Manitoba Hansard — 8 April 1999 (Sitting 3, 36th Legislature, 5th Session)

36-5-3

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session- Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba _.·,·,:..· �� •Oc DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLIX No. 3 - 1:30 p.m., Thursday, April 8, 1999

Memb-:r ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUA Y, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James DRIEDGER, Albert DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK,Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen FRIESEN, Jean GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWA Y, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

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

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

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

83 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, AprilS, 1999 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the 1997- 98 Annual Report for the Department of Agriculture, copies of which have been previously distributed. As well, I am pleased to table the 1997-98 Annual Report of the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation, copies of which have also been previously distributed.

As well, I am pleased to table the 1997-98 Annual Report for the Manitoba Farm Mediation Board, copies of which have also been previously distributed. As well, I am pleased to table the 1997 Annual Report for the Faculty of Agriculture and Food Services, University of Manitoba. As well, I am pleased to ta ble the Annual Report 1997-98 for the Manitoba Crop Insurance Corporation, copies of which have been previously distributed. In conclusion, I am also pleased to table the 1998 Annual Report for the Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute, affectionately known as PAMI. House Business Hon.

Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I am rising to ask if there would be leave of the House to allow for the first reading today of the Electoral Boundaries Commission legislation. I would like to table as well at this time a letter that we received today from the Leader of the Liberal Party requesting that the House deal with this matter and pledging his caucus to seeing that in fact happens. I only indicate that if members opposite are prepared to give leave today and have first reading, we can distribute the bill this afternoon . I know the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer) is quoted in the media as not having seen the bill. By allowing first reading today, the bill will be distributed this afternoon-it cannot be distributed without first reading-and the member can see the bill. I would ask if there is leave. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson. Are you on a point of order? *

(1335) Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think the government House leader did far more than just ask for leave, and I am somewhat puzzled because I was contacted by the same government House leader, in fact, before the spring break in which he indicated that it was the government 's desire to proceed with the electoral bounda ries bill following the throne speech and before the budget. I would like to note for the record that that seemed to have changed on the basis of a matter of privilege moved by the member for The Maples (Mr.

Kowalski), and since that time the government House leader seems to have chosen to deal with House business on the floor of the House, which is certainly not the practice followed by previous government House leaders. I want to indicate that when I spoke to the government House leader I indicated more our willingness to talk to the government to arrange the business of the House, and we want to see fair boundaries which will involve passage of the bounda ries act and fair elections which will

84 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 involve dealing with the Monnin recommenda tions. would suggest that the government House leader might want to take less direction from the Liberal Party on this and follow the processes of the House and his own word that he made to myself that he was willing to

schedule this after the throne speech. It was his proposal. I would suggest that he go back and reflect on his desire to now raise the business of the House on the floor of the Legislature. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honoura ble member for Thompson, I would agree to a degree that indeed the government House leader did go beyond the request for asking for unanimous consent, but I also allowed the House leader of the official opposition a lot of latitude in responding to the honoura ble government House leader.

I will now ask the question that the request was made for. Is there unanimous consent of the House to allow the government House leader to introduce Bi112? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind all honoura ble members that this is not a time for debate. We do have rules and procedures that should be followed. The request was made and asked and leave has been denied. Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, would like to have all honoura ble members draw their attention to the public gallery where we have a number of guests with us this afternoon.

Firstly, in the Speaker's Gallery we have three students who are returning from an exchange in Costa Rica with the operation World Scholarship. They are Beth Bryson, Michele Nychuk, and Niki Ashton from R.D. Parker Collegiate in the constituency of the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton). Also seated in the public gallery this afternoon we have twenty-two Grades 7 to 11 students from Maples Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Murray Goldenberg. This school is located in the constituency of the honoura ble member for The Maples (Mr.

Kowalski), and three Grade 9 students from Nelson Mcintyre Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Elliott Drewiak. This school is located in the constituency of St. Boniface. On behalf of all honoura ble members, I welcome you this afternoon. Speaker's Statement Madam Speaker: Prior to recognizing the Leader of the official opposition, I wish to draw a matter of attention to the House. Yesterday I was troubled by some of the language used, but I did not address it then because I wanted to check with the authorities to review past Manitoba practice.

Having reviewed the transcript of yesterday's Question Period and debate under Orders of the Day, at this time for the benefit of all members I would like to make clarification of rules respecting unparliamentary language, particularly quotations from other sources. Speaker Rocan on October 5, 1989, ruled that quoting words of another person which were unparliamentary is out of order. He also ruled on December 12, 1994, that words may not be used hypothetically or conditionally if they are plainly intended to convey a direct imputation, as did Speaker Phillips on September 2, 1986. *

(1340) Speaker Graham in a statement on June 30 made reference to the parliamentary authority Erskine May which reads: A member is not allowed to use unparliamentary words by the device of putting them in somebody else's mouth. This quote is also contained in the current edition of Erskine May. Mr. Ashton: I am wondering, Madam Speaker, was that some advice or was that a ruling.

