Manitoba Hansard — 15 April 1991 (Sitting 22, 35th Legislature, 2nd Session)

35-2-22

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Second Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 40 Eli zabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XL No. 22 - 1:30 p.m., MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1991 Printed by the Office of the Quee ns Printer. Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBl Y Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Polltlcal Afflllatlon NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARR, James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY,Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY,Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MclNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington Crescentwood River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage la Prairie Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas lnkster The Pas St. Norbert Elm wood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River PARTY.

Liberal NOP NOP Liberal Liberal NOP Liberal NOP PC PC PC PC NOP NOP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NOP NOP PC PC NOP Liberal PC NOP PC NOP Liberal NOP PC NOP PC NOP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NOP PC NOP PC PC PC PC NOP PC NOP PC PC NOP NOP

847 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, April 15, 1991 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PR OCEErnNGS READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition and it conforms with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Some Honourable Members: Yes. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Petition to the Legislature of the Province of Mani toba.

The petition of the undersigned residents of the province of Manitoba who desire the Government of Manitoba to assume responsibility for Sturgeon Road north from Four Mile Road, and to study and implement recommendations to decrease risk of accidents on Sturgeon Road, hum bly sheweth: WHER EAS many Man itobans have been injur ed or have died in traffic accidents occurring on Sturgeon Road; and WHER EAS many other residents of the province of Mani toba have been subjected to threat of physical harm due to the safety risks presented by Sturgeon Road; and WHERE AS the volume of traffic on Sturgeon Road is increasing annually; and WHER EAS th ere exists conf usion regard ing responsibil ity to maintain Sturgeon Road; WHEREFORE YOU R PETITIONER S HUM BLY PR AY tha t the Depar tmen t of Highw ays and Transpor tation consider assuming responsibili ty for Sturgeon Road and und ertake to compile a study of tile acciden ts on Sturgeon Road within the Perimeter and implement recommendations of said study to reduce traffic accidents on Sturgeon Road.

AND as in duty bound your petitioner will ever pray. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure of tabling the Annual Report 1988-89 of the Manitoba Film Classification Board. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): I also have a min isterial statement and I have copies for the House. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of the members an important week of celebration.

As of 1987, citizenship has been celebrated on the anniversary of the signing of the Canadian Cha rter of Rights and Freedoms. Through the Charter, the values, rights and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship are expressed. The theme of Ci tiz enship Week this year, "Canadian Ci tizensh ip: A Commitment to our Futur e," reminds all Canadians that we share values, rights and responsibi lities of citizenship developed through our history. We also share visions for the future and have tremendous resou rces to make Canada and specifically Manitoba a better place to live.

It was only in 1947 that the status of Canadian citizen was defined. No longer British subjects, but Canadians, we began the task of legally and politically shaping who we are as a people. As part of nation building, the Citizenship Act of 1977 improved access to citizenship and equal treatment for applica nts. Notably, the act affi rms that all Canadians, whether citizens by birth or by choice, share identical rights and responsibili ties. *

(1335) Today, Canadian citizenship is one of the most sought after in the world. During Citizenship Week, we can reflect on what it means to be Canadian. Canadians value the freedom, fairness and equality in justice of their political and legal systems that are enshrined in the Charter. Canadians share global concerns and responsibilities to the environment and other nations of the world.

848 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 Participation in the myriad volunteer agencies and social programs brings Canadians together to ensure the welfare of others. Canadians honour our rich cultural diversity. As Mani tobans, we take pride in the values of Canadian citizenship. We have a multiculturalism policy that affirms our multicultural society and celebr ates the strength of our diversity, equal access to opportunity, participation in all aspects of life in the community and partnerships with the community and government.

Through the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, programs and services are provided to assist immigrants to gain opportunities and full participation in Canadian society. National Citizenship Week is an opportun ity for us all to recognize and affirm the contributions made by all of our citizens, by birth or by choice. Across the country and throughou t Manitoba, many events will raise awareness of the values and contributions of citizens during National Citizenship Week. Citizenship means, Mr.

Speaker, that we must always act on our rights and responsibi lities to make our future bright and strong and encourage all members of the House to actively support National Citizenship Week. Thank you. Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radlsson): Mr. Speaker, I would like to reply with a nonpo litical statement, a response. I would like to start off by saying it is important to have weeks like this, National Citizens hip Week, because it gives us a chance to draw our attention to some of the problems that are facing us in Canada.

We are currently going through a process where we are trying to define once again what a Canadian identity is. There is an opportunity for us to really look at, in a week like this, how we can come to be able to put into policy and practice the whole idea that, as Canadians, we can be different and equal, that citizenship does not depend on how long you have been in Canada, and the rights that you have as a Canadian do not depend on how long you have been in Canada, but that we all should have equal rights, no matter how long we have been here.

To me that is one of the most important things that could come from this kind of a week. I will be able to go to some of the conferences this week and activities that are happening in the city that are going to celebrate this week, and I look forward to those. Thanks very much. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (lnkster): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to stand up and to give the Liberal Party's perspective, a few words, on Citizenship Week. As the theme itself is the commitment to our futu re, Mr.

Speaker , we, in the Liber al Party, recognize the fact that Canada's past, our fi rst people, with our aboriginal, which was follo wed with the French and English and then different waves of immigrants, our future in Canada is going to be based on multiculturalism, and citizenship is a very important aspect of living in Canada. I have had the pleasure on many or on several occasions to go out and partici pate in citizenship swearing-in ceremonies, both inside my riding and outside the riding, and it is with pleasure.

Towards the end when they stand up and they sing our national anthem, you can see a great deal of pride. It is a pleasure for myself, as I say, to stand up and to give those remarks, and I hope to see more Canadian citizens in the upcoming years. It is encoura ging to see tha t the na tional government has finally allowed, or is hoping to see, 250,000 immigrants into Canada in the upcoming years. I think Canada will do well with that number of immi gr ants. We would like to see more immigrants, on a more compassionate reason, to be allowed to come into Canada. Thanks again for allowing me to speak. *

(1340) TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for '89-90 for the Mani toba Mi lk Pr ices Review Commission, the '89-90 Annual Report for the Farm Lands Ownership Board and the '89-90 Annual Re por t for the Ma nitoba Agric u ltural Credit Corpora tion. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 16- The Motor Vehicle Lemon Law Act Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, move, seconded by the member for Dauphin (Mr . Plohm an) , that Bill 16, The Motor Vehicle Lemon Law Act,

Loi sur les vehicules automobiles

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 849 defectueux, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker , it gives me great pleasure to introduce Bill 16, The Motor Vehicle Lemon Law Act. I might remind the government that in opposition they too supported lemon law, but once they became government, it was a different story. Mr. Speaker, in the Un ited States over 45 states have such lemon laws to protect the consumers.

Under this bill, where the repairs are required four or more times in respect to the same nonconform ity or a motor vehicle is out of service for 20 or more days, the purchaser then notifies the manu facturer who will ha ve 10 days to fix the vehicle. If the manuf acturer is not successful, the manufacturer replaces the vehicle with one of comparable value, not the dealer-the manuf acturer, not the dealer. The vehicle must be rep laced with one with comparable value, less a reasonable offset for use, or a refund of the purchase price. Mr .

Speaker , thi s bill has fairly widespr ead support in the province as witnessed by the fact that Mr. Gordon Martin is here in the gallery. Aida lsaku, among others, has called me with problems with lemon vehicles since thi s story was aired on the weekend. I urge the government to support the consumers and pass this law. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honour able members to the Speaker's Gallery, where we have with us today His Excellency Anthony Ayeni, the Ambassador of Nigeria, and Mrs. Ayeni.

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. Also with us this afternoon, we have seated in the publi c galler y, from the Sargent Park School, thir ty-six Grade 9 students. They are under the direction of Bob Forester. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wellin gton (Ms. Barr ett). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Payroll Tax Elimination Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, of course, we know that Manitoba is now the province that is predicted to be the last out of the recession by the Conference Board of Canada. Our private sector per capi ta investment is lower now than in 1987, the only province to have that situation.

The Premier, four budgets ago, promised that within four budgets he would in fact totally eliminate the health and post-secondary tax in Manitoba, something that both he and the Liberals had promised at that period of time, something that we argued we could not afford and it would not in fact create the jobs that were being given away in terms of those tax breaks, Mr. Speaker. We are now finding that, notwithstanding the tax breaks to corpora tions, our corpor ate sector revenue will be very, very questionable tomorrow in the budget. The Premier well kn ows that, Mr.

Sp eaker, because the pri vate sector is not perfor ming well. I would ask the Premier today whether he will totally reverse his position in terms of the health and post-secondary tax and he will reverse his position not to get rid of the health and post-secondary tax to meet his promise of ridding us of that tax in four budget years. Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I find it difficult to understand the logic of the member for Concordia when he argues against having training dollars spent in this province by the private sector.

That is exactly what he is arguing against when he suggests that there are somehow tax breaks. *

(1345) The only break that the corporations get is they invest in training of new staff and retraining of existing staff so that they can meet the needs of the work force in Manitoba. That is a positive; that is the sort of thing that even New Democrats should argue for, Mr. Speaker, but he is arguing against it. I say he is wrong in that. With respect to the pernicious payroll tax, if he is arguing against removal of the payroll tax from small businesses, businesses who employ 50 and fewer people, Mr. Speaker, that is again a wrong-headed

850 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , i 991 view that only a New Democrat can come up with. Wilen he says, tax the formation of new jobs in this province, he is wrong on that. In terms of advice, the kinds of things that New Demo cr ats did to destroy job crea tion and investment in this province in the 1980s are not the kinds of things that we want to repeat. I can assure the Leader of the Opposition of that. Economic Growth Job Creation Strategy Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr .

Sp eaker, the th ousands of people who are unemp loyed, the "for sale" signs, the bankrup tcies, all the human stories that are out there in this province will argue clearly against the Premier and his government's position. He has given away, and his government has given away-and I take from his answer that he is reversing his position. He is not going to fulfil! his promise of getting rid of it in four years. He will not remove another $180 million tomorrow in the payroll tax, the health and post-secondary tax.

He is starting to follow the logic of the NOP, because he is not getting the $50 million in tax breaks to corporations. He is not getting the benefit in our society with created jobs, with private-sector investment, with growth in our economy, Mr. Speaker. In fact, he is now starving the education system. Is it 1 percent for the Winn ipeg education system? Child and Family Services are going to get zero percent tomorrow. The social services are making up for his corporate tax breaks.

I would ask the Pr emier whether he will look at a more effective way of job creation in the province, rather than corpor ate tax breaks, which have failed this province and failed our revenues in terms of the Province of Man itoba. Hon. Gary Fllmon {Premier): Mr. Speaker, again, the Leader of the Opposition is totally confused. Those reductions in the payroll tax in those previous budgets were ones that were supported by the New Democrats when they were in opposition. They supported them and voted for them. Now, he is coming up and arguing against it.

