Fourth Sess ion - Thirty-Fifth Legis lature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 42 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No. 109 C • 10 a.m., TUESDAY, JULY 27, 19 93 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thlrty·Fifth Legislatur e Members, ConstHuencles and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACOUAY, 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, Ciif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Brian 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, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant Vacant Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimii Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Ain Aon La Verendrye Fort Garry St.

Johns Swan River Rossmere Rupertsland The Maples PARTY. liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

5986 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, July 27, 19 93 The House met at 10 a.m. ORDERS OF THE DAY (continued) Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Govern ment House Leader): Mr. Speaker, as this is still Monday and it is past ten o'clock Monday night, I would ask that one of our rules, namely 65.(1 1), be waived, which would then allow the introduction of certain motions after ten o'clock at night. Mr. Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to waive Rule 65.(1 1)? [agreed] Mr. Manness: Mr.

Speaker, will you call Report Stage, Bills 24, 35, 47, 49, 52 as amended-we ll, you would have the listing of which have been amended-and Bill 41 . REPORT STAGE BIII 24-The Taxicab Amendment and Consequential Amend ments Act Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), (by leave) that Bill 24, The Taxicab Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les taxis et apportant des modifications correl atives a d'autres lois) , as amended and reported from the Standing Comm ittee on Law Amendments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 35- The Fisheries Amendment Act Hon. Har ry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): I have a proposed amendment to Bill 35, The Fisheries Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia peche) . I move THAT Bill 35 be amended by striking out the proposed subsection 33(4) as set out in

section 4 of the Bill. (French version] 11 est propose que le projet de loi 35 soit amende par suppression de paragraphe 33(4) enonce a I'

article 4 du projet de loi. Mr. Speaker : It has been mo ve d by the honour able Mini ster of Natural Resources, seconded by the Mi nister of Hig hways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger), (by leave) that Bill 35 be ame nded by stri king out the pr op osed subsection 33(4) as set out in

section 4 of the Bill. Agreed? [agreed] Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, I had discu ssed the amendments with one of the critics of the official opposition, the honourable memb er for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), and while we had agreed on the main amendment, this particular amendment that I am moving removes that one portion with respect to appl ying the mor atorium on fur th er north er n potential transfer or sales of quota. I am advised that that administratively will cause difficulties within the branch in a sense that some of what we refer to as the northern quotas is in the northern portion of Lake Winnipeg.

It is the intent of my director of Fisheries, in fact, by direction and by policy to carry out the intent of the issue that the member for Flin Flon raised, and I so commit the department to it, but was advised that legally it presented a potentially le gal problem for us if it were allowed to stand as we had agreed to and we had both concurred in at committee stage of the bill. I want to assure the honourable member for Ain Flon, and I would ask him to certainly avail himself to have the opportunity of visiting directly with Mr.

Joe O'Connor who is the director of Asheries, that I was only apprised of this myself this last day that there is no intent on the part of the government and certainly on the part of this minister not to abide in principle with the points raised by the member for Ain Flon which I agreed with, and the Fisheries department agreed with. That is, in esse nce , Mr.

Spe aker, for the edification of other members, to provide a greater degree of protection for the northern fishermen that in the event, and it is only in the event-because individual quotas are not established yet, as the member knows, in the northern fisheries-but in

5987 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 the event they are established that there be kind of a further legislative check and balance put in place that would ensure that in the first instance and if anything the holding of fishing licences and quotas in these northern lakes should be biased and prejudiced in favour of northerners who reside in the area. That was the intent of the recommended amendment to The Fisheries Act at committee stage, which I concurred with, and it is the intent of the Fisheries branch to carry out that very same policy, I want to assure the honourable member for Flin Flon.

Mr. Jer ry Storie (FIIn Flon) : Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments from the Minister of Natural Resources. I was aware that this bill would affect fisheries on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. I appreciate that it may in fact cause some difficulties because of the administrative problems within the department because of the nature of the fisheries on either side of the lake. I would simply ask, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to-1 cannot say that I am delighted by the amendment.

I am disappointed, but I will take the minister's assurance that the interests of fishermen on the east side of Lake Winnipeg in Northern Affairs communities, in First Nations, will be protected by directive in the department. I would also ask the minister to review the possibility that by regulation he may be able to segregate out part of the areas of Lake Winnipeg, because the minister has given himself the power to designate within the bill what areas and under what conditions quota is allowed to be sold.

So by regulation, the government and the minister may be able to do what we are not able to do by law in the statute, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Enns: Am I closing the debate on the-- Mr. Speaker: No, you are not closing debate. The ho nourable minister has spoken on the amendment, so has the honourable member for Flin Flon. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? That is agreed and so ordered. Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), (by leave) that Bill 35, The Fisheries Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia piche), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. *

(1010) Blll 47- The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh), I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), (by leave) that Bill 47, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act (2) (Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia location a usage d'habitation), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 49- The

Summary Convictions Amendment and Consequential Amendment s Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move on behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme), (by leave) that Bill 49, The

Summary Convictions Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les poursuites

sommaires et apportant des modifications correlatives a une autre loi), reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 52- The Man itoba Foundation Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger), (by leave) that Bill 52, The Manitoba Foundation Act (Loi sur Ia Fondation du Manitoba), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. House Business Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, we will deal with Bill 41 Report Stage this afternoon.

July 27, 1993 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5988 As I understand it, we have one bill to deal with in committee, that is private memb er's Bill 21 2. That has been called for Law Amendments committee at 2:30 this afternoon. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am now going to call the committee to go into Supply and go back to the concurrence motion. If we are to finish before 1 :25 with concurrence or at least the consideration of concurrence at this time, then we would move to third readings-by leave. I therefore move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines, (Mr. Downey) that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Mr. Speaker: Just prior to putting that question to the House, I will recognize the honourable member for Point Douglas with his committee changes. Com mittee Changes Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): I move, seconded by the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) for the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans); the member for Swan River (Ms.

Wowchuk) for the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) for Tuesday, July 27, 2:30 p.m. Motion agreed to. *** Mr. Speaker: It ha s been mo ved by the honour able gove rnmen t Ho use le ader (Mr. Manness), seconded by the honourable Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to Her Majesty with the honour able memb er for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay) in the Chair.

SUPPL Y-CAPITAL SUP PLY COMMITTEE OF SU PPLY Madam Chairperson (Louise Dacquay): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order, to continue to consider concurrence of the Supply motion. Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): I have a few questions for the Minister of Education. It is related to curriculum and special education programs, as well as programs for gifted children. I am wondering if the minister could update the House in the area of programs for gifted children. What is occurring right now within the Department of Education in regard to any type of programs for gifted children?

Is there a particular curriculum? Is ther e any assistance that is given to particular school divisions for that? I am asking the question because I have had a number of individuals, parents, within the city of Winnipeg phone, who have gifted children and are concerned that in fact there is not much emphasis put on the needs of gifted children, that dollars and resources, albeit limi ted, are going into special needs childr en, but wh en it comes to gifted children, the dollars or the resources are not there. So I am wondering if the minister could perhaps comment on that area of education. Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): The area of gifted education, there has been a committee which has been working on gifted education, and we have had information from that committee. Part of the difficulty in the area of gifted education has been for schools and for educators and for those involved to determine the best model for the del ivery of education for gif ted young people.

There has, in the past, been a pullout model or a special class for gifted and talented education, but as we have had the opportunity to look at education for gifted and talented young people, there has been an increasing reco gnition that we are speaking of gifted young people who may be gifted overall or who may be gifted in a particular area and require enrichment in that one area, or we may be speaking also about talented young people. In terms of the area of talent, we might be looking at athletic talent or computer talent.

So over the past year and a bit, there has been a much wider view of who are the young people that we may be looking at. As I said in the past, the model has been a pullout model to enrich a curriculum . One of the areas brought forward for consideration now has been a cascading model or a different type of model, rather than the pullout, which we have been

5989 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 asked to look at. It does have imp lications for teaching. So I will say to the member that a decision has not been reached at the moment on exactly how we will imp lement that; however, I can tell her that there has been some significant work done, both by the department and also by the committee in the area of gifted education. I certainly will look at for her, and provide her with, some further information on exactly where we are in that area.

Also, in the area of gifted and talented young people, again, we are looking overall to make sure that our curriculum for all young people is of the hig hest quality so th at all young people are challenged; however, we do recognize that some young people may in fact wish to, in the high school years, challenge some academic programs as well from the university level. * (1 020) So it is an area that we are looking at with the community, and we certainly have recognized that it is an important area for Manitoba young people and their families. Ms. Gray: A couple of questions in relation to that answer.

Is the minister able to give us any type of time frame on when there might be some decisions made on the committee and the work that they have done? She kindly agreed to give me further information in this area. Is there some information specifically related to the work the committee has done that she would be able to give me that we could pass on to me mbers of the public who then perhaps could have some input in terms of responding to the committee or back to the minister, et cetera? Mrs.

Vodrey: I am not able to provide the member today with the exact time frame that we would be looking at in terms of imple mentation, however I will look at providing the information that I can. I have not released the repor t , which again was a committee which was doing some work and a task assigned to them by the Department of Education and Trai ning, and we are considering the recommendations.

I will provide the member with what I am able to at this time, and I would ask too that with the people of Manitoba that she is meeting with, if she could let them know that we have recognized that that whole area of gi ft ed and talented education is an important one, and we certainly are looking at it. There was one other part th at I wanted to respond to as well, to the first question.

Another area that we have been asked to consider on behalf of gifted and talented young people is a designation in re porting so that where young people have done an enriched program there is in fact some kind of designation on a report card or a transcript of marks. I think that is one area which can be accomplished. I have asked the department to look into how we can provide that designation.

I cannot entirely commit that we will be able to have that designation available for the next school year though I have asked for th at to be im plemen ted as soon as possible, as soon as we come to a satisfactory way, because I do think that young people who do work in an enriched program should have the benefit on applying to further post-secondary educa tion, wh atever their choice, of th at recognition of that additional work that they have done. Ms.