I do not believe a point of order was raised on that, and I would specifically like to know whether your ruling is suggesting that we cannot quote page 16 of the Monnin inquiry which stated "In all my years on the Bench I never encountered as many liars in one proceeding as I did during this inquiry." statements that were attributed towards the

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 85 Filmon team, I suppose, the eight individuals that lied repeatedly before the commission. Can I receive your advice on whether that is a ruling? Because, in terms of unparliamen tary language, I would raise the question as to whether you are now saying that we cannot say what Judge Monnin said, and that is that significant Conservative Party members lied.

If that is the case on the ruling, we may indeed challenge it, but I would like some clarification because I am not sure indeed whether that was merely advice to the House or whether indeed it was an official ruling. Madam Speaker: That, indeed, was advice to the House, to all members of the Chamber. I did, as I indicated, review all yesterday's transcripts and also in the heckling back and forth I heard words used that if they were on the record would be clearly unparliamentary by all members on both sides of the House. I stated this simply for clarification.

I have been advised that it is past Manitoba practice, but I was not aware if all members knew what past Manitoba practice was. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Education System Funding Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, over the last number of years there has almost been a tale of two cities dealing with education funding and its reality in the classroom. We hear stories of the pressure on kids, the amount of students in classrooms, the loss of staff, the loss of teacher's aides and its impact on special education, and many other results of what people believe to be funding cuts.

The Tories of course, the members opposite, extoll their own virtues. But, Madam Speaker, I have looked over the FRAME reports from the early '9 0s which have a

section dealing with actual funding to public schools and would note that the reality the people are facing in the classrooms appears to be the true reality, that the amount of money has gone down indeed from $732 million to public schools in one report to 1998-99 -and the one report being '9 2-93-d own to some $709 million. I would like to ask this Premier what has been the impact of those cuts at the classroom level, performed by his government, on the lack of opportunity for kids and their future in Manitoba educational facilities in public education. Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the government of Manitoba has been very active in working with the education system to ensure that our children receive the best education we as a society can provide for them. Indeed, international commentators have made the point that Manitobans are the most advanced of any to be found anywhere in the world, and that is thanks to a quality system of public education that we have in our province.

In order to keep on that track, new directions were entered upon some five years ago, and that has been moving along towards full implementation, which is providing Manitobans with a system of education that is relevant to today, which sets curriculum requirements that are relevant to today and tests to those requirements to ensure that we are meeting the objectives that have been set out for us. With respect to the funding of this system of education, this past year we saw a funding increase of 2.2 percent, this year 2.3 percent and a commitment of no less than 2 percent next year. *

(1345) Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, if that money is going into the bureaucracy of the minister's department and not going to kids in classrooms, that is the issue that parents and parent advisory counc ils, kids and municipal councils have been raising. Madam Speaker, the shift on taxation from the early '90s from the provincial government to the property taxpayers through their education taxes levied by the school divisions has gone from $208 million to $377 million, and with increases such as the one in Brandon of 9 percent announced this year, it will even go greater.

This is the equivalent of over seven points on income tax. Will this tax priority be a priority for this government in this budget to

86 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 give the much needed relief onto property taxpayers by funding education in a way that really gets the money to the classroom and stops offloading to the property taxpayers of Manitoba? Mr. McCrae: It should be noted that under this administration, education funding as a proportion of the total budgetary spending of government has risen from 17.7 percent in 1997- 98 to 19.3 percent in 1998-99. In contrast to that, under the previous NDP administration funding for education dropped from 21 percent of their budget in I 981-82 to I 7. 7 percent in 1987- 88.

I ask you, Madam Speaker, compare priorities and I am happy to do so. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the minister never contradicted the numbers in his own FRAME documents that show a cut in money. Of course, we know that-[in terjection] Well, if the Premier (Mr. Filmon) wants to answer the questions, you know, I would love him to stand up and answer one of these questions one of these days. I guess he does not know, or nobody told him about the education cuts. Nobody told me about the cuts in education. I did not get briefed. I did not know.

Madam Speaker, many municipal officials, many trustees, many mayors, including the mayor in the city of Winnipeg and others mayors in this province, have commented on the massive shift of the education tax burden to the property taxpayers of Manitoba. Of course, this government also clawed back property tax credits in the early '90s when the deficit was at a record-high level, and this has put another portion of the taxes onto the property taxpayers. I would like to ask this government, this Minister of Finan ce: will he make property taxes, education funding and property tax credits the No.