If what he is suggesting is that we ought to go to the policy of the former Pawley admini stration-that Paw ley ad mini stration that did short-term, make-work jobs that created this huge incr ease in debt, more than doubling our debt in this province in only six years, causing us to have interest costs that now draw away from all of the vital services. Health, Education, Family Services can no longer be funded as well as we would like to, because we are paying $600 million a year in interest. If he thinks that we ought to go back to those policies that destroyed this province in the '80s, Mr.

Speaker, he is dead wrong. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, let the record show that we voted against the '88 budget, we voted against the '90 budget and we supported one budget when it-w hen the Pr emier xe roxed our el ection promises, we supp orted the budget as we said we would. My final question to the Premier is-and I am sure that Mani tobans will not enjoy the rhetoric from this government. It is last in private sector per capita investment for 1991. It is last coming out of the recess ion. We are ha ving thousands and thousands of more people unem ployed every month.

My question to the Premier is: Will he reverse his standpat course, which is failing the people of Man itoba, failing our province, failing our economy, whether it is private or public sector? Will he reverse his course and start to develop a proactive approach to get Man itobans working again, rather than putting people on welfare where they are headed with the Tory budget and Tory policies in this province? *

(1350) Mr. Fllmon: Mr . Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition very conveniently elimina ted the 1989 budget, which he supported along with his party, which included removal of the payroll tax from a considerable nu mber of employers in this province, and he had better get it straight. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, the so-called proactive appr oach tha t the Leader of the Opposition is now advocating is the one that he ridiculed when he was the president of the Manitoba Government Employees' Association.

He said the only long-term benefit of those Jobs Fun d jobs were the green and white signs that were on everybody's window and throughout the province. He ridiculed that, because he said all that would be left would be the debt that is run up and, indeed, that is the case-no jobs to show for it, short-term,

April 15 , 19 91 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 851 make-work jobs, and signs around this province, green and white signs, and a debt that burdens all of us, because we have to pay some $600 million a year in interest costs that we can no longer afford to allo cate to health, to fa mil y services and to education. That was not the right approach in the 1980s by Howard Pawley, and that is not the right approach today. 55-Plus Program Deindexing Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr.

Speaker, large numb ers of seniors in Manitoba continue to live in poverty, especially women who have no company pensions or small pensions and no or small CPP pensions. Since 1982, when introduced by the NDP, the 55-Plus income support program has been very helpful in raising seniors' incomes, but especially for 62 percent of recipients, over 16,000 individuals, who are women who receive this supplemen t.

In light of rising concerns by sen iors and especially the Man itoba Society of Seniors, why did the Minister of Family Services not consult with any seniors organizations, but particular ly not with MSO S before deindexing the 55-Plus in come support program? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, the member and I have had the opportu nity to discuss this issue quite recently. I have indicated to him and to others that the government is faced with many, many difficult decisions. One of the decisions that was made was to maintain this program at last year's levels.

If we were in a better financial position, if we were not paying $1 .5 mil lion a day on a debt that was accumulated throughout the 1980s, we would be in a better position to further enhance government programs. We have made a commitment in the throne speech to main tain pr ograms in health care, education and family services, and those will be maintained. Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, perhaps they could have applied some of the surplus they inh erited to funding the seniors 55-Plus program.

Will the Minister of Family Services acknowledge that it is l1is government's policy to practice restraint on t11e backs of seniors, particularly those who can least afford it, that is married seniors whose income is $1 ,800 a year below the poverty line and single seniors whose income is $3,300 per year below the poverty line? Mr. Gilleshammer: I have indic ated to the member as recently as a few days ago that my department deals with many, many vulnerable Manitobans. We have some 26,000 cases of social allo wance, people with no inc ome at all.

We deal with nu merous clients in the rehab and commun ity living, where we are tr ying to put in pl ace li ving accommodations and programs for these people who are very, very vuln erable. The question of the 55-Plus, we are maintaining this program at last year's levels. It is an income supplement for low income Manitobans. Again, if we had the financial resources, there are many things we would be happy to do, but I do not want the member to forget that we do have a tremendous debt in this province, a debt that was more than double under the previous adminis tration.

If we do not attack that debt now and get our financial house in order, we will not have the luxur y of providing these essential programs in health care, education and family services in the future. I think that while the member is encouraging us to spend more and more money, our position is that we have to take a realistic look at the debt. Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, the seniors on the panel with the minister-and I acknowledged some of the things that the minister is saying, but they were still left unsatisfied.

Will the Minister of Family Services meet with representatives of the Manitoba Society of Seniors and reverse their announc ed decision to deindex 55-Plus as soon as possible, instead of puni shing the most vulner able members of our society while giving tax breaks to corporations and increasing funding to elite private schools by $1.5 million? Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. *

(1355) Mr. Gilleshammer: I have indic ated the tremendous respect we on this side have for the seniors of Manitoba. Traditionally we have met with the executive members of MSOS in previous years, and we will continue to do so in the future. We have a good working relationship with the MSOS.

852 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANI TOBA April 15 , 19 91 I ind icated to them both publ icly and in recent meetings tha t we wish tha t there were more resources that we could access at this time to enhance programs, but I think that all Manitobans un derstand our priorities are health care, education and family services. We have to make some tough choices and tough decisions, choices and decisions the previous government was not prepared to make. We are committed to facing the debt and the deficit problem we have head-on, and Manitobans over the long run will recognize that fact.

Cartwright, Manitoba High School Closure Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my qu estion is to the Minister of Education. On Fr ida y, the paren ts of the studen ts at Cartwright senior high school pull ed their children out of that school. Those childr en are not today attending school. For tuna tely, they are receiving-hopefully, the quali ty will be able to be maintained-an alternative form of education taught by retired teachers and others in the communities with special skills.

Will the minister tell this House today: Now that the students are no longer in school, will he finally act in a manner appropriate tor the Mini ster of Educ ation and enforce his own guidelines with respect to school closures? Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr . Speaker, I indicated to the member of the third party on Friday that indeed this is a matter that is within the realm of responsibil ity of the local school board. I have no intentions of interfering in those matters that relate directly to that of the local school board.

I am aware of the fact that the students have been pull ed out of the school, and indeed education is still the primary responsibility of the parent. The parents ther e have made it kn own tha t they will find alternative means of educating their children. It is my hope that the parents of the Cartwright area and the school board will be able to get together and resolve this problem, which none of us like to see. Mr. Speaker, I have to indicate that it is a matter which the school board has responsibil ity for and will have to resolve. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr. Speaker, it is not a local issue.

It is a provincial issue because this minister has guidelines, guidelines which he is turning a blind eye to. One of the trustees of this school division said on CBC Radio that they used the word "transfer" instead of the word "closur e," because if they had used the word "closure," they would have had to have enforced the province's guidelines. Now, it is clear that this board is circumventing his gui deline s. Will the min ister enforce his own guidelin es? Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, any school division in this province has the right to transfer either one grade or several grades from one school to another.

That is within the complete authority of that school board. That is spelled out very clearly in The Public Schools Act. That is what the school board did in this particular case. They transferred three grades from Cartwright school to a different school within that same school division. Mr. Speaker, they did not close the school. As a matter of fact that school will remain open next year, but the grades' numbers that are in that school will be reduced. That does not constitute a school closure.

However, I have indicated to the school board that should they require any guidance or assistance from the department, my staff and I, as min ister, are prepared to meet with them at their earliest convenience. Mrs. Carstalrs: Well, the only thing connecting this school with the junior school is a gymnasium. The schools used to be two entirely separate different structures; this is a school closure.

Can the minister tell the House today why this school board is not presenting to the parents the fiscal and financial reasons why this school is closing, and does he not believe that they have a fiducia ry responsibility and he has a responsibility to make sure that information is available to those parents? *

(1400) Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, I guess the questioning of the Leader of the thir d party shows very clearly that if she had the authori ty she would get right in there and try and overrule what the local school board is doing. Let me in dic ate very cl early that there is a definition, a legal definition, of what a school is. The

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 853 Cart wright school is one school. It has one principal for the entire complex. Despite the fact that there is a gymnasium between the high school wing and the junior wing, that school is still one school. Mr. Speaker, I do not know that the school board has not presented their financial situation to the parent s of Cart wrig ht schoo l. That is the responsibilit y of the school board and, indeed, I am not going to exert my authority, as Min ister of Educ ation and Trai ni ng, to try and impose something that is completely out of my jur isdiction.

Asslnibolne River Dam Con struction Mr. Edward Connery (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, my question today is to the visionary Minis ter of Natural Resour ces who built the Shellmouth Dam in the 1960s. The minister says now that an extension is the answer to our water problems on the Assiniboine, but this year the Sheilmo uth Dam will not fill. Meanwhile, downstream flows on the Assiniboine River are quite high, in fact, as high as 4,000 cfm, 20,000 cfm is what is requi red for the South Hespeler Di version.

It would not take man y days of impounding of that runoff water that is downstream from the Shellmouth Dam to provide that water. Will the Minister of Natural Resources have a second visionary flash and commit to buil d a second dam on the Assiniboine River so that all of southern Manitoba can have adequate water? Hon . Harry En ns (Minister of Nat ural Resou rces): Mr . Speaker, allow me in the first instance to express my appreciation, indeed that of many Manitobans, for the moisture that we did receive over the weekend.

It has enabled my forest fighters to put out some 55 to 60 fires which many Man itobans may not be aware that were already burning. Of course, for our agricultural community, the water is welcome. I am not prepared to speculate as to the status of the reservoir. If we get some more moisture, it is every hope and expectation that the reservoir will fill to capacity, but I recog nize in the member 's qu estion that there are ongoing problems with respect to solving some of the water shor tages in south and south-central parts of Manitoba.

At such time that the government has an opportun ity to examine some of the alternatives, some of the alternatives that I may acknowledge and put on the record that had been presented over the many years to different governments, I will be the first one, and I will be enthusiastic to make this House aware of those plans and certainly the honourable member involved. Assiniboine River Diversion Government Commitment Mr. Edward Connery (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, to the same minister. Has there been discussion and/or a commitment to the diversion project, and is there a time commitment in there? Ho n.

Harry En ns (Minister of Nat ural Resources): The answer is absolutely no. I want to take this opportun ity to put very firml y on the record that what the govern ment has received in the company of several ministers back in February in Morris, Manitoba, a presentation of a task force report. I might say that there have been many reports dating back 20, 30 years that have been presented to governments with respect to trying to find a resolution to the water shortage problems of south and central Manitoba. That is the status of the report before us.