Gray: Moving to another area, and again I received some phone calls with some concerns expre ssed- this is in rural Manitoba-about the­ and I do not even think I have the right term-it is what I remember as being called OEC classes in high school, occupational education, OEC. There were some concerns expressed about where there was not a good enough job done by teachers. Perhaps, not necessarily, it was not a criticism of the teachers but a comment.

It was perhaps related to lack of knowledge or information and resources about students who would be placed under the OEC program for a variety of reasons, and then once they had completed th at program-in fact, first of all, are they considered to have had a Grade 12 education?-and that in fact they were very limited in terms of what their options were once they had completed that. I am wondering if the minister could tell us: Is ther e criteria within the depar tmen t? Is ther e resour ces availa ble for teacher s ?

What determ ination is made in terms of how is it decided that a student will or will not go into an occupational entrance type of course? Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I believe that the course the member is refe rring to we now refer to as the modified program. The modified program takes the exis ting cur riculum but allows th at curriculum to be modified for young people who are

July 27, 1993 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5990 seen to have difficulty in achieving in the 0001 area. Young people who are in that program do receive the designation of modified, so when their transcript of marks is prepared it would be known that they in fact did have a modified course at certain levels. In terms of the actual follow-up, I am not sure if the mem ber is saying that the diffi culty has been for those young people as they wish to progress on to post-secondary or if it is in fact employment areas.

One of the areas that we have been particularly want ing to pay atten tion to is the area of co- operative education, work experien ce, so the skills that young people have are recognized within the em ployment community, and the employment community has had some experience with all kinds of young people. I would like to say that the whole area of work experience and co-operative education we are very interested in for all students in Manitoba. However, for students in the modi fied pr og ram , th ese students do some times ta ke par t in some commu nity em ployment so that their skill s are recognized.

In that way it seems that we not only have to provide for some experience, but we also have to provid e a way for the em ploym ent community to be as knowledgeable as they can be about the educational system. I have spoken before about education as a two-way communication process. We in education have to make sure that our story is well told in the community, but we also have to make sure that the door is open for the com munity to come into education to be as informed as they can possibly be.

In the area of access to post-secondary training, I would hesitate to say, without checking with the department, exactly what is available in terms of moving ahead immediately for young people who come from the modified program. I will be happy to look into the edu cational oppor tu nities at the post-second ary lev el. I th ink the memb er is speaking about training programs, college and university programs, if I am correct, so I will look into that and see she gets the information. Ms. Gray: I thank the minister for that.

During the Estimates process, one of the issues that I discussed with the minister was the report th at had been comple ted by The Manitoba Teache rs' Society, the Manitoba Association of School Trus tees and, I bel iev e , one mo re organization. It was related to medical needs of chil dren in schools. I know the mi nister had indicated during the Estimates process that there was a committee of deputy ministers, I believe, and that her cabinet colleagues would be looking at this issue. That was a number of weeks ago.

As we have prog ressed into the mi ddle of summer and thr ougho ut the session, I am wondering if the minister could shed any more light on that issue today basically refe rring to where it is on the agenda of cabinet. Does she have any better indication as to when there might be a decision made on what should be done in regard to that, given, in fact, we now have about five, six weeks at the most left before we begin another school year? Mrs.

Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, as I said in the Estimates process, this was an issue that was taken very seriously by several ministers and it does specifically concern, in the area of medically frag il e childr en, the Mini ster of Health (Mr. Orchard), the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) and the Minister of Education. In addition, the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) and his department have also been involved in the work that we have done. There has been a committee which the ministers requested to be struck. It has been a committee of deputy ministers and then a working group from our department.

In terms of the time frame, the other ministers involved and myself will be looking to make an announcement by the beginning of the school year. Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I thank, again, the minister for that information. One other question I wanted to ask the minister and it was in relation to her planning and audit

section and looking at the whole issue of funding of educ ation . Obviously within the provinc e of Manitoba we still partially fund our public education system based on property taxes. That is done in some other provinces but there are a number of provinces where in fact it is not fu nded in any shape or form through property tax. I am wondering if the mi nister and her dep artmen t have had an oppor tuni ty or have looked at all at the whole issue of fundin g of education with perhaps looking at the pros and

5991 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 cons of looking at an alternative model to funding education. Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chair, we have, in fact, looked at a number of models for the funding of education. We have looked at property tax which currently provides a basis of funding and we have looked at other models. We have looked at other models as they are around the world. Certainly we have looked across Canada. We have looked at Britain who has tried another model through a poll tax as opposed to a property tax.

At the momen t, the informat ion that I have received is that there has not been a method which has really been considered overall to be as, I suppose, effi cient as the property tax. In areas where there has been a change from property tax to another type of taxation to provide funding, there have be en, I have been informed by the dep art men t who has looked into th is, some difficulties surrounding it. We have not yet found a method of funding that we believe at the moment could replace the property taxation.

I have spoken with municipalities and taxpayers who have spoken about the value of property and the taxation that comes with it, and the value of the property may not speak to the actual individual's ability to pay that property tax. I am certainly aware of the issues raised and certainly do spend time speaking to Manitobans about that and certainly are looking at alternatives. If the member has other alternatives which she thinks would be helpful to us to look at, then by all means we will look at them.

I can say in the reviews that we have done so far, we have not been able to find a method that appears to be as satisfactory, though we certai nly will continue looking and continue the discussion. * (1 030) Mr. Nell Gau dry (St. Boni face) : Madam Chairperson, first I would like to say thank you to the minister for her co-opera tion whenever I did ask questions of her staff and herself. My ques tion today is in regard to the 50-50 franc;ais partielle program at the Norwood School Division. Can the mi niste r advise wha t has happened with the program at this stage? Mrs.

Vodrey: Madam Cha ir, as the memb er knows, ther e was a meeting which was held between people, particularly parents, who had an interest in the 50-50 program with the department, and they also have held me etings with their particular school board. My understanding is that they have reached an agreement, but I would just like to check with the department on the details of that agreemen t rather than attempt to put forth something that may need to be corrected. My understanding is an agreement has been reached, and I am certainly happy to inform the member. Mr. Gaudry: Madam Chairperson, on April 20 Mr.

West and Mr. Gendron had sent a letter indicating that they had forgotten to ask you in regard to the department which was reviewing the status of the 50-50. Franc;ais partielle has recognized the program. Can the minister advise if there has been any changes in regar d to that prog ram ? I felt personally that it was a good program. My three children went through the program. Two of them went through to high school. My daughter decided after the 50 from Grade 9 she went to the complete Franc;ais program on her own choice.

I respected that at that time, but I have always felt the 50-50 program was a great program. Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, as I said, I know that some discussions have been held, and there has been discussion as well with the home and school division. I will be happy to look into the details of those discussions and also what the results of those discussions have been and inform the member. Mr. Gaudry: So if I understand very well, Madam Chai rperson, at thi s time there have been no changes in the 50-50 program. Mrs.

Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I did say to the member that I would like to check into the details of that particular question before providing him with an answer at this time. But I will look into it, and I will certainly give him the information as quickly as possible. Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I have a question for the Minister of Justice . I know during this session he has certainly referred to the fact that he and his department have spent time lobbying the federal government in regard to looking at potential changes to The Young Offe nders Act. We are pleased to see that lobbying is going on.

I guess my ques tion would be to the minister. Given that you cannot pick up a newspaper or listen to the television these days without hearing

July 27, 1993 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5992 something about violence, particularly within the city of Winnipeg, and oftentimes i1 relates to youth violence, I would ask the minister, is there anything that he sees his department being able to do in regard to taking some type of a proactive approach to what could be done in regar d to violence , particularly youth violence?

When I ask this question I recognize that it is cer tainly not an easy sol ution, whatever the solutions are, and it is not probably short term either, but I am wondering if the minister could tell this House, is there something that is or can be done in regard to this ever-growing problem of youth violence? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : Madam Chairperson, I thank the honourable memb er for her question. It reflects the frustration of many people in our society when the honourable memb er raises questions about escalating youth violence.

Of cou rse , it is no surprise there is no easy quick simple solution to the problem, but I believe that in Manitoba we are making a concerted eff ort, and I think with some positive results when I tell the honourable member that we are placing far more em phasis on high-risk offenders. We are placin g far mor e em phasis on assessm ents of offenders who come into our system and trying to tailor our corrections programs to address head-on the issues that come up in these cases.

We are indeed doing a much better job than used to be done in this province and elsewhere when it comes to the assessments of people who come into our system. But I fear that is not the only problem. We need to address this problem at the other end of the spectrum, that being the crime prevention end of it. Part of that will require input from a broad range of community groups and agencies. It is going to require, I think, more help from the volunteer sector that perhaps has not even been involved to this point. We are pleased that we have youth justice committees in this province.

We are pleased that we have volunteer probation offi cers and advisory groups and so on. I think that flowing from a conference I attended earlier this year respecting crime prevention in our country, we are going to be watching very carefully to see what leadership does flow from Ottawa in this regard. One of the main recommendations of a House of Commons commi 1tee report on crime prevention was a national approach, and I think that is going to be getting started. But I think that we can almost mir ror th e same kind of efforts In the various provinces as well.

We have to be able to convince the public that we cannot have a police officer on every corner. Everybody knows that, but on the other hand, we need a better recogni1ion of that. I think we have to fin d ways , th rough departments other than the Department of Justice, to deal with the underlying causes of the problems that are developing with some of our young people. I have complained publicly about parenting and what is going on when we know that very young children are out there stealing cars and committing other crimes.

I have to agree with Inspector Lou Spado of the Winnipeg Police who wonders what the parents are doing or what role they are playing. So I think authorities have to bring to the attention of parents the shortcom ings of their children. I think in too many cases the parents do not even know, or the parents or those who are charged with the responsibility of raising young people do not even know the kinds of difficul ties and mischief young people can get into. The Young Offe nders Act is often cited as the reason for all of our problems.

Well, I think the honourable memb er will agree with me that is only one part of the puzzle and that we indeed should address The Young Offenders Act. Officials are doing that this summer and ministers across the country have agreed to meet again in the fall to review what offi cials have been doing this summer with respect to The Young Offe nders Act. But I certainly try to remind people every time I get a chanc e th at of cour se we shoul d do something with The Young Offenders Act, but do not expect that magically to reduce the crime rate because it will not.