I priority for tax relief for the citizens of this province in this upcoming budget? *

(1350) Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to see that the Leader of the Opposition is interested in tax reductions. It is certainly a stance he never took when he was in government. We will be bringing down a budget in the not-too-di stant future, and we will just have to ask him to wait. Education System Funding Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, parents have told us that this government 's cuts to Manitoba public schools have been so severe that not only have their property taxes increased, but they must also sell chocolates for basic classroom resources.

The minister, the new minister in true Tory style at first denied this. Then he met some parents, for which I commend him, and he discovered it was true, and in true Tory style he then blamed the trustees. I would like to ask the minister today to bring some fresh air to his portfolio and to acknowledge and confirm that the real cause of diminishing classroom resources is the systematic cuts to public schools by his government recorded year by year in the FRAME document. Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I have been pleased in these early months of this min istry to spend time with something over 600 parents of the children in our school system in Manitoba, and I am glad to hear the honoura ble member' s comments in that respect. We have had some very good discussions, and I can tell the honoura ble member that they have not been focused only and exclusively on issues of the kind the honourab le member is raising here today.

In fact, over and over again we have been told that the curriculum being placed before the school system in Manitoba is excellent. That is not my word; that is the word of teachers and of parents in the system, that we are working towards an excellent curriculum and that clearly to change to new curriculum will require effort and some strains and stresses. These are things that the department and parents and teachers in schools can and should work together to overcome, because we all agree on the objectives and that is to have a quality education for our children.

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 87 Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, I am not surprised the minister does not want to talk about the money. I would like to ask the minister to explain why students must still use social studies texts from the 1970s, which take no account of the immigration which changed Canada in the '7 0s, the '8 0s and the '90s, which has no account of the new place of the North and no sense of the new global society into which these children are entering. Mr.

McCrae: Madam Speaker, the honourable member is very familiar with the New Directions and that new curriculum are being developed province-wide and also across the western part of this country. For years, parents-!, myself have complained that, you know, people should be able to move about in Canada and hope that their children can have some kind of consistent education opportunities, and this is what is happening in the development of science and social studies curriculum to follow things like math and language arts curriculum. The honoura ble member made reference to funding for basics.

Before she does that, she should check some of the statistics out there about what dollars are available for these things. I know that the whole issue of textbooks was raised, and yet in the city of Winnipeg I find that the textbook account for the Winnipeg No. 1 School Division is in a surplus position, $398,978. So I say that, Madam Speaker, to remind the honourab le member that the education of our children is still a shared respon sibility between the government of Manitoba and the school divisions. Funding-School Curriculum Ms.

Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Could the Minister of Education-who is clearly and, to me, shockingly unable to assure Manitobans today that our students are equipped with up-to-date texts and resources sufficient for their classes tell the House what his plan is? He is responsible for education in Manitoba. What is his plan to bring our schools to where they have relevant and current curriculum and resources? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I would never imply that there is never going to be a challenge again in our school system, because that would not be consistent with the changing reality of our world. We ought always to be challenged to be as up to date and give the best education we can for our kids, because they are going to need that as they face a changing reality in the new millennium. But just for the honourab le member's edification, I read an

article in the Winnipeg Free Press today written by Kathy Mallett and Leslie Spillett. I suggest the honoura ble member should have a look at that because there are some very good statements made. Among them, the obsession with the inadequate funding debate serves to mask and divert attention away from other important structural issues that the public school system must face. Madam Speaker, that is exactly what New Directions has been labouring away at doing, with the partnership of the school divisions and the school teachers and the parents.

All I can say, in the past two months of meeting with all of these people, is I am very impressed with the level of commitment I am seeing from teachers, parents, principals and school trustees across this province, and I would encourage that to continue. *

(1355) Cardiac Care Program St. Boniface Hospital Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Je voudrais poser une question au premier ministre ou au ministre de Ia Sante (M. Stefanson). Madame Ia presidente, nous avons parle avec beaucoup de medecins, de patients et d' infirmieres au Manitoba, et particulierement a I' Hopital Saint Bon iface. Nous avons beaucoup d' etudes ici au Manitoba qui recommandent que Ia chirurgie cardiaque reste a l' Hopital Saint-Bonif ace. Je voudrais demander au premier min istre ou au ministre de Ia Sante: est-ce qu'il va changer Ia decision et dire aujourd'hui que le gouvernement va garder Ia chirurgie cardiaque a l' Hopital Saint-Bonif ace?