No co mm itment of this government has been made to respond to this. Mr. Connery: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for that reassurance. Southern Diversification Initiative Mr. Edward Connery (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, to the same minister, has there been any commitment or thought of using the Southern Diversification Init iative funding for the diversion project? Ho n.

Harry En ns (Minist er of Nat u ral Resources): I think the question is probably more properly dir ected to the responsible ministers with respect to Rural Development and/or Agriculture perhaps, but from my knowledge I suspect that those funds are fully subscribed for the purpose they were intended for, namely to provide sewer and water infrastructure to the different commun ities in rural Manitoba. Home Care Program Report Recommendations Ms. Judy Wasy lycla- Leis (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, I never thought I would be happy following a question from the member for Portage la Prairie.

854 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 I certainly am given his constructive criticism in this Chamber. I will try to do the same only this time in an area pertai nin g to the Min ister of Health's jurisdiction, and that is home care. Three years now we have been raising, time and time again, qu estions about Conser vative cutbacks to home care. We have raised serious concerns about the underspending of this government to the tune of $4.5 million just last year for home care and, of course, the minister has always chosen to ignore those concerns.

Since we now have vindication for the concerns we have raised through a report by this minister's own task force on health services tor the elderly, which has delivered quite a scathing commentary on the program talking about serious understaffing , problems that require urgent attention, I want to ask the Minister of Health what steps he has taken to address these 12 hard-hitting recommendations in this report to restore a proper level of funding, staffing and resourcing to home care to meet the growing aging population in Man itoba today? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, the report that my honourable friend has is an interim report by the task force, which is circulated back to all of those groups that made presentation to the task force for a compila tion of their thoughts to the task force and submission to the Health Advisory Network, and then the report comes to me. Mr. Speaker, I cannot act on recommendations that have not been presented to me by the Health Advisory Network, so I will take my honourable friend 's que stion as notice and act upon and provide advice to her when I receive the final report from the Health Advisory Network in the near future. Ms.

Wasylycla-Leis: I would suggest the minister call in to his own department at 945-8599 to get a copy of this public report and give us some answers to these very serious constructive criticisms. My question to the minister is: Is he saying that after receiving a report for five months now, that he has not serious ly consider ed these recommendations and included them in the budget deliberations and having them addressed in the presentation of the budget tomorrow? Mr. Orchard: This is the same issue that came up when an interim report on the extended treatment bed task force came to the House about 14 months ago.

It was not the final report. It changed in the nature of its recommendation from the task force which my honour able friend has, which is an interim report circula ted back to the communities. That is why my honourable friend has a copy of it. It is not the final report and the final recommendation to the minister, as was not the interim report tabled by the Liberals 14 months ago, which left out a service area of the entire northeast qua drant of the city for extended treatment and personal care home beds, a recommendation that they agreed to as Liberals, but we disagreed with as government, Mr. Speaker.

All I ask my honourable friend is just to be patient. The Health Advisory Network will report. Their recommendations will be made public, and the public will be informed as to government's reaction to them and action plan taken. Ms. Wasylycia-Lels: I wish he would tell the senior citizens to be patient when they cut off home care services, deny the right- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member this is not a time for debate. The honourable member for St. Johns, kindly put your question, please. Finan cial Accountability Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St.

Johns): Let me ask the minister a question about an issue that the task force that I referred to says is being now addressed by the minister. I will ask the minister: What steps is he taking to restore financial accountabilit y to this program which, in the words of the task force, is a serious fundamental problem which requires political will to rectify and the ur gency of which can not be understated? What steps are being taken to deal with improper financial accounting- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Finally, Mr.

Speaker, a question of substance from my honour able friend, not the wild rhetoric that we hear from time to time. In 1988, when we assumed government in May, the financial controls in the Home Care Program were absent, and that was identified by a Coopers and Lybr and-I belie ve it was Cooper s and Lybrand-c onsult ant study into the home care report. They made several recommendations.

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 855 Mr. Speaker, we undertook-pardon me, it was not Coopers and Lybrand. My honourable friend the author of the report said it was Pr ice Waterhouse, which identified during the previous government no financial con trols in the home care system, an issue which I had brought to the floor of the House as opposition critic. *

(1410) Several initiatives have been undertaken to bring the kind of admin istrative control necessary for effective delivery of the Home Care Program. Those have not been easy to accomplish, given the size of the program, the numb er of clients that we serve each month and the nu mber of individuals working in the program. My hon ourable frie nd, from her seat, again mouths the NDP rh etorical phrase "cutba ck." Every year we have spent more money to serve more needs in home care, and I refuse- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Value-Added Processing Government Initiatives Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr.

Speaker, the rural economy continues to decline in Manitoba, hurt by the neglectful policies by this government, hur t by the Mulr oney trade agreement, which this government supported, and hurt by a declining agricultur al economy. Now we see the latest target by the Americans through the trade agreement. That is the alfalfa processing and the delivery of alfalfa products to third markets in Manitoba, whi ch could cost some 40 jobs in Dauphin and many other potential jobs throughout this province.

I ask the minister: What specific policies has this minister put in place in rural Manitoba to stimulate value-added processing in rural Man itoba so that jobs can be created rather than contribute to the decline of these jobs, as is happening now? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned to the member the other day when they made light of the Free Trade Agreement, Mani toba has done a very good job of accessing American markets in wheat, canola, flax and certainly in many other grain and oilseed crops.

We have doubled and tripled and sometimes qua drupled our access to the American market. The most recent action-the most rec ent indication of action in the Un ited States is they are going to look at alfalfa products going from Canada to the United States with the idea of looking at a counter vail-is certainly a most reprehensible degree of action that the Americans may well take.

It goes without saying that it is following the same line that was used in the pork ind ustry which brought countervail in place and which is causing us great heartache, even though we are winning the dispute settlement mechanism panels. We are winning the cases and the Americans are refusing to acknowledge that those panel cases are binding, and the decision that is to come down by May 15 on the pork coun tervail will go a long ways to determining how we are going to react on many of the other issues that are going to come up in trade-related matters with the Uni ted States in agriculture. Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Speaker, given the fact that value-added processing is absolutely essential in Ma nitob a if we are going to have economi c stimulation in the rural areas of Mani toba, and given the fact that the trade deal is at cross-purposes with this potential development because, in fact, the trade deal takes away from the processing, does not assist in process, I ask this mini ster how he can justify and rationali ze his continued support of the trade deal when in fact it is only raw materials that are inc reasing in export to the U. S. and value-added products are declining as a result of this trade deal? Mr. Findlay: Mr.

Speaker, the member's analysis that value-added processing is not supported by access to the American market is truly false. The only access we have got for the products we can value-add in this province really is the American market, that is the growing market. We are growing in north-south trade and I have just given some examples; canola is the very best one. We have incr eased our export of canola oil, whi ch is processed in Mani toba, some four fold between 1988 and 1990, fourfold, and that market access is growing and growing.

So the evidence is on the table that access to the American market is very critical for us to be able to have further value-added processing here in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, the facts are clear that the food processing industry has declined some 200 percent in terms of balance of trade since the trade agreement was put in place.

856 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 Will the minister table today any objective studies that have been done by this government to support his position that the trade deal has been good for value-added processing in this province, and will he use that to explain to the people of Dauphin and tile people of Manitoba who are going to lose these jobs in processing of alfalfa products that the trade deal is good for this province? Mr. Findlay: Mr.

Speaker, in the province of Man itoba, we have to export 50 percent to 60 percent of what we produce and the growing cash market that we can export is the Un ited States. Since the Fr ee Trade Agreement our sales to the Un ited States have increased some 23 percent. That is called market penetration and a secure market that can pay cash for the products they buy. In the same period of time across Canada, we have had 50 new processing plants and 55 processing plants that have been expanded, totally contrary to the misinformation that member just put on the record. -(interjection)- M r. Speaker: Or der, ple ase.

You had an opportun ity-order, please. Child and F amlly Services Deficit Relief Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, up to now this government has enjoyed the confidence of a majority of the members of this House, but in addition to that confidence, it must have the trust of the people whom it works with. It must honour the agreements that it makes with people.

When the government became aware the Child and Family Services agencies were running deficits in their '89-90 year, the Minister of Family Services entered into an agreement in which he gave them three conditions to get that deficit pickup -three conditions. All agencies have met those three conditions, and yet the minister will not give that deficit relief that they so desperately need. He has given it to two, but not to the others. Why is he breaking his commitment? Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr.

Speaker, as the member is well aware, the deficits have been there for a numb er of years. We have grave concerns about the deficits that have been run by the Child and Family Services agencies in previous years and in the year just passed. We are in the middle of a process of working with those agencies to deal with their deficits to have them bring forward service agreements and to enter into funding agreements. The process is in a state of evolution, as we become aware of the deficits for 1990 and '91.

Certainly with the first agencies we entered into an exchange of letters of under standing regarding the deficit. The situation has evolved to the point where we want a more formalized structure. We are working on a funding agreement that was forwarded to one of the agencie s la st week. We have ind icated, if there are some problems with that, we are prepared to sit down and discuss it with them. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, while this minister is evolving, he is prioritizing his relationship with the Minister of Fin ance (Mr. Manness) over the needs of children in this province. This is the '91-92 fiscal year.

These agencies are opera ting now. Every one of them presented balanced budgets, but this minister will not give them that relief. They are going to go back into deficit, because they are carrying tl1e in terest cost of those deficits which he has recognized and agreed to support. Will he today see that those agencies get that relief that they deserve? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I want to say very clearly that our commitment is to the children and families of Manit oba. -(in terjection)- Well, tile member, who is a fr equent cons ultant to the agencies, feels that we are not treating them fairly.

We have to be concerned with those deficits. We have to be concerned with tile escalation of those deficits in the year '90-91. We are in tile process of looking at the funding agreement that we forwarded to one of them. I met as recently as this morning with the umbrella agency which represents tile agencies, and we have grave concerns. We are prepared to continue to meet in the near tuture to try and remedy these. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, every agency produced a balanced budget. Two of them got the deficit relief; the others did not. Why? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr .

Speaker, each of the agencies operates quite differently. Some have traditionally had balanced budgets, and we applaud them for that. We applaud them for the fact that for a numb er of years they have had a balanced budget,

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 857 some of them with surplu ses. Some of the agencies who were late in submitting their plans and having these finalized are the agencies with the largest deficits- A n Honourable Me mber: Not true, Har old. Northwest had the largest- *

(1420) Mr. Speaker: Or der, plea se. The honour able member for Osborne has had an opportuni ty to ask thi s que stion, and I would ask all honourable members to give the ho nour able min ister an opportuni ty to respond to the question. Mr. Gllleshammer: I know that the honour able member is intimately involved with the agencies, and I am not sure that he shares our concern that they are running deficits and debts. I can tell you that some of the agencies with the largest debts, we have had a more difficult time or they have had a more difficult time in presenting a balanced budget.