I can just say to the honourable member that the work that we are doing in Justice and Corrections will help prevent recidivism, will help keep young people from recommi tting offences. And to the extent we do that well, then we will have achieved what we are trying to do. To the extent we fail, then we have more work to do. * (1 040)

5993 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I agree with the minister on two points: (

a) that obviously any changes in the Young Offe nders Act are not going to suddenly make crime, particularly youth crime and violence, disappear; and secondly, that crime prevention needs to be what we are focusing on. The mini ster men ti one d that he was at a conference about crime prevention, and I am wondering if the minister, just for the record, could identify three or four of the main factors that were probably indicated in regard to the societal factors that have a direct or indirect relationship on the amount of crime that does occur in our society. Mr.

McCrae: Madam Chairpe rson, that goes to the heart of the conference I attended. It was a conference called as a result of the release of the report of the Standing Comm ittee on Justice & Solicitor General, headed by Dr. Bob Horner, an M.P. from Toronto, an all- party committee . The report was a unanimous report in the sense that some of these justice issues really do cut right acr oss all the party lines. There was no partisanship involved at the meeting I attended. It was a me eting in Toronto, and I ju st cannot rememb er precisely what the date was, but it was earlier this year.

There were representatives there of government, of various government depart­ ments, representatives of community agencies. I reme mber , fo r exam ple , having a good discussion there with Graham Reddoch of the John Howard Society her e in Winnipeg who was a dele gate to that conference. The two of us thought that we could go forward, perhaps, and work even more closely toge th er.

As we were able to announce yesterday, our participation in the John Howard Society's restorative resolutions program, which would deal more with adult offe nders, but those kinds of programs, we hope, will be the right kinds of programs to use in the future. But I think the seeds were pl anted at that particular conference for a national sort of effort, but also those who attended, the media was also involved and had delegates at that meeting, and I think the media got an earful from some of the other delegates about the role it can play in creating a crime-free society or a more crime-free society.

I thin k, thr ough the contacts lik e th at, our relationship with organizations like John Howard, who are interested in being involved in the kinds of activities that we are going to have to get into, it is going to req uir e more of the kind of thing we already see, but I mean more of it, more block parents, more neighbourhood watch, more people caring a little bit more about what goes on in their neighbou rhoods in order fo r us to get a better handle on crime in our communities. Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I agree, as well, with the minister, that it is not just a Department of Justice issue.

When the minister talks about other factors in regard to youth violence and where are the parents, et cetera, I concur. That is where I cringe, because when I look at what is occurring in some of the other departments, such as Famil y Services, wher e whether th e Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) likes to believe it or not, basically, children who are 16 and over are not even being dealt with by Child and Fam ily Ser vices , basical ly , any typ e of voluntary counselling programs that used to be organized and operated through government have since been cut from about '88 on.

I do not think with teacher s th at are fe eling stress today in schools, et cetera, I do not think we necessarily see a lot of extra programs within the school system th at look at the whole issue of children and parenting, et cetera, so I certainly have concerns in regard to what is happening, particularly in the city of Winnipeg. The minister referred to an all-p arty committee.

One of the questions I would ask him, one of the things that I have been thinking about is that-and I hate to use th e words "esta blish anoth er committee"- but I am wondering if it is not time for the mi nister and some of his colleagues to establi sh, whether you call it a task force or whatever, perhaps task force, specifically related to the city of Winnipeg. I am not saying that we do not have crime and increasing crimes in rural areas, but this is certainly a problem, particularly youth violence is certainly ever increasing in the city of Winnipeg.

Get a group of individuals together to form a task force, representatives from City Council, from the Legislature, from the police force, perhaps from the me dia , from Parks and Re creation, other com mu nity gr oups , some of the et hnic communities. Get a group of people together who could sit down, decide on how they would want to go about collecting information but try to get a handle on exactly what some of the underlying problems are in regar d to the increase in the

July 27, 1993 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 5994 amount of youth violence in our city and then develop some recommendations or strategies as to what can we as a city and also a province do to try to curve this ever increasing problem. Again, I in some ways hate to use the words "task force" because of tentimes we can use com mi ttees and task forces regardless of governments or political stripes.

It is sort of a reason to not do anything, but I could see if we had the people together representing some of these various groups that would actually sit down and look at them , perhaps we could come up with some creative ideas that do not necessarily cost dollars in terms of brand new programs, where we could even utilize the existing commu nity groups and volunteer organizations to maybe do some work in this area.

I think some community clubs, and I am sure the minister is aware of them as well, who have started to look at their own safety audits and are starting to work on, in a community basis, looking at some ways to actually change what goes on within their own com muni ties in regar d to crime . I am wondering if this is not something that government, in fact all memb ers of the Legislature, could be loo ked at in terms of this prob lem. I would appreciate the minister's comments on that. Mr. McCrae: I think what the honourable member says amounts to a very helpful suggestion.

I think I will indeed ta ke wha t she has said under advisement about perhaps a city of Winnipeg task force of some kind. It would repl icate perhaps something like what we did in Toronto, which really raised awareness there, but in the national scheme of things, everything is so vague and it seems like crime prevention is such a hard thing to attack on a national scale, I give him credit for wanting to go ahead and do it. I do not know how much we can hope for in terms of results, even if it just raises awareness, then it will be better than not having done anything at all.

Th is spec ific idea the honourable member raises about a task force here in Winnipeg is, in my view, something that should be looked at very seriously. I think social agencies ought somehow to be represe nted on ther e , perhaps the probation division of my department, perhaps somebody from Family Services, the City of Winnipeg Police, teacher s maybe , someb ody representing City Council. I can understand the potential usefulness of that, and I will indeed discuss this further with my department.

I want to go back just one moment because we talked a few minutes ago about the causes of this, and I do not think I gave the honourable member a full answer with respect to the profile of a young offender, for example, or any other kind of offender, but certainly a young offender. * (1 050) I think if you look at many, many of our young offenders here in Manitoba, you will find that they, one way or another, have been victimized at one time or another in their lives through abuse from grownups or from other young people.

There may be drug or substance or alcohol abuse involved in their makeup and maybe they do not come from the highest levels of the social structure so that they end up with maybe less of a self-es teem than we would like to see. There tends in some cases to be a ghettoization. The crime is found in some areas more than in other areas. All of this leads to a lack of hope , which really leaves a person in a desp erat e situa tion and it is a very unhappy situation. I remember the conference. There were some young people who put on a play for us which sort of he lped break the ice for everybody there.

I will have to see if I can remember the-yes, the play was entitled Fear is a Two-way Street, and we were meeting there to deal with the fear that is felt in the public about their safety. The young people who wer e part of this play wer e all for mer young offenders, had all either served time in a juvenile detention centre or they had undergone probation and had completed that , but they had lea rned something from all that and they were trying to tell us-1 do not think I will ever forget it because I learned that fear is indeed a two-way street. Many people who are out there are offe nders.

We do not feel very sorry for them because they are offenders and we have to deal fairly strictly with them, but some of them are quite a lot like you or I, Madam Chairperson, and all of these things in their lives have conspired to make them fearfu l for their future . This causes them to strike out and engage in inappropriate behaviour. You need to under stand all th at, I th ink, to understand your profile of who it is you are trying to deal with and what kinds of programs you should

5995 LEG ISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 be putting together and who should be brought into the resolution of these problems. When we are criticizing the amount of money we do not spend in certain areas of social agencies or Family Services, we should remember what one of my colleagues sometimes says. That is, if spending money would help us solve our problems, we should have them all solved by now because this government certainly has engaged in massive spending in areas that we have prioritized since we came into government in this province. So we can defend the spending that we do.

We can also say, oh, it will never be enough as long as we still have programs. I will be the first to say that, but honour able member s, I think, have to re memb er ther e have been ver y signi ficant changes in our society since the end of the war. Families are viewed diff erently than they used to be viewed. We now look to government to solve a lot of problems that families used to solve without the assistance of government. The need is growing faster than the ability of the taxpayer to meet that need, so we have to find other ways as well.

If we do not have the dollars, maybe we could afford to spend some time thinking about how we can get together on suggestions such as the one the honourable member made, which I intend to look at very seriously. Ms. Gray: I am very pleased that the minister is prepared to look at that. I just want to comment, I do not want the mi nister to mi sinte rp ret my comments because in fact I do not think I referred to money at all when I talked about Child and Family Services and some of the other programs.

If the mi nister looks th rough the Estima tes process over the last number of years, I think he will see that a number of suggestions and questions that the Liber als have asked in the Estimates process related to prog rams and servi ces , sometimes related to reorganization and changes and how we do business, not necessarily always adding more dollars. Thank you. Mr. Gaudry: Madam Chairperson, my qu estions are to the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae). It is an issue that has been a long time, and it might not be an issue anymore, but the minister had given me some information at the time.

It was the closing of one of the courtrooms in St. Boniface, and he had given some statistics and estimated savings over a period of five years. Can the minister indicate at this time what is the situa ti on wit h the ope ration of jus t the one courtroom in St. Boniface? Mr. McCrae: I did not come prepared this morning with facts and figures on the operation of our court services in St. Boniface, but I do believe that I made avai lable to the hono ur able memb er some information. I rememb er at the time ther e was quite a fuss created when one courtroom was shut down at the St.

Boniface facility ther e, but my unde rstanding th en, and ther e has been no indication different since, is that we are carrying out our responsibilities to Manitobans in St. Boniface, French-speaking Manitobans, and I do not know of any particular difficulty beyond the usual ones that happen right across the province. From day to day to day in the justice system something happens that you do not expect, and so you have to look at each and every thing that comes along to see if ther e is not something structural that we need to do. I think in St.

Boniface we are carrying out our mandate there and serving the public, but if the honourable member knows of any reason for that to be questioned, by all means bring me details, bring me circumstances, and I will indeed look into them and attempt to ensure that the service continues appropriately and without interruption. Mr. Gaudry: No, I did not have any specifics on anything. It is just that I have never asked any questions really in the House with regard to the courtroom and felt at the time that answers had been given out. The minister had given me these details, so I felt comfortable with this.