88 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 [Translation] I would like to ask a question of the First Minister or the Minister of Health (Mr. Stefanson). Madam Speaker, we have spoken with many physicians, patients, and nurses in Manitoba, and particularly at St. Bonif ace Hospital. We have many studies here in Manitoba that recommend that cardiac surgery remain at St. Boniface Hospital. I would like to ask the First Minister or the Minister of Health: is he going to reverse the decision and state today that the government will maintain cardiac surgery at St. Bonif ace Hospital? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): thank the member for Kildonan for that question. I think he knows very well that the whole issue of the shifting of programs throughout our health care system in Winnipeg has been a very comprehensive one. It has included a number of individuals-health care providers, doctors, nurses, other people in the system-in terms of prioritizing, where we should be providing our programs.

The overall objective is a basic but very important one, Madam Speaker, to make the absolute best use of our physical assets, our buildings, best use of our technology, our equipment, and the best use of our people. The recommendation from that very comprehensive program that has been also recommended by the Winnipeg Hospital Authority has been to ultimately shift that program to the Health Sciences Centre. Today we currently have one program running with two sites. That obviously is going to continue for a period of time while this whole issue of the transition to one site ultimately is worked on. Mr.

Chomiak: Le ministre peut- il decider aujourd'hui de garder, pour tous les gens dans le systeme-et j 'ai parle avec beaucoup de gens dans le systeme-le ministre peut- il aujourd'hui dire que nous avons le rapport Bell- Wade qui recommande deux programmes, plutot un programme et deux sites?

Le ministre peut-il aujourd'hui dire que c'e st quelque chose de tres important pour les gens ici au Manitoba que le programme cardiaque reste a Saint-Bonif ace en meme temps qu'a u Centre des sciences de Ia sante, au benefice de tous les gens ici au Manitoba? [Translation] Can the minister decide today to keep, for all the people in the system-and I have talked to many people in the system- will the minister today say that we have the Bell-W ade Report which recommends two programs, or rather one program and two sites?

Can the minister indicate today that this is something that is very important for the people of Manitoba, that the cardiac program stay at St. Boniface as well as at the Health Sciences Centre for the benefit of all the people of Manitoba? Mr. Stefanson: The review process, again I remind the member, and he is very aware of it, was an extremely comprehensive one in terms of looking at not only this program but all of the programs, all of the services that are provided through our hospital facilities in the city of Winnipeg. The recommendation is to consolidate the cardiology in the Health Sciences Centre.

Today we continue to have the one program with the two sites while we are working through that transition, which will take a period of time. But that is a recommendation that has been made after extens ive review, extens ive consultation, extensive analysis. Again, I remind the member, in terms of I would hope it is an objective that he shares with all of the needs in health care, not only in Manitoba, right across Canada, the fundamental objective of making the best use of our buildings, the best use of our technology, the best use of our people.

The experts in the field have gone through this anal ysis, and they have made this recommenda tion. But at this point in time, while we are going through the transition, we will continue operating out of two sites. Surgery Reduction Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Quand le gouvernement a consolide Ies chirurgies et les programmes pour les enf ants a l'h opital des enfants, il a n!duit Ies programmes qu' il offrait aux enf ants du Manitoba. Et, en meme temps, aujourd'hui l'O HW veut reduire le nombre de chirurgies cardiaques pour l'a nnee prochaine.

Pour moi c'e st quelque chose de grave pour les gens ici au Manitoba, parce qu'on fait attendre

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 89 beaucoup de gens pendant longtemps pour les chirurgies cardiaques. Le mini stre peut-il aujourd'hui annuler le plan de l'O HW de reduire le nombre de chirurgies cardiaques ici au Manitoba? [Translation) When the government consolidated surgery and programs for children at Child ren's Hospital, it reduced the programs that it was providing to the children of Manitoba. Today the WHA wants to reduce the number of cardiac surgeries for the next year.

In my opinion, this is a serious matter for people here in Manitoba because many people have to wait a long time for cardiac surgery. Can the minister today cancel the plans of the WHA to reduce the number of cardiac surgeries here in Manitoba? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Again, Madam Speaker, I think the member for Kildonan knows that there was an awful lot more to this whole analysis than the shift of the one program from St. Boniface to Health Sciences Centre, that there are also programs coming into St. Boniface that will be introduced there in terms of services that they were being provided.

So, again, I just remind the member that this is a decision that has been made with extensive consultation, extensive input. The people involved in these particular fields have been involved as part of this analysis, a part of this recommendation, with the total objective of getting the best service to the public in the most efficient and effective way. So it is not an issue of providing less service. It is an issue of providing the ability to provide more service, to making better use of all of our people, all of our technology, all of our buildings. That is the overall objective.

I think that is a very wise objective that we certainly support, and I am bewildered why members opposite do not support that fundamental objective. *

(1400) Troy Baird Bail Hearing Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): My question is to the Minister of Justice. Troy Baird was apprehended, I understand, last night or today following charges laid this weekend that he had sexually assaulted his wife causing bodily harm while he was out on bail facing charges of attempted murder, uttering threats, forceable confinement, suicide aiding.