As a result, this has taken more time than we initially expected. Video Lotteries Job Creation Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for Lotteries. Given tile fact that this minister has lost 52 jobs to Stettler, Alberta, and recently, along with other memb ers of the Wes tern Canada Lotter y Corporation, lost over $600,000 to the Pogo ad campaign, can this minister tell this House how many jobs will be created through the new video lottery scheme, and what guidelines will she put in place to ensure that children are not exploited by this scheme? Hon.

Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Foundation Act): Mr . Speaker, I think I would like to correct some of the infactual information that has just been put on the record, as usual, by members of the official opposition. Mr.

Speaker, had we continued along with an NOP administration over the last couple of years, we would have lost some 120 jobs from Western Canada Lottery, because the former minister was very amenable to breaking up the corporation rather than trying to work together in the best interests of all the provinces, and we would have lost many more jobs under that admin istration than we were able to accomplish. I wanted to cor rect tha t infactual information and also the insinuation that th ere was $60 0, 000 lo st thr ough the Pog o advertising.

The print campaign went ahead in the province of Manitoba, and I am very concerned about that ki nd of money being spent. I have asked my board members who represent Manitoba in the Western Canada Lottery Corporation to bring that issue forward at the next meeting and ensure that we do some proactive rather than reactive work in the future. Crystal Casino Revenue Forecast Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, after last year's fiasco with labour relations at the Crystal Ca sino, will thi s govern men t still make the anticipated $10 million in revenues? Hon.

Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba lotteries Foundation Act): Mr. Speaker, we had indicated that the casino would generate $10 million in revenue in its first full year of operation. We had a two-month strike by the casino workers. Every expectation is that we will be somewhere between $8.5 million and $9 million in the final figures after 10 months of operation, because of the two-month interruption by a work stoppage. Video Lotteries Revenue Forecast Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Actually my fi rst question dealt with the video lottery scheme.

I was wondering if the minister could tell us the anticipated revenues forecast from this scheme. Hon. Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba lotteries Foundation Act): Mr. Speaker, I do not know, again, where the member is getting his info rmation from, but there are informal discussions about video lotter y termi nals throug hou t the pr ovince of Manitoba. There has been no decision made, and I will assure the member opposite that as soon as any decision is made that we will inform him. Mr. Speaker: Time for Ora l Qu estions has expired.

858 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call the bills in the following order: Bills 5, 6, 20, then Bills 8 and 12. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Biii 5- The Mental Health Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Min ister of Health (Mr. Or chard) , Bill 5, The Mental Health Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la sante mentale, standing in the name of the honourable member for St . Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) . Stand? Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): I would like to speak to this bill and have it remain standing in the member's name. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for this matter to remain standing in the name of the honour able member for St. Johns? Leave? Agreed. Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate having the oppor1unity to put some remarks on record with respect to Bill 5, The Mental Health Amendment Act. We were chastised by the Min ister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and the government House leader (Mr.

Man ness) for not directing remarks to this bill. There seems to be an assumption on the part of the Minister of Health that this bill had the approbation of all members of society and all those involved in the mental health community. Mr. Speaker, that clearly is not the case. There are, clearly, some significant points of confusion, significant differences of opinion with respect to the implications of this bill on people in the province of Manit oba, both indi viduals and fa milies who unfortu nately might come under the purview of this act.

I think it is important that this Chamber review the amendments to the, I think it was, 1987 Mental Health Act Amendments, a major rewriting of The Mental Health Act, which was done in a consultative way with the mental health community, with those involved both in providing services and those with family who have or are suffering from some form of mental illne ss. Mr. Speaker, these are difficult issues.

I respect the fact that much of what is contained in this leg islation is designed to impr ove the circu mstances for those who suffer from mental illn ess and those who have family members who are cu rrently suff ering or have suffered from some type of mental illne ss. Mr. Speaker, perhaps if I could start by saying that this particular piece of legislation and implementing this legislation is difficult because of the nature of the problem we are attempting to deal with. Mental illne ss is a serious problem.

The forms that mental illne ss takes create a dilemma for professionals who treat mental illne ss, for the families who suffer along wit h peopl e who experience mental hea lth problems, and the disease itself creates problems for legisla tors who try to cope with all of the demands of society, the family, and the individual, in creating legislation that is workable. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Ch air) Madam Deput y Speaker, the original amendment s to The Mental He alth Act were introduced to really resolve a number of problems.

They were introduced to resolve a problem with respect to individual rights, because we are all aware in this Chamber that individual rights have been abused as a result of mental health legislation both here and in other jurisdictions across the country and around the world. It is only in the recent past where the true nature of mental ill ness has begun to be understood. I say begun, Madam Deputy Speaker, because no one to date completely under stands the vast array of mental illne sses that confront us and confront health care professionals.

Diseases, mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia, paranoia and depression, are only beginnin g to be under stood. *

(1430) There are very few certainties when it comes to the treatment of people with mental ill ness. We have designed for ourselves an onerous task. We have said we are going to create a mechanism for assisting people who have mental ill nesses. We are going to design a mechanism that will provide support to families of people who suffer from mental illne sses. We are going to design a method of ensur in g the public safety when it comes to protecting the public from people who suffer from one or another form of mental ill ness. Fin ally, we are going to create a system where the person suffe ring the illn ess does not, him or herself,

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 859 become a victim. Madam Deputy Speaker, that is not an easy task. I, at one time, was a school counsellor and have ha d an opport uni ty to work with indi viduals, particularly young people who are suffering from mental illness. Over the course of my experience, Madam Deputy Speaker, I also had an opportun ity to work with many professionals, mental health care pro fessiona ls, in dealing with the variet y of symptoms, the variety of situations, in which both illne ss sufferers and families find themselves in the course of an episode of mental illne ss.

I say that simply to ind icate that what we are trying to do here is going to create its own set of problems, because there are no simple answers. There are no simple solutions when it comes to dealing with these kin ds of problems. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orch ard) indi cated when he introduced this legislation for second reading that the amendments were really only to clarify and make more workable the previous mental health amendment.

Well, as we go through this legislation, we find that some of the su ggestions that are being made by way of amendment are going to create their own set of problems. I think we want to take some time to talk about whether the cour se tha t is being recommended by this legislation is, in fact, the direction that we want to take.

I would intend to talk more specifically about some of the provisions in a moment, but I want to say first that, in general, the amendments that we are seeing here are not going to addre ss the fundamental dilemma facing the families of people who suffer from mental illne ss or the sufferers themselves, because I guess the objectives of everyone involved in the treatment of mental illne ss is to provide a qual ity and a level of mental health care that serves the patient and ser ves the society as well.

Madam Deputy Speaker, one of the dilemma s is trying to decide how and under what conditions people who suffer from mental illness can remain in their home, can remain in their community or must of necessity be institutionalized, and it is not clear from these amendments how we are going to address that balance. This government is now introducing its fourth budget.

They have had the opportunity to prioritize their spending both in the Manit oba Health Services Commission and the Department of Health to ind icate a greater level of support for those who suffer from mental illne ss, particularly in rural and northern Man itoba. I want to go on record as sayin g that my community, the community of Flin Fl on, is one of those co mmunities that unfortunately offers very little by way of service to those with serious, acute mental illness problems. Madam Deputy Speaker, there are no acute psychiatric beds available in the immediate area.

There are no psychiatrists resident in my community or for that matter resident in most of the communities outside of the city of Winnip eg. We have in Man itoba two institutions where, if required, people can go to protect their own health and well-being and the health of their family or co mmun ity. There is a dear th of resou rces available to thousands, certainly thousands of Man itobans in the general population who suffer from one or another form of mental illn ess.

In the last six months I have written a numb er of letters to people in the Mental Health division, to the minister himself regarding services that are being made available or should be made available, I should say, to people in northern Man itoba. Madam Deput y Sp eaker, I am aware of individuals in northern Manitoba who suffer from severe depression, from manic depression, who have absolutely no acute care available to them should they suffer from an episode of depression.

In fact, the only recourse is for the family or a caring friend to assist by transporting that individual to fac ilities in Saskatoon or the city of Winn ipeg-or Selkirk, I should say. I do not think that is acceptable. We continue to hear from the government and from this minister that mental health is a priority, that providing services, more adequate and appropriate services to people who suffer from these kinds of illnesses is a priority. We have yet to see it, certainly in rural Man itoba. My colleague, the member for Dauphin (Mr.

Pl oh man ) , tal ked about the Taj Mahal, the psychiatric institution that is being constructed in the city of Winnipeg. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would be the last to suggest that if that facility is constructed that it will be utilized, but I would be the first to say t11at it should not be the first line of defence in the treatment of mental health. I think there are many, many in our commu nity, people who are involved directly or . indir ectly in mental

860 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA April 15 , 19 91 health issues, who would argue that the need for services outside the city of Winnipeg is great and is growing greater as we speak. Madam Deputy Speaker, I know that in Flin Flon, for example, the community residents have taken it upon themselves to organize, to attempt to provide support to people who suffer from mental illness. Tha t su ppor t can onl y be pr ovide d in a non professional way. There is a growing mental health support group in the commun ity, and they have formed recently a

chapter of the Manitoba Mental Health Association. Madam Deputy Speaker, these steps, however, are interim steps and should not be confused with a real plan of attack on the part of mental health care workers or the government of Manitoba. I think that is what we need.

I think we need to make sure that where there are people willing to spend time and energy supp orting individu als who suffer from men tal illn ess, tha t we should ha ve also a government plan, a government strategy, a strategy from the Mental Health division of the Department of Health, to help these people and offer assistance when clearly the problem has gone beyond what non professional individuals can provide by way of help. The problems that are being experienced in Flin Fl on and outly ing communi ties, whether it is reflected in suicide statistics, aggression, abuse, are only the tip of the iceberg.

The fact is that we do not have very good statistics when it comes to the real ramifications of mental illne ss in the province of Manitoba. I think it is obvious to everyone in this Chamber that the statistics that we do have certainly are not particularly reliable when it comes to the problems being experienced in outlying, remote communities. *

(1440) We should never kid ourselves. Ju st because we do not hear of the mental health problems that are being experienced in isolated communities, we do not see the violence that is infl icted on family members, we do not see the self-abuse, Madam Deputy Speaker, we should not kid ourselves that it does not exist. The fact is that there is no Free Press rep orter on the scene to repor t tl1at kind of unfortu nate incident, but it does occur and it occurs on a too fr equen t basis in many of those communities.