Another question maybe is, when this decision was made was the Francophone com munity consulted on this issue? Mr. McCrae: I am just trying to remember , but I do not think there was any pa rticular , formal consultation process with that change at the St. Boniface cou rthouse. It was a matter of the ongoing operations of the Department of Justice delivering a service that we are mandated and must deliver, and we must do these things because that is our responsibility. I do not recall that there would have been any req uir ement for consulta tion, because we do not believe there has been any reduction in service.

July 27, 1993 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 5996 Mr. Gaudry: Madam Chairp erson, I thank the minister for his answer, but I would appreciate some statistics in regard to backlog if there is any, in regard to this at this time. Do I just contact the minister's office for the statistics? Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the honourable member has asked me today, on the record, about statistics with respect to traffic at that office, and I will enquire and make some information available to the honourable member. I can write him a letter and let him know. Mr.

Gaudry: Thank you, Madam Chair person, now I will just pass it on to the honourable member for St. Johns for one question, as a parting gift for the honourable member. Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St. Johns): First, I must thank the Liberal caucus for allowing me this one brief question out of their time allotment for questions under concurrence motion. My question pertains to a constituent, a case that the minister will be a bit familiar with since we have talked about it, and that is the case of Gerry Oltman [phonetic] who has a long-standing request of complaint before the Human Rights Commission.

It goes back to a case involving the Winnipeg Police force back in 19 85. I want to thank the minister for responding to my letter. However, with all due respect, the point of my letter has not been addressed. I acknowledge in my own corr espondenc e that in fact this complaint was taken to the commission, that the commission feels it had dealt with it, that a solution was proposed and the complainant rejected the solut ion, and ther efore , the case has been dropped. I acknowledge all of that in my letter.

Considering tha t the complai nant re mains concerned about the handling of the case, he does not feel that the solution proposed was acceptable, and given the fact- Madam Chairperson: Order, please. * (1 1 00) Ms. Wasylycla-L els: -that approximately 12 organizations and chur ches have joined hi s reques t for adju dication, my qu estion to the minister is, would he consider looking into this case once more with a view to proposing the route of adjudication as a way to, once and for all, resolve this long-stand ing case involving the Winnipeg Police force and the Human Rights Commission? Mr.

McCrae: Madam Chairperson, I do not know if everybody kn ows, but in the ordinary day-to-day course of business of memb ers of the Legislature and memb ers of the government many of these kinds of matters come forward, and there is a good and co-operative working relationship on these kinds of matters, and I appreciate that. We do not always get the answers honourable members want to hear or their constituents or those people who come forward with complaints.

The way the Human Rights Comm ission works is that, in addition to its adjudication, its education and advocacy work, the Human Rights Comm ission also works to try to mediate disputes between mem bers of the public who have complaints to make about various other agencies, in this case, the Winnipeg Police Department and the individual mentioned by the honourable member. The Human Rights Commission did carry out its function and mediated the dispute and proposed a resolution which was unacceptable to the person comp laining.

In the light of that, howeve r, the Human Rights Comm ission hardly could see its way clear, then, to move to adjudication when its best efforts, the commission's best suggestion, was this settlement proposition which was found by the complainant to be unacceptable. (Mr. Gerry McAlpine, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair) The complainant does have another remedy, and that would be to use the civil courts to seek remedies that might be available.

I cannot today suggest to the honourable member that I will go and try to get the Human Rights Comm ission to get into adjudication, but I will ask if that option might be looked at once again-but I do not want to advocate for that-but I would ask them if they have looked at all the factors that they look at when deciding whether there ought to be adjudication. It is a strange case because I guess if there is a set tlemen t being sug ges ted , the comm ission obviously is finding that ther e must have been some fault or else they would not be suggesting a settlemen t.

Therefore the question is, does the punishment fit the crime, to use the wrong words to describe what I am trying to say. I will ask the com m ission how muc h consideration it did give to the issue of adjudication, and if they might want to look at that again, and I will do that.

5997 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 An Honourable Member: Committee rise. (Madam Chairperson in the Chair) Madam Chairperson: As previ ously agreed , committee rise, call in the Speaker. IN SESSION Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Govern ment House Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is my intention now to call a number of bills for third readi ng. Wou ld you begin by calling Bill 55, followed by 54, 52, 51 , 5o-as you can tell, I am going backwards---39 and 35 at this point. THIRD READINGS Bill 5� The Legislative Assembly Amendment and Consequential Amendm ents Act Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I move , seconded by the honourable Minister of Energy and Mines, (by leave) that Bill 55, The Legi slative Asse mb ly Am endmen t and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur I'Assemblee legisl ative et apportant des modifications correlatives a une autre loi), be now read a third time and passed, by leave. Motion presented. Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Madam Deputy Speaker, I appreciate the fact that I am permitted to express my opinion, having been bound by the majority rule. In our system of government, we re cogniz e two imp ortant principles which apparently are in conflict in this situation. First is the principle of paramountcy of legi slative authority.

That has been decided a long time ago in the Hodges case that the legislative authority of the provinces are not merely dele gated powers from the imperial legislature or parliament, but it is a full plenary power inherent as any other legislative authority. The second principle at sway here is that no one under the gu ise of any oth er rule shou ld be permitted to determine his own self-interest , so we also accepted as basic in our system the principle of conflict of interest.

In this particular situation, the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, in its collective wis dom, has cho sen to give primacy to the conflict-of-interest principle over the basic principle of the paramountcy of legislative authority. It is, of course, within the power of a paramount Legisla ture to make the choice, sensing the atmosphere out there in the public of the rampant skepticism of the citizens on politicians and other elec ted offi cials. I am not questioning the collective wisdom of that Legislature.

This is the first time, though, that we are trying this experiment for a limited period of two years in upholding the confli ct-of- interest principle over and above a very basic constitutional principle of the undiluted and unlimited legislative power of the Legislative Assembly of this province. So what are we doing here?

As the supreme Legislature, in order to distance ourselves to that decision and not be accu sed of violating the conflict-of -inter est principle, we decided to create an independent commission of five persons who are not elected, who are not a segment of this Legislature, to make the critical decisions vitally affecting the memb ers of this Legislature, not only for the present, but also for the future, and within a limited period of two years said that we are granting this body with full and plenary authority. We will not be reviewing what they will decide in the future.

Whatever they decide, we will try for a period of two years. In that way, we cannot be accused of setting our own salary. That is what, in effect, we are saying. Madam Deputy Speaker, having been reared in a democratic society and oriented to that tradition, I have always belie ved in the rule of the majority, because, like any other body, as Jean Jacques Rousseau had stated: Where the weight of the body goes, everybody should go. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) • (1 11 0) Ther efore , the rule of the majority shall be followed. Yet that same rule had recognized the right of the minority to be heard.

This is the right that had been accorded me, and that righ t I appreciate. My concern the refore is the same concern that I raised in my caucus who, again by that rule of majority, had bound me. My concern, I am going to state explicitly and explain clearly. First, I am concerned that it is unwise-1 am not saying it is outside the power of the Legislature to do what it has done- 1 am saying it is unwise, and for that matter, also potentially dangerous and risky for any Legislature whatsoever to surrender its essential last say in anything. Because to do so, it

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 5998 will amo unt to a divestiture of its legitima te authority. It will amount to an abdication. It will amount to an abandonment of its authority, a surrender of parliamentary authority which has been cautioned in the case re Gray when the national Parliament of Canada passed the war measures legislation. But that was a different setting. The setting there was that it was war time and Parliament has to be in continuous control and command of society.

In that particular situation, the War Measures Act in 1918 , in effect, had transferred to federal cabinet the following power, and I quote: To make, from time to time, such orders and regulations as the Governor-in-Council may, by reason of existence of real or apprehended war, invasion or insurrection, deem necessary or advisable for the security, defense, peace, order and welfare of Canada-which delegation was held valid.

But, in the opinion of four of the justices, they mentioned the words "abdication," "abandonment," "surrender of parliam entary power," and if this amounted to such an abdication, that would have been invalid. But the truth of the matter is that it was held valid. So I am not qu est ioning the legitimate authority of this Legislature to do what it has done.

The second point of my concern is that it now created a system of del egation of legisla tive authority by reference to a mere anticipation of certain regulations that will be created by this independent commission of which the Legislature itself had no idea wha tsoeve r wha t those regu lations will contain. They are still not in existence. They are in esse, in the futu re, some hope, some expectation, and then the Legislature in its collective wisdom said: We will not even look at what they will decide; we agree that whatever they will decide will be binding. That is what the Legislature has done.

The point is that if I do not question the legislative authority to delegate authority, that is entirely within the prerogative of the Legislature. I do not question that they relegate it to any instrumentality, whether part of the go vernment or not. What I am qu esti oning is the self-de pri vati on by the Legislature of its inherent authority to take a second look when this regu lation has been drawn and written and, at the same time, still observe its own commitment to make those regulations binding if they so decide after they have seen what those regulations are.

But to prematurely deprive themselves of their inherent authority to even take a look at those regulations to me is unwise. That is the caution that I am saying. The third point that I raise is that it will then facilitate this body of five persons accountable to no one to make , not a recommendation, but a decision how public money should be spent, and it will be done in a system of delegated legislation outside the whole of this Legislature and without any specific authorization by the Legislature until later when these re gula tions and rules have al ready been done and al ready binding on everyone.

Again, to me that is unwise, because whatever this commission of five persons will decide or will write in their regula tion will then be beyond the reach of the Legislature by their unilateral consent.

When that happens, then decision making is a body of persons or groups of persons subject to no one's review outside the system of legislation that is instituted within the framework of the British North America Act and within the framework of the constitutional act of 19 82, because it is done indi rectly through the system of dele gated legislation by a body which is neither a Legislature, nor a cabinet, nor Lieutenant-Governor-in-Cou ncil, nor a board that is recognized as instrumentality of law making. These are my concerns. Is it dangerous to do this?

It is, because what we are doing is we are resuscitating a dead doctrine known as Henry VIII clause. Erskine May in his treatise on the law, Privileges, Proceeding and Usages of Parliament, said, and I quote: The justification and advantages of delegated leg islation in normal times arise from its speed, flexibi lity and adaptability. It is not now practice to include in statutes the power to make delegated legislation which it is expressly provided shall have the force as if it had been part of the original act.