He was released last week, Madam Speaker, by Judge Newcombe, the same judge by the way that had released Roy Lavoie the second time, which of course in no small way was a factor that led to the Lavoie tragedy in 1995, a commission of inquiry and recommendations as to how to better deal with bail in domestic viol ence cases.

My question to the mini ster is: since that bail hearing before Judge Newcombe was heard in the general Provincial Court, why was the bail hearing not held in the Family Viol ence Court, as the Lavoie commission of inquiry told this government to do if it indeed wanted to reduce the risk of the judicial attitude shown in Lavoie ever showing its head again in domestic viol ence bail cases? Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I certainly appreciate the opportunity to respond to that particular question.

I might say that the Crown handling the case at bail was a family viole nce prosecutor, a highly experienced prosecutor dealing with specifically domestic violence cases. The prosecutor in that case requested a remand to obtain a complete report. The complainant was referred to Women's Advocacy and had a personal meeting with the Crown attorney in her office before the bail application continued. The victim stated that she did not fear for her saf ety. The Crown and Women's Advocacy were involved in safety planning for the victim, and they advised her to go to a shelter. That advice was not followed.

I might also indicate that before the judge, the Crown called a Linda Wilcox, an ex women's advocacy worker who is presently working in Family Conciliation Services. She teaches courses in domestic viol ence at Red

90 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 River Community College and in fact testified specifically as to the issues that Lavoie inquiry identified. So I might say that the Crown, insofar as its jurisdiction goes, did absolutely everything to ensure that the full facts of the case were on the record. Mr. Mackintosh: I asked the minister to answer the question. I asked the minister if he would review the transcript of the proceeding before Judge Newcombe, a proceeding by the way on which an order of-a ban on publication exists but within which contains very, very disturbing views.

I asked the minister to look at that transcript and get back to me on his views and tell this House now: Why was the bail hearing not held in the Family Viol ence Court as Mr. Justice Schulman said it should be in the Lavoie commission of inquiry report? Mr. Toews: The member well knows the answer to that question. The Crown does not run the courts. That is a matter for the judges to determine, where these matters will be heard. The Crown and our department specifically have made specific recommendations about where these matters should be held.

This was the position of the judges, and we are in fact following the recommendations of the judge in the Lavoie commission. We have to also understand that when a judge makes recommendations in a report, while the government might be fully committed to implementing those recommendations, sometimes these issues are also in the hands of independent judges who do not answer to me, who do not answer to Crown attorneys, but who make decisions as they see appropriate. Having said that, Madam Speaker, I wiii certainly review the transcript to ensure that everything that possibly could be done was done.

Domestic Violence Court Bail Hearings Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): When the minister reviews the transcript I want him to get back to this House and to me specifically on what the contents of this transcript reveal. But explain now to the House why, after almost two years of having the Lavoie report, this minister has not shown the leadership, this government has not shown the leadership to ensure that bail for domestic viol ence cases is heard in the Family Violence Court. It is this Legislature that has The Provincial Court Act in its jurisdiction. What action has the minister taken?

Why is there not bail in domestic violence court? Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, these bail hearings are held in the Provincial Court. The Crown attorneys assigned to these specific cases are in fact experts and well experienced in this area. We have implemented the Lavoie commission report not only in terms of personnel but actual dol lars that contribute to programs right across Manitoba. Our government put in an additional $2 miilion on an annual basis to ensure that the tragedies that occurred in Lavoie do not occur again.

We are committed to taking every reasonable step to ensure, within the limits of the law, that women in this province are protected in whatever case, and indeed not only women, we are also concerned about the personal safety of every man, woman and child in this province. Electoral Boundaries Revision Legislation Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Premier. Yesterday I was at an all-pa rty panel on CBC, and the member for Arthur- Virden (Mr. Downey) was there and the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) was there. I am getting a lot of confused messages.

Yesterday after the camera went out, there was discussion that all we want to see, "we" being the New Democrats, is the legislation and then we wiii pass the legislation in two days. The member for Arthur Virden, I am sure, can recall that comment. I then turned to the member for Arthur-Virden and challenged him to present, through leave, that biii today. My question, given the response from the New Democrats today: wiii the Deputy Premier commit that the province will not or this government will not call an election based on the old boundaries? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 91 Madam Speaker: Order, please. * (1410 ) Hon. Eric Stefanson (Deputy Premier): I thank the member for Inkster for that question. He knows that we have committed to get the bill for the electoral boundary changes to this House as quickly as we can. Our House leader tried to get leave today to introduce that legislation. That was denied. We are certainly committed to get the legislation forward to deal with it as expeditiously as possible.

