one of the better-run, one of the best-run departments in the government, and it continues to serve us well.

It continues to serve the people of Manitoba very well indeed. * (1 550) Our problem in the opposition is, of course, mainly with the government's fiscal policies and its approach, its ideology, and, as the minister knows, a great deal of our debate involving himself is when we discuss the budget at which time we talk about such things as the economy and where the budget is heading and so on.

I just want to take the opportunity to point out that although the economy has certainly improved in the last few years, nevertheless we in Manitoba have much to be concerned about still, because even though it is perhaps better today than it has been for some time, we still see our employment perf ormance, at least this year, not to the level of which I think any of us would want to see it. I was looking at the last data from Statistics Canada and the Bureau of Statistics. I see Manitoba ranks nine out of 10 in the first five months of this year in terms of job creation.

I think it was something in the order of 1.1 percent over last year's first five months. This makes you concerned, especially when you note that the national average is about triple that. The national average growth rate is over 3 percent, and even Saskatchewan, our sister province, is over 2 percent in growth. I do not have all the numbers in front of me. I do not have any of the numbers, but it is about double, as I remember, what our job creation has been in the first five months of this year.

Also, we should be concerned that real wages over the past many years have not kept pace, and Manitobans are actually obtaining lower real wages today than they did in 1988. There are a lot of statistics around to show this because what has happened is that although there have been increases in nominal wages, they have not kept pace with inflation over a great deal of that time; now, there may have been a variation from one year to another, but generally speaking in the past decade.

Also, we should be concerned about other matters that indicate that the economy could be stronger than it is, and I point, of course, to the continued loss of people to other provinces. Our outward migration increased sharply last year-I believe over 6,000 people on a net basis-and even Saskatchewan was gaining from us by a consi derable number.

So these statistics would indicate to me that although the economy has been helped by the North American. economic boom that has been occurring the last few years and, of course, by relatively low interest rates and by a cheap Canadian dollar-al l these have been ma jor factors that have helped our economy. We have seen some growth, but, nevertheless, there are these features of our economy that should give us cause for concern. We are also concerned about the way the budget has been presented. I have called it a shell game in the sense that you see it one time, then you do not see it, and the minis ter is great.

He is very adept at moving monies in and out. I note in the last budget he put $60 million in from the Fiscal Stabiliz ation Fund. He gave us a reason for that. He said it is for Health expenditures, but, nevertheless, he took $60 million out of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and was able to show on that account a $23-million surplus. If he had not taken that $60 millio n out of the fund, we would hm'e had a deficit. So this is what confuses me and confuses Manitobans.

We put money in on the one hand, pay down some debt and then take it out on the other hand, and then you legitimately ask the question, well, what does the bottom line mean anymore? When it comes to the bottom line of a budgetary surplus or a budgetary deficit, one really wonders how reliable a number that is, given the fact that you have this flexibility of the fund in moving monies in and out, because if the fund did not exist, this could not happen. You would have to play it straight. I recall when this fund was first set up by a predecessor of the present Finance mini ster, Clayton

June 10 , 1998 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4255 Manness, the Provincial Auditor of the day, was very upset because we did have a real surplus in the first year, but the surplus was quickly devoured into the newly established Fiscal Stabilization Fund. The Auditor of the day said that money should have really gone to pay down the debt. That is normally what would happen to a surplus. Automatically, it goes toward the debt, but it did not go toward the debt. Instead, it went into the Stabiliz ation Fund and the rest is history.

The fund has been very useful to this government, and I know other governments have funds too, but I say the existence of that fund, you could argue from an administrative point of view, makes for greater flexibility, but, on the other hand, it makes for less reliabili ty of the bottom-line budgetary surplus or budgetary deficit figure.

I note back in 1992-93 which was a very bad year for Manitoba because our revenues diminished consi derably over the previous year, we had the bottom-line budgetary deficit of $566 million which would have been really $766 million if the government was not able to take $200 million out of the fund. That year, the $766-milli on deficit prior to tak ing money out of the fund was the worst deficit position we have ever experienced in the history of this province.