Madam Deputy Speaker, there was a report very recently on the incidenc e of youth suicide in the province of Manitoba. I recall approximately a year and a half ago, one single community-one single community-in the province of Manitoba, a northern remote community, reporting six youth suicides in one year. Now, I know it is never going to be possible to identify the underl yi ng ill ness, the unde rly ing reasons for those suicides. I do not know that it is going to be possible to identify in any specific way whether there was something concrete and tangible tha t could ha ve been done to prevent those suicides.

I do know that until we get people who have some expertise in those communities, even on an itinerant basis, we stand no ho pe of relieving the se communities of that kind of tragedy. Suicides and so forth are going to happen, and how many are a dir ect result of some ling ering or chronic mental illne ss we will never know until we get the resources that we need into those communities to do a mental health survey, if you will. It is something that I think the government should be thinking about doing.

However, I will leave that for the moment, Madam Depu ty Spe aker , and simpl y say tha t if the government is concerned as it says it is with mental health services, there are areas of the province where residents certainly feel at the present time that they have no access. They do not know where to turn when they or one of their family members are experiencing a mental illne ss episode. However, I wanted to speak for a moment about some of the specific concepts mentioned in this particular bill, Bill 5, the amendments to The Mental Health Act.

One of the issues that I mentioned in my earlier remarks was the question of admission. Who decides-under what cir cu mstances is it decided that someone will be admitted against their wishes, against sometimes the wishes of their family, to an institution? Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill I think attempts to clarify the process to ensure that the individual rights of tha t patient are not undermined unduly. I know that the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchar

d) has a serious problem on his hands when it comes to conflic ts between The Mental Health Act and perhaps the Charter of Rights. As an example, I kn ow that the Department of Health has from time to time been taken to court over

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 861 its admissions policies and admissions practices by in dividuals seeking some protection under the Cha rter of Rights. I say that to recognize the fact that the admissions policy, regardless of how restrictive it is or how thorough in fact it may be, it is going to run into problems from time to time based on ind ividual perceptions that their rights are being violated in one way or another.

I wanted to also make it clear that one of the things that people who have suffered from mental illness, people who have been institutionalized under the provisions of The Mental Health Act, have been saying for a long time is that there has to be a mechan ism to ensur e an appropr iate appea l process, to make sur e that wha tever appea l process is put in place is both under standable and accessible from the patient's point of view. It is not good enough to have an appeal process where only the interests of the institution or the psychiatric profession are represented.

That is one of the issues, I think, that needs to be addressed more clearly in this bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think there are two sections in this legislation that attempt to address it, but I am not satisfied that they address it clearly enough. One of the sections of the bill deals with the right of certain patients to refuse treatment. Again, we are talking about a situation where judgment ultimately determines whether a person can refuse a treatment or not.

That judgment is going to be provided by an attending physician, a psychiatrist, but it is nevertheless a decision with a tremendous set of implications for the individual patient. Madam Deputy Speaker, the second requirement in the legislation is something that I think certainly members on this side will accept readily, and that is the requirement that where treatment is to occur withou t consent th at detai led records of tha t treatment be provided. Now, Madam Depu ty Sp eaker, th ere is a celebrated case in Canada with respect to treatment that is provided without the knowledge or consent of patients.

We are all familiar with the case of Val Orli kow, who un derwent psychiatric treatment without her consent, without her full knowledge of the nature of the treatment or its likely result. These two things put together, the acceptance of the principle that a psychiatric patient, even though he lives with the label "psych iatric patient," still may in fact be capable of determining for him or herself whether he or she should receive treatment and what treatment that might be.

The second principle, which I think is even more important, is that if treatment is provided under the authority of this act that that treatment be detailed and the doses, the ki nds of medicines that are provided, the circumstances in which that treatment is provided, be detailed for the record because it is, I guess, totally unacceptable to most people, or it should be, to have someone treated against their will and have no legal recou rse should that treatment turn out to be ill advised.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the unfortunate facts of the matter are that the public record shows that in many. many instances those who are treating people with mental illnesses have in fact abused the physical and the mental rights of their patients. The unc ontrolled use, the inapprop riate use of electric shock treatment is only one example. Of course, a person that is in an institution with no supp ort, no immediate fa mily su pport, has no recourse to redress wrongs that are done in an institution, because they have no records.

This provision will ensure, hopefully, that if treatment is provided that is un necessary, if the treatment itself becomes worse than the disease, that the patient will have some recourse. The institution and those attending will have some responsibili ty to the patient, and it seems to me tha t is an important principle, Madam Deputy Speaker. Another issue which is raised by this legislation is the question of voluntary patients. I think that many, many in the mental health communi ty are going to have some serious reser vati ons about the provisions that are found in the

section covering the return of voluntary patients to a facility. Madam Deputy Speaker, the medical profession, the mental health care givers in the province have historically encouraged people to voluntarily admit themselves to psychiatric institutions when they the patients felt that it was necessary. The difficulty, of course, for voluntary admissions is not getting in for treatment, or being accepted in the main, but in getting out, in being discharged from that institution.

Although I recognize that thi s amendment is an attempt to clari fy the process for the return of patients, I am still concerned that what we may end up doing, rather than protecting individuals or, as the act suggests, protecting the individual from

862 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANI TOBA April 15 , 19 91 himself, or the individual from the communi ty, is that we may, in fact, be inadvertently discouraging self-admissions. We may, in fact, be discouraging it because of, I guess, the potential for mistakes, changes in status, as has been suggested. *

(1450) We have to know, and the patients have to know, that if they admit themselves volunt arily they have the right to discha rge themselves voluntarily; and that, if that right is going to be taken from them, there is a process in place that protects them, whether or not they are currently capable, in the view of mental health professionals, of making the appropriate choice. Again, we are dealing with a very difficult area in law. We are dealing with an area where it is very difficult to paint things as black or white.

It is difficult for anyone, even the most experienced psychiatrist, to delve into the human mind and know whether there is any real insight into important personal questions. We are dealing with best guesses in most instances, and when that starts to happen, you always have to worry about the rights of the in dividual, you always have to wo rry about overriding indi viduals' rights as a res ult of institutional concern or societal concern. Again, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is a difficult balance, we recognize that.

However, in reviewing this legislation, I think certainly members on this side and our Health critic want to be abundant ly careful in coming to conclusions about what the impact of these amendment s is going to be. These are im portant qu estions, and the onl y way to know-perhaps not know, perhaps we can never know-but the only way to increase the level of certainty is to consult as broadly as possible with health care professionals and those who have been or are affected by the provisions of this act.

In other words, we have to consult very broadly before we rush to introduce amendments to The Mental Health Act to solve problems that exist because, in doing that, in rushing in that way, we may actually be creating more problems for the institt,ition, the professionals in the field, and the patients ultimately. Madam Deputy Speaker, the other area that this bill is addres sing deal s wit h confi dentialit y provisions. Again, because of the stigma that is attached to a diagnosis of mental ill ness, these provisions are very, very important.

Again, I am familiar with an individual, again from the commu nit y of Flin Fl on, who pub li cly ackn owledged that he had su ffered and occasionally suffered from severe depression, a mental illne ss. I would like to report that that disclosure had no impact on the way he was perceived or the way he was treated by individuals. Un fortunately, I do not think anyone could report that kind of statement.

The fact is that mental illn ess still retains significant stigma, that people who are viewed as being mentally ill, people who have periodic episodes of mental illne ss, whether it is depression or schizophrenic episodes, are viewed as different, as potentially dangerous. The importance, I guess, of confidentialit y in dealing with mental illne sses is paramount. What we are talkin g about in this particular piece of legislation, I think, is the right of an individual to

a) access their records and

b) to correct the record or attempt to correct the record if they feel that their confidential records are somehow in error. I think it is a good idea, and we only hope that the process of correcting the record can be made in such a way that allo ws not onl y the individual patient but perhaps other practi tione rs, men tal health practitioners, to also attempt to correct the record because there is very little certainty in the diagnosis of mental ill ness-very little certainty.

Two individual psychiatrists may come to very different conclusions about the degree to which someone is affected by a mental ill ness, about the degree to which that mental illness affects the abil ity of the individual to conduct his daily life, the degree to which that individual is lik ely to present a danger to himself or herself, the degree to which that in dividual is li kely to present a danger to the commu nity, so you have the same indi vidual presenting the same symptoms with very differing diagnoses.

The right of the individual patient to correct the record, should a diagnosis be present in his record, is extremely important. I know that most members in this Chamber, and probably most individuals, have heard or fol lowed individual cases where remarks left on the record by a psychiatrist, the diagnosis left on the record, ha ve affected dr ama ticall y in dividuals' lives, dr amatic al ly, because clearly there are many professions, for exam ple , there are many occu pa tion s,

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 863 occupations, cir cums tances, where a person's health records become part of the review for employment. When you consider the degree of difficulty there is in diagnosing mental illne ss, the degree of error which occurs, you recognize how important it is to be able to correct the record. Now this, of course, is true of most of our records. You could talk about school records, employment records or anything else.

It would always be nice to be able to correct the record, but because of the stigma that is attached to mental illness when it comes to employment opportunities and the ability to get visas to go to other countries, to travel to other countri es, the implic ations are quite astounding and quite serious. The inclusion of new provisions to allow mental health patients to correct the record is important.

It is important for a lot of reasons, so we will, I think, Madam Deputy Speaker, be looking to consult with those who have been or may be affected by this particular amendment and trying to ascertain whether the amendment proposed by the minister is going to resolve some of the problems that remain in The Ment al He alth Act with respect to confidentialit y and the rights of patients to correct the record. Madam Deputy Speaker, the only other

section that I wanted to talk about was the treatment decisions by other

section which deals with the right of the patient to refuse psychiatric and other medical treatment when that individual is deemed to be competent to make those decisions. I said earlier that because of the vagaries involved in defining mental illness and determini ng how dangerous one individual is to himself or others, that decision had to be weighed very carefully. Clearly there are going to be in cidents when an individual does not believe that he should or she should require treatment. It then falls to the health care professionals, as required by The Mental Health Act, to make that decision for that person.

That is the most difficult circu mstance of all for the individual and for family members. *

(1500) We have a situation where an individual believes himself capable of making his own decisions with respect to treatment, a professional who believes otherwise, and we have a decision to make. What we need to do, and I would recommend, and perhaps others will recommend, that the process of determining competency will not be left at the sole discretion of an individual and that there be an appeal mechanism, an informal appeal mechanism perhaps, of ensuring that the patient's interests in all of this are protected.

We now have a situation where a patient is assessed, it is determined that he is not competent, despite his own objections and feelings to the contrary. Now we have to make sure that the next step in the decision-making process respects the inherent rights of the patient. I am not sure that the current amendments satisfy the interests of the patient to the extent that is possible. I guess what I would like to see and perhaps many would like to see is a much more rigorous requirement for the involvement of the patient's family, spouse, friends, et cetera.