We realize at the end of the day, and this member for Inkster knows parliamentary process, that it ultimately takes the co-operation of everybody here to pass bills. We are prepared to introduce it; we are prepared to pass it immediately. I gather the members of the Liberals are prepared to do it. I think he has some work to do, not on us, in terms of moving that process quickly. He should talk to the Leader of the Opposition (M r. Doer) and the House leader of the opposition and get their co operation to introduce that bill and pass that bill immediately. Mr.

Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, again to the Deputy Premier: will the Deputy Premier recognize that both the NDP and the Conservatives are mocking Manitobans and the whole democratic principles? What we are specifically asking the government is to make a commitment that they will not call an election on the old boundaries. Both parties are being highly irresponsible and mocking democracy in the province ofManitoba. Mr.

Stefanson: Madam Speaker, with all due respect to my friend the member for Inkster, I think this must be his fall-back position because really, really the best thing we can do is introduce the bill as quickly as possible, deal with the bill and pass it. We are prepared to do that; we understand you are prepared to do that. The members opposite, the members of the opposition, the New Democratic Party, are not prepared to do that. They are the ones whose co operation we need to deal with it. We fundamentally believe in the issue of representation by population. We are prepared to introduce the legislation.

We are prepared to deal with it immediately and pass it. Let us get the co-operation of the NDP to do exactly what we all believe in doing. Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, my final supp goes to the government House leader. The question-if the government House leader can provide for each caucus a copy of the legislation that the government will have access to as of two o' clock, and again, appeal to the government to request leave after Question Period to try and get this bill through, much in the same fashion that they have treated high-pri ority legislation in the past. Hon.

Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, the reason in fact of seeking leave of the House for first reading today, by having first reading we were not intending to ask for leave for second reading. We know the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), it is his day to speak, but if they had granted leave for first reading, we could have then di stributed the bill under the rules of our House. Every member would have had [interjection] Yes, I read the quotes in the paper of the Leader of the Opposition saying: we have not seen the bill yet.

So today we offer to provide the bill to all members of the House in a proper fashion, and members of the press are here. They have seen unanimous consent provided many, many times. The real question is: what are they afraid of? Jules Benson Employment Termination Mr.

Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Deputy Premier, the former head of Treasury Board, and it is in regard to the conduct of the former secretary to the Treasury Board, Jules Benson, who as we have learned from the Monnin inqu iry, engaged in what Judge Monnin called improper behaviour in the 1995 Tory election campaign in which he negotiated with advertisers and prepared over I 00 cheques during the campaign. Now the Premier (Mr. Film on) has claimed that he did everything in his power to take responsibil ity for the behaviour of his top aides.

I would like to ask the Deputy Premier then why this top civil servant who viola ted his oath

92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 as a civil servant was allowed to remain in his position until December of last year. The same individual who negotiated the sale of MTS was a major player in finance. Why did they not fire him in 1995 for his improper behaviour? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Deputy Premier): Madam Speaker, the member for Thompson knows full well that that information that came out during the Monnin inquiry was obviously not available back in 1995. In terms of the role that Mr. Benson ultimately outlined that he performed, the member for Thompson knows that Mr.

Benson himself ultimately issued his resignation from that position. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, with a supplementary question. Mr. Ashton: A supplementary. am wondering if the Deputy Premier-()nce again, who was head of Treasury Board-can explain why Mr. Benson, whose invol vement in the vote-spl itting scandal was made clear to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) July 30, 1998, was not only not removed at that time-in October the Premier called him a liar- Jules Benson withdrew that, and in fact we now see in December that he left his position. We have three positions. The Premier said he resigned.

The minister himself says that he left the position, and we know now that Don Leitch asked him to resign. Why did it take six months, and what was the real story? Why was he not fired back in July of last year? Mr. Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, again the member for Thompson is doing very much what he did here yesterday. He knows full well that this entire issue has been dealt with by former Chief Justice Monnin in terms of an extensive inquiry, calling a number of witnesses, interviewing a number of other witnesses, examining, cross-examining witnesses.

The NDP themselves had a lawyer representing them throughout this entire process. So they know that it has gone through a very extensive inquiry and a public inquiry process, and they come here to try and continue to perpetuate that inquiry here today. It is only evidence that they have nothing better to deal with in terms of the important issues facing Manitobans like health care and education and fiscal issues and so on. Again, I think it reflects more on them than anything else. Older Neighbourhoods Revitalization Programs Ms.

Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, after more than I 0 years in government, after offloading more than $170 million onto property taxes, after encouraging urban sprawl and ignoring older neighbourhoods, last night at a meeting at R.B. Russell School on inner city housing, people were saying the government is finally realizing that there is a problem in Winnipeg and older neighbourhoods, a problem that many see they helped create.