Of course, it is the reason, this plus other huge deficits that did occur previously under this government, that the total debt today, even though it has come down in the last year or two, is still higher than it was when this government assumed office in 19 88. So those are the facts. Having said all that, Mr. Chairman, I think our debt situation, yes, it has grown but still, in a relative sense, relative to other provinces, relative to the burden as measured by a percentage of spending, that is interest spent as a percentage of total expenditures, is still well within the Canadian average.

In fact, in many ways, if you take some of these figures, you will see that we are actually much better than the Canadian average in terms ofthe debt burden on Manitobans. So it depends on what figures you want to use. The min ister can use the figure ofthe percentage of his total spending of his department, how big an item that is, and it is a big item, I am not denying that, but when you look at it in another way in terms of public debt costs, percentage of expenditures, 9.4 percent oftotal expending, and that is relatively low in Canada. I think it is about the lowest, if not the lowest.

It is one of the lowest in the country. On that basis, one could argue that our debt burden is not really that significant. Certainly, as a percentage of GOP, debt costs have been coming down, but they have never really been, in the last couple of years, that horrendous in terms of what was going on in the rest of the country. I just want to make one other point, too.

Back in the '80s when there was an increase in debt, too, I might point out that was a phenomenon that was occurring right across the country and including the federal government, and for some very good reasons, not only recession but also horrendous inflation. When you had interest rates of what, 18 percent, 19 percent and whatever, and this did create an increase in the debt burden at that time. At any rate, my last couple of points, Mr.

Chairman, as part of the introduction is to point out again that although we want to be prudent and good managers and nobody disagrees with that, we should be very careful with our spending, every last single dollar of it. Nevertheless, I think it is a fallacy to think that because we moved into some sort of a surplus position that this is the main reason why our economic situation has improved. I would say it is the reverse. It is because of the improvement of our economic situation that we have been able to come into the black and out of the red, so to speak.

The reason we have a better economic situation is because the North American economy has done very well, and as I said, also, low interest rates and the cheap Canadian dollar. All these are major factors that have buoyed the Manitoba economy and has enabled this Minis ter of Finance (Mr. Stef anson) to obtain the revenue to do with what he wishes to do, and what his government colleagues wish him to do. So I just want to make sure that we get the sequence correct and that is, it is the economic situation that has a bearing on our provincial budget, not the other way around.

Having said that, I am not going to state

4256 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June I 0, 1998 categorically that the budget has absolutely no impact on the economy. That is not true. But it is not as great a factor, I would submit, and with all respect, as some of these ma jor national and international economic forces that I mentioned previously. Just one last observation, and that is while we like to look for a fiscal surplus and like to brag about it and pat ourselves on the back about it, we also have to be concerned about what is happening to the social services side.

Some people would argue the fiscal surplus has appeared and it may be growing, but the social deficit has increased, and that is a real concern to Manitobans because when you look behind that word are matters of adequate spending on education, adequate spending on health, adequate spending on social services, and everything from inadequacies in our hospital system to growing child poverty. So, those are our opening comments. We do have some questions on specific parts of the department, and my col league, the deputy critic of Finance, the MLA for Elmwood (Mr.

Maloway), would have a few questions as well on Information Technology. Mr. Chairperson: I thank the honourable member for Brandon East for those opening comments. Under Manitoba prac tice, debate of the Minister's Sal ary is traditionally the last item considered for the Estimates of the department. Accordingly, we shall defer the consideration of this item and now proceed with the consideration of the next line. But before we do that, we would ask the minis ter's staff to join us at the table, and we ask the minis ter to introduce his staff as they are present. * (16 00) Mr. Stefanson: Mr.

Chairman, ju st, with my critic the member for Brandon East, for procedures, can we sort of go through these

section by

section and try to deal with some of them quickly? Obviously, I have the deputy and a couple of key people here, but then I sort of rotate. If you want to talk about public debt, I bring those officials. Is it just as simple to take each category and go through? I am prepared to be flexible, ju st recognizing that I have access to having the right people here to provide as much information as I can. Mr. L. Evans: Yes, that is fine, as long as the minis ter is prepared to be flexible, if we could sort of proceed through the sections. My coll eague has some questions on Informa tion Technology .

The member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford) had hoped to be here to ask some specific questions, but she had to leave because of another appointment. She will be asking those during concurrence, but I would reiterate that it is our intention to wrap it up by six o'clock. So, regardless, it will be a two-hour exercise. This does not include all the enabling appropria tions. I know you have some responsibil ity there. We were hoping that those would be disc ussed tomorrow. So the department per se would be dealt with today. Mr.