I think it is important that when an individual's competency is being questioned, when treatment decisions are being made, that we not leave it to the sole discretion, the un challenged discretion of psychiatrists or doctors in every case. I think that we may need and it may be useful for everyone involved to get the benefit of an outside opinion, an opinion that comes from those who may ult imately be respon sible for the care of that individual should he or she not be institutionalized, which apparently and hopefully is the goal of all of our care.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the amendments which are being introduced, in the main, I think are positive. There are many that will receive the support of the majority of the members of the Legislature, but there are some which raise some qu estions. I want to assure the Mini ster of Health (Mr. Orchard) that I and others will be contacting our interest groups in our communities to get their thoughts on the proposed amendments.

I want to assure the mini ster that where the amendments warrant support, they will receive support; and where, in the opinion of members on this side and the opinion of the groups that we consu lt, there are need for improvements, there will be improvements. (Mr. Speaker in the Cha ir) Having said that, Mr . Speaker, I am prepared to support much of what is presented and look forward to the comments of my colleagues and perhaps members opposite on the strength of the document that is before us today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

864 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed, this matter will remain standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylyc ia-Leis). Bill 6-The Mines and Minerals and Consequential Amendments Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Mini ster of En ergy and Min es (Mr. Neuf eld), Bill 6, The Mi nes and Min erals and Consequential Amendments Act;

Loi sur les mines et les mineraux et modifiant diverses dispositions legislatives, standing in the name of the honour able member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hi ckes). An Honourable Member: The question stands. Mr. Speaker: Stand. Is there leave that this matter remain standing? Leave? Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. SECOND READINGS Bill 20- The Animal Husbandry Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Bill 20, The An imal Hu sbandry Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'elevage, the honourable Minister of- Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr . Sp eaker, the min ister has been detained in his office. I wonder if there might be a willingne ss of the House to revert back to Bill 20 when the minister joins the House. Mr. Speaker: The honourable government House leader, I believe, has the right to call the bills in any order that he chooses. At this time the honourable government House leader did indicate that he wanted Bill 20 called up third. Would you rather now call it up last? Mr. Manne ss: Yes. Mr. John Plohman (Acting Opposition House Leader): Mr .

Sp eak er, the Ho use leader had ind icated he was calling Bill 20 after Bills 5 and 6 and because the minister was un able to introduce it at this time he is changing the order. However, I do not know that necessarily means it has to be the last bill called. I would appreciate if it was done a little bit earlier, if the House leader would consider it, because I was anxiously waiting to hear the introduction of the bill. We do not have any other speakers on the bills that are on the table at the present time, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: There appears to be a willing ness to call Bill 20 shortly.

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 8- The Vital Statistics Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honour able Mini ster of Fam ily Ser vices (Mr. Gi llesham mer ) , Bill 8, The Vi tal St atisti cs Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les statistiqu es de l'etat civil, standing in the name of the honourable member for Wellin gton (Ms. Barrett). An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain standing? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave. Agreed. SECOND READINGS Bill 20-The Animal Husbandry Amendment Act Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minis ter of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) , that Bill 20, The Animal Husbandr y Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'elevage) be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, The Animal Husbandry Amendment Act, Bill 20, is doing some housekeeping amendments to the act since the act was last introduced to the House in 1987. The act consists of seven different parts.

I will identify three different parts that we are going to make some amendment s to, basically in response to some concerns that people at large, particularly the UMM and the Mani toba Association of Ur ban Mun icipalities had about the act, the way it was introduced by the government of the day back in 1987. I guess it is another bit of evidence where they did not consult with people before they went ahead and put a bill in place. -(interjection)- The memb er for Dauphin (Mr. Pl oh man) no w under stands what we are talkin g about. In

Section 1 of the act, we are changing the definition of animal and poultry so that the definition clearly represents that we are talking only about

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANI TOBA 865 livestock that are used for agricult ural purposes and not talking about pets, neither dogs nor cats nor, I guess we might say, fowl that are used for recreational purposes or the fancy flocks that really are not for agricultural purposes but are for hobby uses. In

Section 2, we are removing Sections 35 to 38. Those sections requir ed that damages had to be paid to people who actually experienced some damage to their animals or poultry by animals and the comp ensation ha d to be given by the municipality. We are deleting this entirely, because the truth of the matter is animals or birds can have private insurance to cover those kinds of damages. So the fact that the act allows for compensation when an animal is killed on the road or killed by a dog is really not necessary.

The munici pal ities clearly did not want that responsibilit y to determine the value of the loss and then in turn compensate for that loss. As I said, those ki nds of compens ations were available through private insur ance. We clearly agree with them, so we removed those elements from the act. I guess I would have to also tell the House that there was a fair bit of consu ltation with UMM officials and with MAUM officials.

We also talked to the Man itoba Cattle Pr oducers' Associati on, the Keystone Agricultural Pr oducers, and all of those are very strongly in favour of the information I have just given to the House in regard to the changes to the act. *( 1510) The Manitoba Sheep Association has a fair bit of concern about dogs and stray dogs killing their sheep. The act does still contain, and this

section was not changed, the act still contains the ability for any livestock owner that If a dog is destroying their sheep or any other animals, they have the right to destroy the dog. That right exists. It was in the act and it remains in the act; so sheep producers are covered both from that aspect of the act. They can destroy a dog that is killing their sheep, or they have the right to compens ation through pri vate insurance.

We have had considerable consultation with all those groups, and I think it is fair to say that there is a very strong consensus that these act changes need to be done and should be done. It makes the act much more operational for mun icipalities and for livestock producers. The municipalities can under The Mu nicipal Act develop by-laws to handle stray pets and dogs and cats, so there is no need for that aspect to be in this act. It presently allows them under The Mun icipal Act to develop the by-laws to deal with dogs and cats. One other aspect, Mr .

Speaker, to the bill that we are asking it be introduced at this time is that technology does change over time. We are asking in

Part 3 that some changes be done to include electronic iden tification as a means of branding livestock or anim als. State of the art-t oday's techn olo gy al lows electr onic identification-is being developed and probably will be a fairly significant means of identifying animals in the future. We are asking that this be added to the act so that in the future if regulations need to be developed around electronic identification, it can be done under the auspice of this act without any further amendments.

It will also give an opportunity for clearly defin ing the roles of inspectors under the act with re gard to br an ding and/or el ectro nic identification. It will allow for the procedure of collecting fees and developing cost recovery, if needed, for admini stering that part of the act. So, Mr. Speaker, those are the main elements of the act in terms of the bill that we are introducing here today. It is a changing of the definition of animal and poultry to exclude pets.

It is the removal of the requirement for municipa lities to determine level of damage and com pens ate for those damages, and it is adding the aspect of electronic identification under Sections 41 to 63 with regard to the regulations for branding. I strongly recommend to the House that this bill be appr oved by the House. It does have the sup port of the, say, Un ion of Manit oba Munici palities and also Manitoba Association of Urban Mun icipalities and the farm organizations of the province of Manitoba.

It will streamline the act and allow it to deal strictly with agricultural animals and take away some of the onus that had been put on the municipalities in the previous act that had been brought in, in 1987. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. John PI oh man (Dauphin) : I just wanted to ask a question, if I could, of the minister before moving to, well, have a speaker on it. I have a question of the minister, Mr. Speaker.

866 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANI TOBA April 15 , 19 91 Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Dauphin have leave to ask the hono urable minister a question? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Plohman: Thank you, Mr . Speaker, for gr anting-mem bers for granti ng leave. I ju st wanted to ask the minister if he could clar ify, because I do not have the main act in front of me and perhaps it is not clear if wildli fe th at is domesticated falls into the definition of animal under this act, and comes un der the jurisdic tion of this act; such as buffalo, for example, and perhaps others.

Is this un der The Wildli fe Act? Mr. Flndlay: I do not have the definition of animal specifically in front of me either, but I will find out for sure. My intuition tells me the buffalo, since it is domesticated, is incl uded in the definition of animal under this act. Any other species I am not clear on, but buffalo defin itely is domestic ated for the purpose of agriculture. I am positive it will be in, but I will get the definitive information for the member. Ho n. James Do wne y (Minist er of Rural Developmen t): I rise, Mr. Speaker, to speak.

Just to make sure I keep track of my time, I want to -(interjection)- well, the members opposite again want to take lightly a very important part of the economy of this province, that, of course, being the livestock ind ustry. Before any ind ustry can carry out the normal activities, it has to have the protection, the normal protection of the Legislature as it relates to creditors, as it relates to anything that would in fact discourage producers from being involved in the production of livestock. Mr .

Speaker, I want to make it very clear that the whole pr ocess tha t we are going through is extremely important to the industry and one which I am pleased to stand and speak on. I want to speak, as well, as the Mini ster respo nsible for Rur al Development. As my colleague, the Min ister of Agriculture (Mr.

Fin dla y) , has cl early ind icated, this has been supported by the Uni on of Manitoba Mu nicipalities, ha s been di scussed with them and again a commitment of this government-not like the NOP who would move unila terally in most cases, this has been discussed with the Un ion of Mu nicipali ties and generally supported by them. I think it is important to put that on the record. Bill 20, Mr. Speaker-and I want to talk about the livestock industry in Manitoba. I heard the member for Fl in Flan (Mr .

Storie), formerly from Baldur, who had some good rural roots and has good rural roots and, unfor tuna tely, there happened to be something that distorted his think ing as he was developing in life and got into the NDP philosophy. One cannot hold that against him to too big a degree, but one has to bri ng into context the imp ortance of the livestock industry. I am going to do that. I am going to do that because it is extremely important. (interjection)-! will speak to the bill, and I will speak to the amendments. -(interjection)- Yes, it is.

The livestock industry is extremely important to the economics of this province, and this bill is directly related to the support of the livestock producers and the protection of the product which they produce. So, Mr . Speaker, let it not be said by the member for Flin Fl an that this is not an important bill and protection for livestock producers and pou ltry producers in this province. Point of Order Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) is attempting to put words in my mouth, saying I did not support the live stock indu stry.

Wha t I said was that this government has no agenda. Now they are going to waste another full day of the Legislature's time debating and talking on an amendment that is really quite an unfortuna te waste of time for all of us. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for Flin Flan did not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, it was the members opposite, the other day they tried to grandstand when there was a group of my constituents in here, tried to get an emergency debate on the floor dealing with agriculture for their own political purposes.