That is precisely wh at we are doing , what Erskine May in his authority has been saying, it shou ld not be done , it ough t not to be done , because the regu lation, that these five persons who are not legi slators, who are accountable to no one, the regulations that they will write will in effect

5999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 be the statute that will govern the composition of this Legislative Assembly. Never th eless, he says, modern statutes do confer power on the executive to make delegated legislation which amends the statutes themselves. This is done by what is known as the Henry VIII clause which is used, broadly speaking, to confer power, to alter financial limits, to bring lists up to date, to make exceptions to the operation of a statute and to make alteration of details within a narrowly defined field. * (1 120) I have expressed my concern.

Now, let me explain why I shall be voting for this bill, despite what I say. Then you can say, what is he talking about? He is acting contrary to what he is saying. That is your point. I want to make that clear. As I have already stated, regardless of the wisdom or the foolishness of legislation, a minority should always be bound by the rule of the majority in a peaceful and orderly way, but the mi nority will always have a right to speak its mind, so that when the majori ty will realiz e that they did make a mistake, then there will be a reason for changing its decision.

I am not saying that the majority has made a mistake. I am hoping that they did not make a mis take , becaus e if they did wh at they are instituting here is like the triad in Rome. It is a form of tyranny, a rule by men who are not accountable to anybody. I am voting, because as I said, I am bound by my caucus, the majority in caucus. I am voting here. I am bound by the majority in the Legislature, despite the fact that I have raised and I have been raising this caution. Let me summarize.

The Legislature had no moral right or authority to abdicate its responsibility by avoiding decision making in order that it can evade accountability. The Legislature cannot create a parallel system of legislation by indirection , or by dele gated legislation that will com pete wi th the normal legisla tive process enshrined in the British North America Act and in the Constitution Act of 19 82. This Legislature also ought not to facil itate the expenditure of public money in any way that is beyond the scrutiny of the Legislature itself, who is accountable to the people that it represents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Bill 54- The Municipal Assess ment Amendment Act

(2) Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for third reading of Bill 54, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur !'evaluation municipale? Leave? [agreed] Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Govern ment House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 54, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 52-The Manitoba Foundation Act Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for third reading of Bill 52, The Manitoba Foundation Act? [agreed] Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr.

McCrae), that Bill 52, The Manitoba Foundation Act (Loi sur Ia Fondation du Manitoba), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 51 - The Municip al Amendment Act

(2) Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for third reading of Bill 51, The Municipal Amendment Act (2)? [agreed] Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 51, The Municipal Amendment Act (2) (Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur les municipalites) , be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 50- The Statute Law Amendment Act, 19 93 Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for third reading of Bill 50, The Statute Law Amendm ent Act, 19 93? [agreed] Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the

July 27, 1993 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 6000 Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), that Bill 50, The Statute Law Amendment Act, 1993 (Loi de 19 93 modifiant diverses dispositions legislatives), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. 8111 3� The Fisheries Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for third reading of Bill 35, The Fisheries Amendment Act? [agreed] Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), that Bill 35, The Rsheries Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia peche), be now read a third time and passed. Mr. Speaker : It has been mo ve d by the honourable Government House Leader, seconded by the honourable Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), that Bill 35, The Rsheries Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia peche, be now read a third time and passed. Agreed? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Spea ker: No? The ques tion before the House is third reading of Bill 35, The Fisheries Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia peche. All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. Some Honourable Members: On division. Mr. Speaker: On division. *** Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call Bill 39, followed by Bill 34, third reading. Bill 39- The Provi ncial Court Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Ministe r of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Dried ger) , that Bill 39, The Provincial Cour t Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Cour provinciale) , be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 34-- The Public Schools Amendment (Francophone Schools Governance) Act Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that Bill 34, The Public Schools Am endment (Francophone Schools Governance) Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques (gestion des ecoles franc;aises)) be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? No? Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wou ld move, seconded by the memb er for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. *** Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call the following bills for third reading: 33, 27, 25, 20, 19, 18, 17 , 15 , 14, 13, 12, 11, 8, 7, 6, 5, 3 and 2. Bill 33- The Provincial Rai lways and Consequential Amendm ents Act Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Mi nister of Hig hways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger), that Bill 33, The Provincial Railways and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi concernant les chemins de fer provinciaux et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois) be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. • (1 130) Bill 27- The Environment Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay), that Bill 27, The Environment Amendment Act (2) (Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'environnement) be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to.

6001 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 Bill 25- The Public Schools Amendment Act

(4) Hon. Cl ayton Manness {Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), that Bill 25, The Public Schools Amendmen t Act (4) (Loi no 4 modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques) be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 20- The Social Allowances Regulation Validation Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness {Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that Bill 20, The Social Allo wances Regu lation Vali dation Act (L oi validant un re glement d'application de Ia

Loi sur l'aide sociale) be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. BIII 19- The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendm ents Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 19, The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Cour du Bane de Ia Reine et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. BIII 18- The Corporations Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), that Bill 18, The Corporations Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les corporations), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. BIII 17 -T he Crown Lands Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), that Bill 17, The Crown Lands Am endment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les terres domaniales), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Blll 15- The Boxing and Wrestling Commission Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), that Bill 15 , The Boxing and Wrestling Commission Act (Loi sur Ia Commission de Ia boxe et de Ia lutte) , be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. BIII 14- The Personal Proper ty Security and Consequential Amendm ents Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr.

Downey), that Bill 14 , The Per sonal Prope rty Secu rity and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi concernant les suretes relatives aux biens personnels et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Blll 13- The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Corpora tion Amendment Act Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr.

Derkach), that Bill 13, The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Corporation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia Loi constituant en corporation le Fonds de participation des travailleurs du Manitoba), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Blll 12- The International Trusts Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 12 , The International Trusts Act (Loi sur les fiducies internationales), be now read a thir d time and passed. Motion agreed to.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANI TOBA 6002 Blll 11 - The Regional Waste Management Authorities, The Municipal Amendment and Consequential Amendm ents Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Govern ment House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 11, The Regio nal Waste Management Aut hor iti es, The Muni cipal Amendmen t and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi concernant les offices regionaux de gestion des dechets, modifiant Ia

Loi sur les municipalites et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 8- The Insurance Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader}: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 8, The Insurance Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les assurances), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster}: Mr. Speaker, I know we did not get the opportunity to comment on this particular bill in second rea ding. Just quite simply, we su pp ort the bill. It is fairly noncontroversial. We would like to, in fact, see it get Royal Assent. Motion agreed to. Bill 7- The Bui lders' Liens Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader}: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 7, The Builders' Liens Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le privilege du constructeur), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 6- The Real Property Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader}: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 6, The Real Property Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les biens reels), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 5- The Northern Affairs Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Govern ment House Leader}: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), that Bill 5, The Norther n Aff airs Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les affaires du Nord), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 3- The 011 and Gas and Cons equential Amend ments Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader}: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that Bill 3, The Oil and Gas and Conseq uen tial Amendments Act (Loi concernant le petrole et le gaz natural et ap portant des modi fications correlatives a d'autres lois), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. Bill 2- The Endang ered Species Amendment Act Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader}: Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), that Bill 2, The Endangered Species Amendment Act (Loi modi fiant Ia

Loi sur les especes en vole de disparition), be now read a third time and passed. Motion agreed to. * (1 14 0) House Busin ess Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader}: Mr. Speaker, by prior agreement, before I call the motion to go back into Com mittee of Supply, we will rise at approximately 1 :25 p.m. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be

6003 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 gr anted to Her Majesty with the honourable memb er for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair. SUP PLY-CAPITA L SUPPLY COMMITTEE OF SUPP LY Mr. Deputy Chairp erson (Marcel Laurendeau): The comm ittee will come to order to continue to debate the concurrence motion. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (In kster): Mr. De puty Chairperson, I had a couple of questions for the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and also the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard).

Earlier du ring the session I had asked the Minister of Finance during Question Period some of the concerns that I have as an MLA representing a north-end riding that happens to be in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 . What I was asking the minis ter was with respect to ta xati on. The government talks about its fair approach dealing with taxation for all Manitobans. I wanted to comment with respect to how fair this taxation really is in terms of the property tax. One could ask why would I ask the question of property tax in the Legislature to the Minister of Finance.

It is because the provincial government is the only one that can rectify this particular problem, and I am going to go over the problem. If by chance you happen to live in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 and you live in a home valued at $10 0,000 , you will pay approximately $400 more on proper ty tax only because you happen to live in Winnipeg 1 compared to, let us say, the school division of St. James. So the same house valued at $1 00,000 in St. James compared to one in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 , you pay $400 of additional property tax.

Now, you can bring that down to-and I did that during Question Period. If you live in Brooklands versus Weston-Keewatin Street separates those two homes, if you lik e. They are all warti me homes, probably valued maybe around $40,000. What you are talking about is a senior that lives on a fixed income in Weston would pay approximately $1 00 more than someone who lives across the street, the same senior living across the street in Brooklands, again, because the one senior living in Weston happens to liv e in Wi nnipeg School Division No. 1.

Now there are many different arguments as to why we do not need to have the number of school divisions in the city of Winnipeg that we currently have, but I do believe that there is an issue, school division aside, talking about fair taxation. I am interested in knowing what the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is prepared to do to all those individuals who ha ppen to live in School Division No. 1, because we are paying a disproportionate amount of our tax dollars going towards school divisions than any other school division scattered throughout the province. And that is significant.

If you take a look at it and you say, for example, the demographics of Winnipeg School Division No. 1 is that we have some of the poorest people in the province living in School Division No. 1, yet we are paying the highest in terms of school taxes. I am interested in knowing what the Minister of Finance is prepared to do to try to ensure that at that level we will get fair taxation, because there is nothing that the school divi sio ns can do. Only the provincial government can rectify that problem. What is the Minister of Finance prepared to do to alleviate that problem? Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finan ce): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wonder whether or not the member for Inkster is really taking his question to the logical end that it has to be taken, if he is going to take seriously the discrepancy on either side of the street because individuals happen to be in one school division or the other. What is the higher order here?