Chairperson: Just for the benefit of the comm ittee, would there be unanimous consent to ask questions under the one line as they pertain to the questions and raise the questions that way? What is the will ofthe committee? Mr. L. Evans: Mr. Chairman, it is ju st a matter of maximizing flexibil ity-we have two hours-and try to be as efficient as possible. Mr. Stefanson: I think your suggestion that once we get into

section by section, ju st pick a line and ask all the questions and then we can move through if that is as easy as- Mr. Chairperson: Agreed? [agreed] I would ask the minis ter's staff to plea se come forward and the honourab le minister to introduce them as they are present. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, seated immediately to my left is Pat Gannon, the Deputy Minister of Finance; across from Pat is Debra Woodgate, the associa te secretary to Treasury Board; and Erroll Kavanagh, who is the director of Mana gement Services. Mr. Chairperson: Line 7.1 Adminis tration and Fi nance (

b) Executive Support (

I) Salaries and Employee Benefits. Mr. L. Evans: Under Adminis tration and Finance, I want to assure the minis ter I do not intend to ask any

June 10 , 19 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL YO F MANITOBA 4257 questions about the Soldiers Taxa tion Relief fund-not this year; maybe next year. But I would like to ask a question about personnel policy. Could the mini ster update us on the arrange ments to provide equity of employmen t and any proactive employment policies within the depa rtment? I think it is handled under the personnel division or whatever it is called. Mr. David Faurschou, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair Mr. Stefanson: Joining me as well is Melanie Brownscombe, the director of the Human Resource Services within the Department of Finance.

Employment equity is still an imp ortant part of the hiring process for the Department of Finance. In 19 97- 98 our fiscal year ending March 31, '98, there were 26 hirings in the department.

Eleven were women, which is 42.3 percent; three were from visible minorities, 11. 5 percent of all hiring; one aboriginal, 3.8 percent, but I think, more importantly on an overall basis, when you look at the workforce in the Department of Finance of approximate ly 400 employees for the year ending March 31, 19 98, ju st over 50 percent, 50.81 percent are female, 1. 85 percent are aboriginal persons, 3. 23 percent are persons with disabilities, 6 percent are visible mino rity persons.

In most of those areas we have continued to make progress over the last several years, so in terms of the question, it continues to be a priority and I have ju st outlined some of the statistical informa tion. Mr. L. Evans: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister could commen t about the turnover of staff. My impression is that there is not much turnover, but is this the case? Also, how do you compare with other depa rtments? Mr. Stefanson: Mr.

Chairman, I will certainly determine ifthere is any more specific information that I can share with the member, but speaking to our senior officials, we beli eve within government we would be at the lower end in terms of turnover because of the nature of many of the positions. Certainly looking at many of our senior positions, I know first-hand there has been very little turnover.

I think on an overall basis though, the employees, like our population in general, we do have an aging popu lation to a certain extent, but ju st looking at the stats that I ju st provided the member, a number of hirings, at 26 out of a workforce of roughly 400, shows that it is a relatively stable workforce within the Department of Finance. I think that is pretty indicative of government overall these days. Mr. L. Evans: I would ju st like to pass onto the Treasury

section now, so we could pass this section. That is 7. 1. * (1610 ) The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Faurschou): Item 7. l .(

b) Executive Support

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $355 ,000-pas s; l. (b )

(2) Other Expenditures $69,200-pa ss. 7 .1. (

c) Mana gement Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $439,800 -pas s; l. (c)

(2) Other Expenditures $77 ,800-pa ss. 7 .1. (

d) Payments Re: Soldier's Taxa tion Relief $2,000-pa ss. 7. 1 .(

e) Tax Appeal Commission $20,000-pass. (Resolution 7. 1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $990, 10 0 for Finance, Admin istration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 19 99.) 7.2 Treasury. Mr. Stefanson: Joining me now is Mr. Neil Benditt, who is the assistant deputy min ister of Treasury Division; and Don Delisle, who is the director of th

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-4-62
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 4th hansardpdf 62.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	bc8e484b948ef2f0b3f1b3a9fcdf61f6318e0a24

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