Now he is trying to say, when I want to speak on an agriculture matter, he wants to deny me that privilege and that opportunity. Mr. Speaker, shame on the New Democratic Party for not wan ting to debate agricul ture in this Legislative Assembly when we have the opportuni ty to do so. The reason they did not want to speak-tha t they wanted to delay the other day was twofold: one is

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANI TOBA 867 to grandstand to a group of constituents; secondly, was because they wanted to delay the introduction of Bill 33. Mr. Speaker, need I say any more? Mr. Speaker, let us deal with how important the livestock ind ustry and the protection of the livestock industry is under Bill 20. Agriculture today has, and I say this particularly in the area which I represent, the producers have gone under severe economic press ur e and strain due to mainly two main problems: one is continued drought; secondly, a depressed price for the grain industry. *

(1520) Mr. Speaker, I say thanks to those produ cers who have seen fit to diversify their agricultural production un its to both the livestock and the poultry ind ustries, although very restricted as to what they can get into in the poultry industry because of the regulations in marketings boards, but at least it is an opportun ity to continue to enhance and develop an ind ustry and diversify an industry that so desperately needs it. This kind of bill, this protection that they get from predators, particularly from tame or neighbouring dogs and animals that would cause problems, is important.

Let me point out how important the livestock industry is. We would have, particularly as it relates to the Southwest part of Manitoba and I am sure the member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans) would agree with me because there are some similarities other than usually the moisture conditions are somewhat different, but we are usually based on pretty much of a diversified soil types and the need for the use of livestock to take advantage of some of the more marginal ends and the ki nds of incomes that do not traditionally come straight from the grain ind ustry. I say, Mr .

Speaker, in 1977 to '81, I had the opportunity to be Minister of Agriculture. Those days compared to today, I have to say for a Min ister of Agriculture, were somewhat better. I will admit that the days, previous to our coming into office, with the previous NDP government were somewhat strenuous on Ministers of Agricul ture because from about 1981 on, we saw some very difficult times develop in the agricultural industry, both with the inflationary costs of everythin g a farmer had to buy and continued pressure on those things that they had to sell.

I was of the mind in those particular days that one should encour age increased livestock production. I called for the doubling of hog production in this province, and over a period of some 10 to 12 years that in fact took place. The value of the hog production industry in Manitoba today is something lik e $250 million. Yes, we ha ve seen some difficulties in our packing house indu stry, but at least we still have a packing house ind ustry as it relates to the hog industry. � Mr.

Speaker, if we do not continue to encour age the diversification of our agricultural base, then we will have no job opportunities in the packing house ind ustry, no job oppor tuni ties in the feed mill industry, no job opportunities in an area that is a natural advantage to this province, and I believe, whether it is Bill 20, when we are encouraging people to protect or the government is bringing in legislation to further enhance and protect livestock and poultry production, then I think we should all be prepared to speak to it. I, Mr.

Speaker, am extremely troubled, and I say that at this particular time, because I believe what is in particula rly some of our farm communities is a far greater devastation than one would have thought several weeks and months ago. I am seeing a group of farmers who are continually coming to me in the last few days, even though there had been some proposed changes which have to be agreed to by the federal government, as it deals with the rece ntly annou nced GRIP program, who still continually say to me, the program still does not cover what they thought it should cover.

I am not critical of them for coming forward. In fact, I am continually trying to press and find ways which may in fact enhance and give them the kind of comfort and coverage they need, but I have come to the realization that it is an extremely short-term, shor t-cash position that they are in, that they are faced with the banking ind ustry, faced with those people who would normally give them credit probably saying no to those indi viduals. Mr. Speaker, we have a very, very difficult situation facing many of those young people, and the alternatives are difficult, the options are difficult.

I know that there are some people in the community which I represent, and I again go back to Bill 20 and to the livestock industry, who have in fact been able to maintain a fairly good livestock herd, been able to produce some, but not a lot of poultry, and very few sheep producers. It appears to me that those people who have been able to maintain and to foster and husband a

868 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 livestock unit within their farm operation have been able to at least keep their head even with the commitments that they have made and to make the payments that they have commi tted themselves in their farm operations to, but, Mr. Speaker, there are a group of individuals out there who have had a shortfall in production, they have had a shortfall in moisture and now, when it comes to meeting their financial commitments, they have a shortfall and are faced with absolute frustra tion, pressure and are having a difficult time coping with it.

I want those constituents of mine to know that I have not forgo tten about them, and we as a government have not forgotten about them. I can tell you that I have probably had the most troubled time and concern over the last two months that I have had since I entered politics in trying to deal with the concerns of individuals. As I said earlier, and I will say it again now, the answers do not come easy. We are trying to I think resolve to the best of our abil ity some of the shor t-term pr oblems with lon g-ter m solu tio ns. Mr. Spea ker, there are ind ividuals who may not get to that longer-term position.

So what are the options? Well, I have asked, and I will continue to ask, for other action to be taken as it relates to some short term solutions, and I know that the federal government is working on certain options. I know that closer contact has to be made with some of those individua ls-and I plan to try to do tha t-t o try and assess on an individual basis what some options may be. It certainly is not going out to borrow more money to further dig them deeper into debt.

It is to try and enhance and encourage some sympathetic approach to making some positive changes to their crop insurance coverage, which does not come by the snap of your finger s but, I believe, should be through a committee of farmers. There should be a commi ttee of farmers established to make recommendations as to how to make those improvements. But, Mr.

Speaker, what the long term has to be is a move to greater returns through, whether it be GRIP programs and price su pport, whether it be to try and enha nce the und erstanding of the consuming public to try and make sure tha t they are ever mindful of the deepening difficulties that our producers have, and continue to give us the support that is needed through a tax base to give the kin d of relief needed; that the need for a sympathetic banking industry and the need for a sympathetic ear at the government lending agencies is extremely important and crucial; that we work together to try and utilize some of the more margina l-type lands that do not have the capabilities of producing some of the grains as they do in more highly productive soil zones; that we work for an enhanced multiple use program for that land with both wil dlife conser vati on, grazi ng programs, which have been embarked upon by the Departments of Agriculture, Natural Resources. *

(1530) I would hope they would be enhan ced and brought forward not only to work on the principle of conservation, not only to work on the principle of what is right to do for the environment, but to provide some forms of cash support for those farmers who are trying to earn a livelihood on lands that are less capable of crop production than what some of the better soil zones are. Mr. Speaker, the point I am trying to make in speaking to Bill 20 is that we truly do have to work without under estimating how important it is to maintain that farm base.

I say this, and I say it very seriously, that the longer-term answer, I believe, not only is to increase the market prices for the grain ind ustry, for the livestock sector, but it is to expand into greater areas of opportunity and diversification through our livestock and poultry sectors. If we do not, we will continually see the erosion of that basic uni t of the family farm, which has been such a tradition and such an important instrument and component part of our rural and our community lives. Mr. Speaker, the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Carr) asks for some solutions.

I believe there have been some positive initiatives put forward, and I am not un derestimating the commitment that this government has put into the recent agriculture program. Let me say seriously that I think there have been some problems in understanding and certainly, as I have been told, it is to try and get support out there. There has been an urgency, a pressure, on the delivery mechanisms, whether it is crop insu rance, whether it is the Departmen t of Agriculture, to get this program out. There has been an anxiousness on the staff and pressure to do it.

There has been probably some lack of understanding as to what kinds of solutions. I do believe there are some solutions there, not all. It does not answer all.

April 15, 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANI TOBA 869 The real solution lies with the interna tional marketplace returning to the norm, which I would say would be paying producers for wha t they legitimately produce and put to that marketplace without interference of the major treasuries of the major countries of the world, like the Eur opean Economic Commun ity and the Uni ted States getting involved in the marketplace and pressuring our markets to such a low level. The answers do not come easy.

The answers are very difficult, and there are major pressures being applied, but we cannot quit work in g toward trying to get the marketplace to return what is fair and adequate to those in dividu als and those producer s. -(int er ject ion)- The me mb er again for Crescentwood asked me how we are going to handle the open border. I think we clearly have to understand what is happening with the open border or the proposed open border. As I understand it, before any product can come into this country, wheat particularly, it has to have an end user certificate. It has to go to a mill, a designated mill. Mr.

Speaker, let me put something else on the table, that at this particular point, and my producers were asked about it the other day when they were in here, and one producer said, just give me the opportunity to market my wheat into the Un ited States, because the wheat in the Unit ed States is of higher market than ours is right here. In fact, we have been continually criticized for the amount of durum wheat production that has been going into the United States, because it is commanding a higher price than what they can get for it here.

On a one-on-one price comparison, as I und erstand it, I believe there will still be a lot greater market in the Un ited States at a higher price for Canadian product than it is right here. Let me again give another example to the member for Crescent wood (Mr. Carr ) . I personally am involved in a small way in some grain production. Mr.

Speaker, today, right today, because the grain that I produce was fall rye, the grain that is produced today, because fall rye does not fall within the Canadian Wheat Board ju risdiction, that product right today commands a far greater price in the Un ited States than it does here in Manitoba. I do not fear the way the member for Cresce ntwood does, as was projected in the headlines of the Free Press, I do not fear a major erosion of our prices in this country.

I am going on a pretty practical type of approach, but it is my un dersta nding that today we would probably command a greater return from our farmers going to the United States than what they would ever get into here. What I am saying is, our market is not higher than the Un ited States, and I do not see what a lot of people fear as being flooded with grain. There is a protection mechanism, as I said, with the end user certificate that would have to go along with any product coming in.

So it may in certain regions of the country cause some diffi culties, but as I say, as it relates to Manitoba, I believe we will still be in an export position to U.S. markets. Bill 20, Mr. Speaker, as indi cated by the Min ister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay), I believe will address the concerns that the muni cipal corporations brought forward. I believe it does provide for the protection of livestock and poul try as it relates to the kinds of areas we want it to cover and is supportable in that regard.

I do not want to und erestimate how important it is to remember the concerns of the farm ind ustr y today, and I say that very seriously, because I am sure that every member sitting in this House has farm people who are under extreme pressure, under extreme pressure because of the price which they are expected to receive for their product and the costs of what it takes to produce those products. The answers are not easy. One of the longer-term solutions that I have seen in practice, Mr.

Speaker, has been again those individuals, those farm people who have had the abilit y to diversify their operations to produce several products on that farm so that they have in fact a form of their own insur ance. In fact, I can remember many, many years of having to milk cows and having to help produce the turkeys and the chickens, and I note the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) shaking her head in a positive way. That was the insurance that we were able to have. I do not expect people to go back to that type of lifestyle, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is something that, first of all, you would be hard pressed to do it, because you would need quota to do it, but I think we would certainly be well advised in the long term to try and continue to diversify the incomes of our farm commun ity and improve, and I say that seriously, improve the mechanisms that are in place, whether it is crop insur ance, whether it is the improvement in the recently annou nced programs that are supposed to be there, but I do not take lightly the numbers of people out there who in fact are extremely concerned and under pressure.