If he is saying that all seniors, using his example, regardless of where they live, whether it is on one side of the street or the other, should be treated equally in a school tax sense, then what he is advocating is the provincial government take over all the school divisions. What he is saying is there will be one school division in the province of Manitoba and maybe that is the way he wants it. There are others who do. There is nothi ng sacred about set ting up autonomous school divisions just the way that our forebearers decided to organize the affairs of this province generations ago.

If he does not like the system we have now, and that is what he is advocating, I would say to him then that he should make that part of the Liberal public policy. To not do that, then, is to say that the

July 27, 1993 LEGI SLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 6004 taxing authority that we have given school divisions, which may be realigned as a result of boundary reform, should be removed. The very essence of arriving at certain levels of taxation was on the basis of basic ally two principles. Firstly, that a local autonomous school division should have the right to decide what level of services they want to provide; secondly, what level of pay they want to provide to the people who pr ovide those se rvi ces; and thir dly, to tax accordingly.

Now there is another offsetting principle which says that more wealth some times accrues to certain areas. What the public education funding form ul as have done for the most part through equal ization is try to take , cert ainly from the provincial levy, funds from more highly assessed regions in the province or school divisions into the lower.

So he is then going to have to, by the essence of his question, address those two principles and indicate where he wants to come down to try and ameliorate the problem which he brings before the House, again, that being that there seems to be two levels of taxation for individuals who live on either side of the street. I would tell him that is not an easy course of discussion and/or public policy prese ntation that has to be made.

He has to be prep ared to understand education financing and, indeed, the setting up of school boards and the histories associated with them before he poses his question to me, because the posing of the question says, why do you not fix things? Why do you not just move things around? Well, how in the dickens do I move things around without killing the autonomy of the boards, the taxing autonomy? Or is he saying, well, infuse in the education finance formula pure socialism, now not by district, but by the value of the House, let that be the higher order.

What he has to then agree is that there has to be higher orders. There has to be the highest order here as to what decision is made so that you can make the next one below it. Therefore , he has to tell me what his higher orders are, because if his higher orders are the provincial government now em brace all of us, bring him back home, dismantle school boards, then he has to say so.

Right now, the higher the order of sequence is lik e this, the provincial governme nt-not this government but governments long before us have del egated through The Public Schools Act and other educ ation acts certa in authority to local school divisions who have the right to tax right up to the edge of their boundaries. What we have done as gove rnments, not only ourselves but ones preceding us, to try and reduce that impact taking into ancount the wealth and disparity through equalization, is try to moderate that influence.

If he is saying, well, now moderate it more, well, then what he is really saying is that if you ever put your value into your household, God forbid, because you are going to be nailed. If you ever, ever attempt to take the fruits of your labour and put it into your household, you will pay the price. So I say to him, what are his higher orders? * (115 0) Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to enter into that discussion, because it is an issue that I have been following over the last number of years. There are a number of options that the government can do, and the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) alluded to three of them. I want to talk about those three options, the whole issue of school divisions, the number of school divisions. I am on record inside the Chamber as commenting that the city of Winnipeg does not need more than two school divisions. An Honourable Member: You still have a border. Mr. Lamoureux: Right, you will still have a border. My suggestion to this Chamber is that we do not need more than two. So, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, yes, I, and I believe this Chamber, should be open to that particular option.

What I am suggesting to the Minister of Finance and this government-a nd this is where we can comment in terms of the equalization­ Winnipeg School Division No. 1 has the inner-city schools and other schools that have demands on it that other school divisions do not necessarily have in terms of the numbers. There are programs that are necessary in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 , more financial demands than other school divisions have.

You can go through different things such as lunch programs, the whole idea of you cannot learn on an em pty stomach. [interjection) What the minister is referring to is all the more reason why one should look at the school divisions and should have been looking at the school divisions because,

6005 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 quite frankly, you do get that. You can go from one school division to another school division and find that they use com ple tely different com puters. Sometimes they will not necessarily have the same sort of courses that are being made available. There are a lot of inequities, and I am just refe rring to the fina nces , the taxation issue, because I believ e that this government can do certain things.

Through equalization, it can ensure that the individuals that happen to live in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 are not being excessively taxed on their proper ty tax, which I beli eve we are-and I guess maybe I might have a conflict in the sense that I live in the riding I represent so I am unfortunately- An Honourable Member: .. . your local school autonomy. Mr. Lamoureux: Well, we can talk about local school aut onomy.

I would suggest the former Minister of Education read Bill 16 before he starts talking about local school autonomy, because you are doing more to that than what I am suggesting in terms of equalization. I think that is a viable option that this government could look at today that if, in fact, it is quite content to rule out the first option by saying, well, the school divisions, we are now as a government five years into a mandate, where after being in a government for five years, we are now prepared to look at the school divisions. Fine, that is Option 1. Option 2 is the equalization.

If this government believes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that individuals are being taxed unfairly, that there is something that they can do, we do not see this government acting on that. I find that unfortunate, because again I would suggest to you-and you can take Census of Canada information, and you look at where the average income is. You will find it is not in the inner city or the Shaughnessy Park or the Weston. It is where it is the low end, yet these are the individuals that are bein g taxed the most regressive tax that is there in terms of our property tax.

This is something that the school divisions--and we can talk about the local autonomy, and, yes, Winnipeg School Division No. 1 should be able to reduce their proper ty tax, but they have more demands. The government has to recognize that fact. I would suggest that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and his government look at the funding formula of equalization. That is the second option. Now the Minister of Finance talked about this third or this other order. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I, as I am sure most individuals in this Chamber, do believe in the need to have school divisions in the province of Manitoba.

There is an argument to be made in terms of why it is that we are relying on school taxes from our property tax, the shifting of the school tax away from our property tax into general revenues. I know this is not something that could occur overnight or even within five or 10 years, but I think we have to look at it as a general direction of government. What we have seen over the last number of years is more of a reliance on the property tax because of the government's lack of commitment to funding education through general revenues. As a resu lt, we see the increased relian ce on the proper ty tax. Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, whom is that going to hurt? Is it going to hurt the school divisions as it is currently structured that can least afford it or have the tax base that is not necessarily based on income in terms of which divisions need how much revenue? Worse yet, you are relying that much more on a very regr essive form of taxation. If government was wanting to send direction and wants to talk about fairer taxation, one would believe the direction, that order that the Minister of Finance is talking about, at least in part, should be from shifting from property tax to general revenue.

Durin g the last numb er of mo nths In the discussions that I have had with many different Manitobans, and not just within the Liberal Party, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, many individuals feel that education is not that much different than health care, that we, as a society, value education and believe that there Is a sign ificant role for the provincial government to play and to ensure that we have an educational system that is funded from general revenues. I personally believe moving in that direction would be the right way to go, and this government is not doing that.

So, if I were to end with the question, I would go by saying, I am going over those three options. The first option being the one of school division reform. Unfortunately, the government is very late In bringin g up the whole discussion of school

July 27, 1993 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6006 division ref orm. That is one option, and I can understand the minister saying no to that particular option. The second option is equalization, and that is really the option that I would like the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) to commen t on, is the whole question of the equalization. Does he not believe that through equalization, that individuals who live in the north end would be far better off if the government were to address that particular issue?

The third one is the general shift of financing our education from K to 12 to general revenues, as opposed to the more gradual shift that has been occurring to property tax because of the lack of commitment from the government. Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, I have never heard such poppycock! I mean that is pure unadulterated garbage the member is speaking. He talks about shifts, the proper ty tax from general revenue because of lack of commitment. I mean, where does he stand? Does he want a billion dollar deficit? Where do you think this money comes from?

See, what I despise about his commentary right now, he tells us the high priority is of health and education, we all agree with him, but he has not got the courage to stand up and tell us in what areas he is prep ared to reduce spending. I am not talking now about a mil lion, a half-million dollars, I am talking tens, twenties, hundreds, 200 mil lion. See, he does not have the courage to stand. But if he had the courage to say, ah, but increase taxes, then I would pat him on the back, and I would say, well, at least you are principled enough to tell us that you are going to support increased incom e taxes.

I wou ld say by the increase of roughly 40 percent, taking the personal tax rate from 52 perce nt of federal tax up to around 70, 75. Because remember now, you are talking about the middle class, because the people earning $60,000 and over, there are not any. They are roughly 3 or 4 percent. So other than that, who is going to be paying all these $200 million? So maybe it is not personal income tax he is talking about, maybe he is talking about consumption taxes. Maybe he wants to see the retail sales tax increase from 7 to about 11 percent. If he does, fine.

A principled man would say, yes, I support that, and I will go out to the public and say so. *

(1200) Indeed, if that revenue can come in, taking into account the negative impact it is going to have on the econom y, but nevertheless there will be additional revenue. If he is saying, then this should go to education, then cert ainly, the provincial government could relieve some of the property tax burden. No doubt. It could prob abl y do more in the ar ea of equal izati on, and that is wher e this whole discussion ended, or it started on equalization. But I remind him right now, there is roughly $100 million flowing out from the so-called wealthier-assessed divisions to the lower.

I am glad I looked at the member for Emerson (Mr. Penner), because the me mber for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) obviously for gets, we did mor e fo r the homeowner in Winnipeg School Division No. 1, with an issue unrelated to education, when we brought forward assessment reform . We did mor e for the homeowner in School Division No. 1 than anything else that was ever done before. Mr. Lamoureux: Clayton, we still pay the highest taxes than any other person, yes, we do. Mr. Manness: Well, part of the reason you pay the high est taxes is because you have the most programs anywhere. Yes, you do.

You have the most programs. You would say that, well, some of them are for special needs. We put supplem entary funding into the formulas to the Winnipeg School Division No. 1 more so than any other division to try and help ameliorate the- Mr. Lamoureux: We have more special needs children than any other school division. Mr. Manness: Well, that is why we put the money there. Why do you think we put the money there? So there is no use arguing, we agree. When the memb er says he wants greater equalization, what he is really saying is he wants subu rban Winnipe g to pay more for Winnipeg School Division No. 1.