They have made some sketchy references to a renovation and crime-proofing grant program to revitalize older neighbourhoods in the throne speech, but they neglected to tell us many details. I want to ask the Minister of Housing: did he Jearn anything from their last experiment which did not help older neighbourhoods at all, where you had to spend $5,000 to get back $1 ,000? Can he tell us the parameters for this experiment by the Conservative government on renovation in Winnipeg? Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): I, too, was at that meeting that the member for Radisson was at last night.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Urban Affairs and Housing, to complete his response. *

(1420) Mr. Reimer: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I guess it is the tale of two cities, in a sense, because what the member for Radisson was lis tening to and what I heard was a lot of different rhetoric. One of the things that was discussed very extensively at the meeting last night was the fact of community ownership and community involvement with the revitalization of the downtown area and the homes area. One of the things that was stressed by quite a few

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 93 people-in fa ct, I even took some notes because I thought that maybe the member would be there. I thought that the member for Radisson might be asking some questions. The one thing that was quite prevalent was the fact that there were a lot of very, very talented people at that meeting last night. There were a lot of very strong people in the community who are looking for change , and the one thing that they were advocating was not necessa rily more government involve ment but a concentrated effort of trying to find resolve. Ms.

Cerilli: Madam Speaker, I want to ask the min ister the question that he was asked last night, and he missed an opportunity to answer that question. He was asked very directly what is going to be the provincial government 's involvement and role in revitalizing the Winnipeg areas that are deeply, deeply troubled. I want to ask the minister to explain what his program is going to do. A number of people said that 50 homes a year is not going to do it. What is the governm en t's program? How many homes a year is your program going to help to renovate? Mr.

Reimer: One of the things that was outlined quite exten sively in the throne speech which we just heard the other day was the fact of this province 's commitment to the City of Winnipeg in trying to look at resolve in a lot of the programs. One of the initiatives that was introduced was the Take Back the Streets in itiative where we will be looking at working with the City of Winnip eg, empowering the neighbou rhood associations.

In fact, we are looking at neighbourhood renewal committees to look at how we can try to look at capitalizing on the assets of the community, looking at the government in a role that can work in consultation with the City of Winnipeg because there has to be a partnership not only with the community but the City of Winnipeg in trying to get the resolve of some of these problems. So it is not totally a government initiative and a government directed and a government funding agency that is involved. There is a partnership that is involved with a lot of these things.

I think that this came out very, very evidently in last night' s meeting. The public, the constituents out there, the interest groups that were there, they wanted to see a change, and they were looking for government to be there in a catalyst role, not as a totally funding organization. Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, it is unbelievable that, after 11 years of government, they have no specific plan for a specific number of homes with a specific budget for a revitalization program. I want to ask the minister again: can you give us more than some sketchy rhetoric about your program for revitalizing old neighbourhoods?

Mr. Reimer: One of the things, we are working very closely with the city because we must recognize that there has to be a partnership involved with working with the City of Winnipeg, and we believe that that is the best way to try to get results. We are looking at a joint review of the inner city housing and the housing components of the neighbourhoods, and this is a joint venture between the City of Winnipeg and the province. It will be announced very shortly, the parameters and the direction that it will take.

These are some of the things that we feel that we have to get into to get a knowledge of where the money is going to be going. It is not just a matter of throwing money at some of these problems and some of these areas, to think that all of a sudden the problems are gone. There is room to grow with these communities, and this is one of the reasons why we feel that there is that direction. Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Manitoba Tartan Day Mr.

Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): wanted to rise yesterday with regard to paying tribute to the celebrations for Tartan Day, which is April 6. Tartan Day is normal ly-and it has been pledged by this government and this province that April 6 of each year would be a celebration for people who respect and honour the tartan.

94 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to speak about Manitoba Tartan Day. The Province of Manitoba declared April 6 as Manitoba Tartan Day, recognizing Scotland 's freedom from England many years ago. On April 6, 1320, the Scottish Lords assembled in Arbroath Abbey to appeal to Pope John XXII to recognize Scottish independence from the English. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am experiencing great difficulty hearing the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek.

I wonder if I might ask that those members having private meetings do so either in the loge or outside the Chamber. Thank you. Mr. McAlpine: Thank you, Madam Speaker. On April 6, 1320, the Scottish Lords assembled in Arbroath Abbey to appeal to Pope John XXII to recognize Scottish independence from the English and to declare Robert the Bruce their king. This message resulted in a successful truce in 1323, giving Scotland peace after 25 years. Scotland remained separate from England until the Act of Union in 1707.

In the year 2000, Scotland will elect their first parliament in 300 years, and they will have control of almost all aspects of their country. Tartan Day is celebrated all across the world, Madam Speaker, by descendants of Scotland, including my family, the McAlpine clan. Manitoba Tartan Day is a very important day to all members of this House, as I imagine all of us have constituents of Scottish heritage in our ridings.