870 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 91 They have fam il y me mbers who can no t un derstand why they are not able to do some of the things that other people in society-and I do not believe it is fair to, Mr. Speaker, deny some of those people the opportunities that others in society have. So I can assure you, I am committed to try and make improvement where possible. I certainly do not have a monopoly on the ideas.

I think collectively and listening to our farmers, we will have some ways shown to us that will in fact help, but the bottom line has to be that we were put in such a financial straightjacket by the deficits of the past 15-well, since 1981 to 1988-by the previous admin istration that our opportunities are very, very difficult to find. Mr.

Speaker, can you just imagine today, if we had the $500 million in interest charges that are going to the banks in New York, that are going to the banks in Zurich and are going to all those bankers who lent us that money, if we had the $500 million today, the kind of economic support that we could give to our farm community, Mr. Speaker. I ask the members opposite, I ask the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) , I ask the member for Dauphin (Mr.

Plohman) , I ask all those members when they are critical of the government for maybe not putting as many resources toward the things that they would like to see us do, be mindful of the financial straitjacket that they have put us in. I say that seriously. I am not saying it politically; I am saying it factually. They have put us in a straitjacket that makes it very difficult to put the kind of support mechanisms in place.

I will conclude my remarks by saying Bill 20, I believe, addresses the concerns that were brought forward by some of the municip al people who discussed them with the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fin dlay) . I want to make it clear that I will be supporting this bill and hope that we can, through agr icul tur e di versifica tion, thr ough sup po rt mechanisms, try to deal with the very difficult times that our farm community is facing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. *

(1540) Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I move, seconded by the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS 811112-The Court of Queen's Bench Small Claims Practices Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Mini ster of Justice (Mr. Mccrae), Bill 12, The Cou rt of Queen's Bench Small Claims Practices Amend ment Act; Loi modi fiant la

Loi sur le recouvrement des petites creances a la Cour du Banc de la Reine, standing in the name of the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak). An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain standing? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Agreed. Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I stand today to address Bill 12 which comes before this House following upon Bill 8 from back in 1988 when this minister moved to first amend The Small Claims Practices Act.

That act, Bill 8, as it was in 1988, I welcomed and our party welcomed as an improvement on the existing Small Claims practice system, most notably because it expanded the jurisd iction of that court from $3,000 to $5,000 as an outside maximum amount of a claim that could come under the Small Claims practice. However, at that time, I raised with the minister, and I have raised repeatedly since then, the notion that generally we should expand the court's ability to deal in a

summary fashion with claims beyond $5,000. I personally have recommended to the minister that we take it to at least $20,000. As I said, I raised that at that time. I have raised tha t rep eatedly since because I bel ieve tha t Manitobans are deeply desirous of having their day in court on matters in which they get into conflicts. The whole point of The Small Claims Practices Act is to give people that day in court without making the cost of litigation the decisive factor and that is the problem, Mr . Speaker. We have a system in place, the Queen's Bench rules, for normal claims which is a fantastic system.

It sets out all of the rules by which we get to the trial and have a trial and gives a lot of pretrial discovery. It is a wonderful system if your claim is a significant claim. If it is not, the other party can in a sense frus trate you by imposing costs on you which then

April 15 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 871 become the decisive factor for you in determining whether or not to settle that claim. In other words, regardless of the merits, your opponent has the ability to fru strate your ability to get to court. That is a real shame, Mr. Speaker, because the whole point of our system is that justice not only is done but is seen to be done.

A critical part of that is that the litigants feel that they have had their day to put their case in front of a neutral and qualified arbiter, that is a judge, who then renders a decision, and they live with that decision or they appeal that decision, but at least they have their opportunity to state their piece, give their evidence. I have had some experience in Small Claims, Mr . Speaker. Most lawyers do in their articling year and in their first year or two at the bar when they go and repr esen t litiga nts in Sm all Claims.

I kn ow first-hand the importance for litigants to feel that they have gone to court, pressed their case, and won or lost. In many cases, even if they lose, they leave the courtroom knowing that they had the opportunity, that they were listened to, and that is critical. The problem we face today is that I would set it at $20,000. I believe in B.C. they .have initiated an economic litigation program, and I believe they have gone to $20,000. I would suggest perhaps even higher-$25,000 or $30,000. Litigants should be able to go through a

summary procedure, perhaps not as

summary as the Small Claims procedure, but, by the same token, not as onerous as the full Queen's Bench procedure. That is an idea whose day has come, Mr . Speaker. We have recommendations from the Canadian Bar Association that this be moved upon. The single most exciting ini tiative in this country, in terms of this process, is coming out of the Province of British Columbia, which instigated a flowing on their major Access to Justice Report, which was handed to their Minister of Ju stice some two or three years ago. They initiated an economic litigation program. They did not do it province-wide.

They started with a pilot project, and it is somewhere in the lower mainland, I think, New Westminster. They have set this up, and I have spoken repeatedly to them, because I am interested in how it is going, in the progress. I hear nothing but accolades about that program, because it has allowed people the opportuni ty to get to court and to not go through all of the pretrial hoops, but some of them, more so than in Small Claims, and have their case heard and get a decision. You back that up, you protect people in the

summary procedure, Mr. Speaker, by building in appeal procedures, so that in certain cases appeals can be heard relatively swiftly. You also buttress that system, Mr. Speaker, by allowing a party in a certain case, before it has been heard in the Small Claims or the economic litigation program, to go to a judge and explain why this should go through the full trial procedure. This particular bill speaks to that. Some cases, no matter how much money they are worth, should not be dealt with ln a

summary fashion, should not be dealt with in Small Claims or, in deed, in an economic litigation program, but those will be the exception.

The rule should be that where individuals are fighting over sums of money, set sums of money, and those sums of money are, I would say, less than a far greater amount than $5,000, less than $20,000 or less than $30,000, they should have the opportunity to get to court in a relatively short period of time, with a relatively few number of hoops to jump through before they get there, and let whatever evidentiary problems emerge be dealt with at the trial, rather than in the pretrial discovery. Let the judge of the day decide what is relevant, what is not relevant.

Ju dges can do that and take a proactive role in these situations. That is what they do in Small Claims every day. There is no reason, in my view, why we should not expand the theory of access to justice, which is embodied in The Small Claims Act, and it is of note, Mr. Speaker, that this minister's first public speech was to the Manitoba Bar Association up at the Elkhorn ranch, and this was some weeks after his being sworn in as Minister of Ju stice. I attended that speech, his first public speech, and I wanted- H on. Harry En ns (Minister of Nat ur al Resources): An auspicious occasion. Mr.

Edwards: An auspicious occasion, as the Minister of Natural Resources says. I felt that it was my responsibili ty as the newly appointed Justice critic, then for the official opposition, to attend that speech, and I did. I will never forget the theme which was harped on. It was not a substantive speech, I might say, and the Mini ster of Justice (Mr. Mccrae) may be forgiven for that, because he had only been on the job a couple of weeks. He really did not know what he was

872 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA April 15 , 19 91 doing. He was there with his former campaign manager, Randy Smith, from Brandon- An Honourable Member: A fine man. Mr. Edwards: A fine man-and the present Mini ster of Ju stice read entirely from his notes. It was not a moving occasion, because he was pretty tightly scripted in those days, but he did say repeatedly, access to justice, access to justice. That is what he talked about through out, and I thought, I agree with that. That is a good theme for a Minister of Ju stice. The NOP had so mismanaged the justice system, Mr .

Speaker, that there truly was no access to justice. It was too difficult to get through the morass of delays in the court system, delays in the Land Titles Office and all of the barriers which the New Democratic administration had put up in the justice system. They had totally neglected it. They had aliena ted all of the participan ts in the justice system. Everyone was relieved to see the end of the NOP administration on justice issues, believe you me. To that extent, I started out in 1988 knowing that it could not get worse. Ind eed, Mr.

Speaker, I must say that on many fronts, due to in no small part many of the ideas put forward by the Liberal Party, many of the difficulties in the justice system have been dealt with. I give the minister some credit, as I say, not a lot, because it could not get worse in most cases, but what we did see was repeated disasters in the justice system under the New Democratic administration, and anybody who particip ated in the system can tell you that.

In any event, it has been no small disappointment to me that given that initial theme of the minister, whi ch was access to justice, and his apparent commitment to it, there has been absolutely no action-no action- to explore the feasibility of an economic litigation program in this province, and that is indeed a shame. We are letting the province of British Columbia lead the way and do all the work in this area, and I think we have every reason to embark on this program. In particular, our Minister of Justice (Mr. McCr ae) is very unique. He is not a lawyer. At the time, he was criticized.

I see the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) saying, that is a good thing. I, at the time, Mr. Speaker, ind icated, and some lawyer stood up and said he should not be allowed to be the Min ister of Justice, because he is not a lawyer. Some members of the private bar say that. *

(1550) I disagreed. I said that the Min ister of Justice could certainly be a nonla wyer. It was probably preferable to have someone with legal train ing, but certainly not necessary. Ind eed, I felt that there may be some benefits to a non lawyer being the Min ister of Justice, and when I heard the access-to-justice speech, tha t was solidi fied. I felt, here is a nonla wyer who is going to take the common person's approach to justice issues and really show that there should be access to justice by the non lawyers in our society who come before our courts. They should be able to get before our courts.

So you can under stand my disappointment, Mr . Speaker, when this minister in fact did not move to initiate some form of economic litigation program. He did some things to clear up the backlog in the criminal courts, the provincial courts. That is good, but the other half of the court system is the civil side, and on that front there has been little, if any, progress, I am afraid. In particular, this type of a program is greatly needed and should be tried in this province, and the cost would be minimal, if any. It is a question of structuring of the courts. It is a question of rewriting the rules.

I have canvassed this idea with many members of the Bench who would be called upon to adjudicate on an economic litigation program and they are all supportive. They want to be involved in writing the rules as they should be, but they are supportive of the concept; so are the members of the private bar whom I canvassed this issue with, Mr. Speaker.

The y are supp ortive because the y feel very frus trated when they have to turn to their clients and say, look, your claim is only worth $10,000 or $15,000, and I am sorry, but the cost of litigating this means you have to decide right now if you are going to go into a loss position just to get this to court, or are you willing to settle simply because of the enormous cost of preparing all of the materials and holding all of the discoveries which are being thrust upon us by the other party prior to getting to trial, which we have to do. It is a problem, Mr. Speaker.

I think lawyers un derstand and know that their clients deserve to get to court. They feel badly, as

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-2-22
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 2nd hansardpdf 22.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	be537d8bf7a986039ff76f39c0b6d9a1516af990

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