But you see where he falls down, he draws his thinking around the city of Winnipeg. He does not care about those rural divisions. Where does that fit into the equalization model? I can tell him that if you have pure equality of programm ing through all the school divisions in

6007 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 19 93 Manitoba, Winnipeg School Division No. 1 would have to have higher taxes and lower services because there would be more of a transfer of money out from Winnipeg School Division to the rural areas. If you wanted equality of programs­ because I can take you through school division af ter school division in rural Manitoba that collectively do not· have any of the extracurricular activities. An Honourable Member: Not even close. Mr. Manness: Not even close-band programs, swimming programs, interzone sports programs. I could take him into the academics.

There are many school divisions that do not have advanced calculus in Grade 12. An Honourable Member: Why is that? Mr. Manness: Wel l, why is that, the memb er asks? Why is it? Beca use the local school divisions and the ratepayers have decided that they cannot tax themsel ves to support it. Mr. Lamour eux: To su pp ort how many individuals? In one school? Mr. Manness: The member says, in one school. I do not know. In some cases one school, in some cases in two schools within the same division. I do not know what he is talking about. Mr.

Lamoureux: Every school does not offer those very same courses that you are talking about. You have to have a certain size. Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, now the member is not caring about universal equality of education. Mr. Lamoureux: It does not even apply to the city of Winnipeg. Mr. Manness: Of course, it does not, and because it does not apply is because there are two different tax rates on either side of the street. The member had better think through his question. He is saying greater equalization.

Today in Canada we have provinces, so-called wealthy and so-called less wealt hy, and I say to him that the fed eral government does not impose upon the Province of Manitoba a provincial tax rate at a level other than what the Manitoba government is prepared to accept. Right now, 52 percent, one of the lowest in Canada. No thanks to the mem bers opposite who voted against every one of our taxation reduction moves. I hear what he is saying. He is saying put more money into the pot, take the effect off the property taxpayer if you can, but now it is up to him to tell me where I am going to get that money. Mr.

Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, it is inte resti ng, you know, you listen to what the minister-and at first he has used the word, and I am not too sure if it is even parliamentary, the word "poppycock." I notice the minister is the only one who uses that word in the Chamber because he used it on me last year, too. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, accepting the challenge of the mi nister, he talks, he tries to gi ve the impression, here is what the member for Inkster wants: he wants now general revenues to cover for all of the educational costs. So what does that mean?

The mem ber for Inkster wants to have increased personal income taxes. We are going to have to increase personal income taxes by 40 percent. Well, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is very good at twisting the facts around and trying to come up with what he believes would be maybe not necessarily a popular thing for an opposition party or, in fact, any member of this Chamber to say. No memb er is suggesting that you increase personal income tax by 40 percent. At no point did I make that suggestion. I talked about a general direction of this government.

The general direction of th is gove rnment is to move mo re towards regressive taxes as opposed to progressive taxes. A good example of that is in fact the property tax with respect to the school divisions. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that is what I was referring to. If the Minister of Finance was wanting to move into the other direction, there are other things that the Minister of Finance can do. You know, the Minister of Finance thought nothing of taking $75 off of th e $325 re bate.

We ll, if in fact the government was wanting to have more of a shift over to the school division taxes, you could take the balance-wh at is it?-$250 now in terms of the rebate . There are areas. That is not going to increase or decr ease , but it does send a very strong message that government is quite prepared to move more towards the general revenues, not more towards the regressive tax of a property tax to finance our educational facilities. If in fact the Minister of Finance even made the suggestion that the member for Inkster was going

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 6008 to increase income tax by 40 percent, what the Minister of Finance does not say is that if in fact the government decided to do that, what would be the result? You would see a dramatic decrease in the property tax, which was much more a regressive tax than the personal income tax.

Now, that is not to say that I am saying that the school divisions should be 1 00 percent financed through general revenues, but what I am saying is that there should be direction from the government in the other way, indicating that, yes, the school division tax on your property tax is a regressive tax, and if in fact you start cutting back on the general revenue towards education, you are going to have more of an onus on the property tax which is a more regressive tax.

I am saying that you should change that direction; that you should have more of an onus on the general revenue taxes than you do- An Honourable Member: Like what? Mr. Lamoureux: On your educ ation fundi ng, through equalization as a perfect example. An Honourable Member: Where do I get the rest then? Mr. Lamoureux: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, right now the Minister of Finance says, where are you going to get the mo ney from . We ll, unfortu nate ly, the Minis ter of Finance is in government, and you know we see the direction, and I am talking about the general direction.

The general direction is that this government is quite content on saying that the revenues to finance education should rely more and more on property tax. That is what this current government is saying. I am saying that it should not be saying that. *( 1210 ) An Honourable Member: That is why we froze it. We put a bill through that froze the increase on the property taxes. Mr. Lamoureux: Well, Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, that could enter into the discussion about the autonomy in which 15 minutes ago someone was criticizing myself for not talking about the autonomy, but I wanted to get right back to the original question. The original question is what is this Minister of Finance doing to ensure that, in fact, the senior that lives in Weston versus the senior that lives in Brooklands, what is he doing to ensure that discretion is in fact being narrowed, that, what I believe, is most unfair, the argument in terms of, well, one school division wants to provide such-and-such courses. Mr.

Dep uty Chair person, the province of Manitoba benefits by many of the courses. For ex ample, some of the nurser y progr ams that Winnipeg School Division has, we benefit very much so. Some of the lunch programs that are being provided-[interjection) Well the free lunch program- all Manitobans in fact benefit from that particular program even if it is just being applied primarily in Winnipeg School Division No. 1. Why shoul d individuals in the subu rbs of Winnipeg School Division No. 1 have to be the only ones that have to subsidize? You know, Winnipeg School Division No. 1 also has suburbs.

I represent some suburbs. So it is not a question of saying that the suburbs of the city of Winnip eg have to do some subsi dizing. Curr ently there are some subu rbs-it is called Meadows West and Garden Grove-that are doing the subsidizing, at least in part, and there are other areas that are doing some of the subsidizing, and the city of Winnipeg benefits as a whole and, through that, the province of Manitoba.

But qu ite simply, what is the go ve rnmen t prepared to do to ensure that those individuals that happen to live in School Division No. 1 are not being overly taxed in compa rison to oth er individuals in the city of Winnipeg in particular? Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, naivete is an endearing quality for a while. I wish I had the numbers under my control, but it seems to me that we take, as a provincial government, I think it is around $15 0 million.

We take from the wealthy and we give to the less wealthy in equalization, and if we had not done it, and if we were not doing it, I am not so sure that this $40 disparity between one person living on one side of the street- An Honourable Member: One hundred dollars differ ence. Mr. Manness: A $1 00 disparity. I do not know, again-this is what, the St. James division and the- An Honourable Member: Winnipeg No. 1. Mr.

Manness: -a nd Winnipeg No. 1 division. do not know what dynamics are at play, what quality of education, indeed what expenditures are at play that are mostly re spo nsible for that differe nce, but I can attest to the fact that if we did

6009 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 not have this $1 50 million to equal ization, that either the disparity, the $1 00 he is talking about, could either be $500 greater or it could be minus $300 the other way different. I mean, we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars by way of form ula, a ver y complex and complic ated formula which, I dare say, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, maybe 25 people in the whole province of Manitoba understand. What the member is saying to me, he says, well, make it more complex, make it harder to understand.

An Honourable Member: Well, if it makes it more fair- Mr. Manness: Well, you see, but-m ore fair, or fairer I think is what he meant. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the reality is he has a decision to make. In opposition, if he is going to be in opposition, other than charge the government and to ride the government for not being able to give him that fa irness, exactly the same tax payable in two jurisdictions by imposing our will, I would say to him that he has to come up with a better alternative. We will work, I know, through the boundary review. I am certain that there will be a reduction in school boundaries.

That will help, possibly, but that is not the question. That is not what we are talking here. As the member is calling for greater equalization, what he is saying is attack the rich more so. What he is saying is for those people who have put the fruits of their labours into their homes that they definitely should be attacked for it. What he is saying is attacked. Well, he is not saying attacking earning ability, he is saying attack wealth. Thirdly, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I say to him, he has to tell me where it is I am going to get the extra money to take the greater pressure off of the property taxpayer.

I can tell him there is nothing more I would rather do. There is nothing more I would rather do than try to safeguard the property taxpayer. But you notice the memb er for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) not once in this discussion says or suggests that the school divisions themsel ves should be doing something on their expenditure side. To him, it is simply a revenue issue. As long as he believes that there is nothing that the school division should be doing on the expenditure side, then he and I cannot agree. He and I will never ever have agreement with respect to this issue.

Because I am telling him like I am telling some other people in educational circles, just like this government, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) particularly, every day is being attacked because- An Honourable Member: And rightfully so. Mr. Manness: -and the member says rightfully so, because he is not finding enough money to put it-oh, well, it all comes down to money. The issue comes down to money. Yes, oh, yes, and nobody is-[interjection] Well, let me say something about Connie Curran. As the head of Treasury Board, I have gone through that contract, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.

As I have said to this House before , and I will say it again, the desire to engage Connie Curran was not overly strong. Everybody understood the potential political fallout from em ploying Connie Curran. You do not have to be a genius to understand that. How many votes in the crowd do we get out of em ploying an American consultant? You could have all the handicaps known to society and you would still know that there is no percentage behind it. An Honourable Member: Because you did not know what you were doing. Mr. Manness: Oh, we ll, did not know what we were doing.

You see, no, no, this is very relevant, very relevant. But the reality is, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, when everybody is an exper t li ke they are in the education community, everybody knows how to fix the problem. And you know what you find out very qu ickly? That all of the ir solutions seem to conveniently leave themselves untouched. I am not speaking of the health area particularly well, but I understand education better. Everybody has a solution, and they are all workable. But you know what? Every one of the ir solutions safeguards themselves. Every one of them.

So when you start to look around for the honest broker, who is going to lead us down the path? All of a sudden, you have people who more or less agree on the honest broker. I will tell you, you have to seriously look at that person, and that is exactly why we have Connie Curran, no regrets and no apologies, none whatsoever. (Mr. Edward Helwer, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair) * (1 220)

July 27, 1993 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MANITOBA 6010 Mr. Acti ng Ch air person, in the educ ation question, the member is going to have to decide what the higher order is. If it is pure socialism he wants in support of education, get up and say so. If it is higher taxes he wants in support of general revenue taxes, get up and say so. If it is no impact on the expenditure side in school divisions, get up and say so, because those are the three major criteria that everyone in a position of power has to deal with. The member says that we are offloading on the property taxpayers.

We brought in Bill 16 to prevent and safeguard the property taxpayers so they would not be held account able for our less-than-wished-for level of funding this year to the local school divisions. Mr. Acting Chairperson, this is all thought out. There is great consistency behind all of our decisions as a government, and I am proud of them. Mr. Lamoureux: What I want, and I believe that even the gover nmen t wants at times, is fa ir taxation. I do not believe it is fair taxation.

I do not believe it is because of excessive spending on the part of Winnipeg School Division No. 1 school trustees that has resulted in an individual that has a $10 0,000 home paying $400 more a year on school tax- [interjection] for those ministers that did not hear my opening remark s, a house value d at $100 ,000 in Winn ipeg School Division No. 1 compared to one in St. James, you are paying approximately, from what I understand, $400 more a year in property tax. If a senior-and this is one to St.

James­ [interjection] I am talking about Winnipeg School Division No. 1-[interjection] I am not aware of any schools that have been closed in Winnipeg School Division No. 1. The schools are busting at the seams. In Sisler High, you have 11 schools feeding into it. It is growing. If anything, there is more of an additional demand, but the government does not recognize that.

Anyway, I do not believe that the services that are being offered to the individual children that are attending the schools in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 are that much in excess to justify having the difference of-as I say, in a $100 ,000 home, $400; in a $30,000, $100. I do not believe that is in fact the case. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) said he wished that he had the numbers. I too wish he had the numb ers. I too wis h that the Minis ter of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) was able to say, this is the reason why the discrepancy is there, to justify it.

If in fact the minister, the government-be cause I do not have the resou rces that the gove rnment has-ca n justify by saying, this is the reason why the discrepancy is so much. [interjection] The Minister of Finance says that he will give me the reason, and I hope he will give me the reason as to why. We have a number of months between now and the next session, and I hope that in fact I will find out from the government why the difference is there.

I know when I asked the Minister of Finance qu es tions in the last session de aling with a particular issue, he had made a commitment to getting it back to me, and I never did get the information. Mr. Manness: Is that right? On this issue? Mr. Lamoureux: Not on this issue, on another issue. An Honourable Member: You are mixing apples with oranges. Mr. Lamoureux: We ll, no, mi xing apples with oranges. I am just hoping that the Minister of Finance will get back to me. Mr. Manness: No, I did not. I said, right now, I would tell you one of the reasons. Mr. Lamoureux: He has backtracked a bit now.

He says, right now, he will give me one reason. Well, I would be content with the one reason right now, but I am wondering if the minister would take it under advisement and get back to me any time within the next six months as to why it is people in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 have to pay the tax level that we are currently paying under the school division compared to other school divisions. What services is it that the residents in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 are getting that those that are living in St. James are not getting?

Can the minister take that question as notice and get back to me in some sort of a det ailed break down of it? That is reasonable. Mr. Manness: I will endeavour to do a better job than I did a year ago and try and shed some greater light on the question. Certainly, I know for certain two of the factors will be-l cannot quantify the weight of either of them-but the two factors are: one, the level of programming in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 is the highest compared to any school division, so therefore, there is costlier

6011 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 provision of programming; and secondly, I also know in the St. James School Division, because colleagues have told me, that they have reduced some of their costs significantly by closing some 11 or 14 schools over the course of the last 15 years. Now I am not entering into the ir re alm of responsibility in p�ssing judgment whether that is right or wrong, but obviously, there have been cost savings effected as a result of those decisions.

Those are two of the real reasons why there is such a discrepancy, and all of that is basically as a result of local autonomy, decisions made within those local school division offices. So I would say to him, if he really wants the question answered, he should go to those school divisions and ask them, but I will endeavour to shed more light on that, on his question. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I was wanting to go to the Minis ter of He alth (Mr. Orchard), but I just want to comment very briefly. With respect to the fi rst answer, I think that the equalization should have addressed that issue. Mr.

Manness: It has in a big way. Mr. Lamoureux: The minister says, it has in a big way. We will hopefully find out how it has in a big way. The second one, he makes reference to St. James in terms of closing schools. Well, I can speak on behalf of the constituency that I represent of Inkster. We have a great demand for schools, because it is a growing area and it is part of the whole division. But if it is a growing area, chances are you have got more families moving in, we have got more houses being built, a bigger property tax base-[inte rjection] That is right.

I will do my best to ensure that I look at it in as fair a fashion as possible. I do appreciate the minister's commit­ ment to getting back to me with respect to it. I want to move on to the Department of Health, Mr. Acting Chairperson, and that is with respect to another issue that has come up time after time.

I have a working group established in my riding that deals with health care issues, and one of the discussions that we have had on a couple of occasions is the whole question of access to our health care. • (12 30) As it stands today, and the best way is to give an example, and I have been giving this example- and hopefu lly it is a fairly accurate example-over the last number of months, and the example would be, if someone is riding a bicycle and they fall off the bicycle and they scratch up their knee, they would go into a walk-in clinic, possibly.

The knee would be looked at, all prepped up and so forth, and then once that has all been done, a medical doctor would come in and take a look at It and say, yes, you know, put a band-aid on it or whatever it might be. You can go from that to the institutions and the hospitals where our registered nurses and LPNs, I would argue, are being underutilized and in fact could be mor e util ized by reco gnizing the profe ssionals that they are by giving them the authority to do more. It is not because I do not necessarily appreciate the hard work that our medical doctors put into it.

I think the medical doctors perform a wonderful job within our medical services, but the question that comes up is, why is it, whether it is the walk-in clinic, whether it is a prescription for drugs, our hospitals, our personal care homes, the only access to any of these facilities is in fact the medical doctor? Is the government looking at access to some of our medical facilities through other professions, in particular I would say the registered nurses or Bachelor of Nursing, the prescription of drugs and so forth?

I am wanting to know from the minister if in fact the government cu rrently is looking at expanding the roles of those other health care professionals in terms of access to our health care? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Acting Chairperson, the answer to the question is yes, but not in the dimension my honourable friend presumes to propose in his question. The one issue in te rms of drugs, for instance, pharmaceuticals, my honourable friend is wanting to know if we are, as I understand it, going to broaden the prescribing ability of drugs to nurses, for instance. No, that is not in the cards.

I want to tell my honourable friend why it is not in the cards. There would be a pretty reasonable argument, I think, made even by the professional nursing associations that their current training program would not adequately prepare them for that role, and I think that is an argumen t that could be sustained. It is not that one has any particular adversity towa rds nurses unde rtaking mo re ser vices in the syst em , but even nur ses them selves in making that request to government

July 27, 1993 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA 6012 put limits on what they believe they can reasonably do as professionally trained, as educated. Pr escribing drugs is not one of them .

Admissions to hospitals, I sense my honourable friend is wanting to know if we are contemplating having people other than physicians have admitting privileges to hospitals, with the exception, and this is the only exception that is being contemplated, of how midwives, when we bring that opportunity for practice into the Manitoba health care system, how it is they might access a hospital if that is the choice of the woman giving birth. In terms of offe ring adm itting privileges to hospitals to other professionals, no. Again, I will tell my honourable friend very de arly why.

It is difficult enough under the current context to assure that you have appropriate admissions from 2,000 physicians in Manitoba, let alone having com peting profe ssional discip line s wanting to admit patien ts for varying reasons into our Manitoba hospital system. There again can be the argument as to which profe ssional group would have the pr of essional trai ning to mak e the judgment as to whe ther individual A should be admitted to a hospital or seen on an outpatient or indeed seen by a nurse.

Now to answer by honourable friend's question a little further, we have initiatives underway which are bringing mo re nurse-m anaged care into the Manitoba health care context.

One project that comes easily and quickly to mind, of course, is the shift of a lot of the outpatient emer gency activity from the Health Sciences Centre over to the Health Action Ce ntre with accompan ied salar ied professionals providing the care; a shift away from the tertiary care, our trauma centre for emergency care at Health Scie nces Centre, an attemp t to move less complex care needs away from that very critical operating trauma centre to receive the most significant of emer gencies and serious injury in the province of Manitoba in taking a lower level of complexity away from that emer gency and moving it to the Healt h Acti on Ce ntre- very , very pragmatic, a very sensible approach.

Nurses are going to have a greater role in the Health Action Centre in doing that. But my honourable friend, I submit with all due respect, ought to seriously consider his sug gestions about widening the expansion of prescription drugs or widening the admitting privileges to our ac ute care hospitals beyond physicians. I will tell my honourable friend why.

You take a look at the Health Action document, and you will find that if you go to the latter pages of that document, that over the multiyear tracking of the cost of drivers in our health care system, you will find, even with ad justme nts to the Pharmacare program which raised the deductible so that consumers paid more of their own prescriptions, that line is the fastest growing line in the province. That is why my honourable friend's colleague the memb er for The Maples (Mr .

Cheema) was so adamant that we pursue as quick ly as possible pla stic card technolo gy on the Pharm acare progr am , because yes, it had the potential advantage of the reimbursement aspect, but it also offe red the ability to prevent adver se drug reactions, inappropriate prescribing and a whole number of initiatives.

That is why three and a half years ago, for instance, with the Pharmacare program , as sugg ested by the pharmacis ts of Manitoba, that we bring in the triplicate prescription program for addictive pharmaceutical products, because they made the case that there was inappropriate prescribing patte rns in addictive pharmaceuticals. The Ritalin and Talwin issue, the R&Ts, the street drugs, we have essentially curtailed the­ they are still there, but their availabili ty is significantly lower today because of that action.

You know, what it did is it put greater constraints on the physician and his fre edom to prescribe, and I make no bones about it. That was recognized by myself when I accepted that recommendation from the pharmac ists . I also recog nized that the pharmacists, in making that recommendation, were in essence doing themselves out of business, and they did, because that program alone saves on average $750,000 per year. Even with those chan