I would like to thank the many people that were going to come here in celebration of Tartan Day on Tuesday at the opening of the House, but fortunately they were able to find some control and to make the decision to cancel this and to respect security's wishes of the House in cancelling the Tartan Day celebration that was, instead of the obvious that happened on April 6 here and- Madam Speaker: The honourab le member's time has expired. *

(1430) OCN Blizzard Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): I am very proud to rise today and announce to this Chamber that the OCN Blizzard, owned and operated by the Opaskwayak Cree Nation in The Pas, won the MJHL championship and the Turnbull trophy. In spite of all our detractors, the story of the OCN Blizzard is truly an incredible one. They have been in the league only three years. In the first year, they went all the way to the league championship final. In the second year, they played in the division final. This year, of course, they went all the way and are now the MJHL champions, and we are very proud of them.

The Blizzard in this season set all kinds of records. They had the most wins in a season. They had the most goals. They had the least goals scored against them, and their goalie is rated No. 1 across Canada. Madam Speaker, they also had the fan attendance in the highest, and they had the most enthusiastic, most supportive, and I believe the noisiest fans in the league. Besides these remarkable achievements, OCN Blizzard also served to rally the whole community-OCN, the town of The Pas and the R.M. of Kelsey-togeth er. The team has everyone working together.

Finally, I congratulate the Blizzard for winning the championship, the Opaskwayak Cree Nation, the town of The Pas and the R.M. of Kelsey for getting together and supporting the team. I also want to thank the board of directors and management, the coaching staff, and finally the fans who were fantastic all three seasons. Lastly, I want to wish all the success to the Blizzard in the upcoming Anavet Cup, and I hope they go all the way to the Royal Bank Cup. Thank you. Urban Green Team Mrs.

Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to discuss an initiative of this government that benefits not only young Manitobans but our communities overall. The Urban Green Team, a component of the Green Team youth employment program has again received the support of the government

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 95 for 1999. Urban Green Team projects have been providing valuable work experience for young Manitobans. The benefits extend beyond the jobs created. Urban Green Teams also improve the urban environment and our communities. Under the Urban Green Team, youth work for nonprofit organizations and engage in projects such as park and riverbank cleanup, improvement of public facilities, trail enhancement, recycling and conserva tion education. Up to 750 young Winnipeg residents will gain valuable employment throughout this program this year.

This in itiative is consistent with this government 's commitment to the development of young people. We are happy to assist our young people in gaining skills and work experience as a component of their education. The Urban Green Team is commendable not only because of the work experience it affords young Winnip eggers but also because of the community benefits. Young people gain the positive experience of contributing something of lasting value to Winnip eg neighbourhoods and community residents can regard their enhanced surroundings with greater pride.

I am proud to be part of a government which believes in its youth and its communities and which takes action to promote the development of both. Thank you. Poverty-Housing Issues Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): I want to draw attention of the House to the national disaster that has been declared in Canada. Housing and homelessness has been declared a national disaster by Canadian mayors.

The UN convention on economic, cultural and social rights has cited the federal government and provincial governments on its lack of follow through on dealing with poverty and housing issues, particularly as they affect aboriginal people in Canada. Madam Speaker, 4,500 units are needed in the North for housing aboriginal people. We have had a provincial government in Manitoba that has sat back for the last 1 0 years or so. They have had a number of policies that have increased the problem of housing in our older neighbourhoods in Manitoba by allowing exurban and urban sprawl.

They reduced wages and kept the minimum wage down. They have cut a number of services, funding to communit y groups like friendship centres. All of these have had an effect, and we heard about this last night at a meeting at R.B. Russell School. The other thing that was made loud and clear through all of this and that we have realized in Canada for more than 40 years is you cannot make money off of housing low-income people. That is also what has been contributed to by this government with their offloading of property taxes, and we now have a property value problem in downtown areas of Winnipeg.

What we have also seen from the last few years is you also cannot have a housing sector run on charity, and a number of the groups last night said that they cannot do it alone and indeed they need leadership and they need the government as a partner. They want a new model. They do not want the old model of social housing which was built and owned by government. They want the community to be involved, but they also want the government to be clear about what it can do. It was very clear last ni ght they want this government to take action on urban sprawl.

They want this government to have a renovation and retrofitting program that will meet the scale of the need, and they want to have some assistance on mortgage financing. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Your time has expired. Ms. Cerilli : Thank you, Madam Speaker. Electoral Boundaries Revision Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, I rise to make a statement in regard to a matter that should not be given as much attention as it is, and that is the boundaries. I heard one of the official opposition members comment toward our little caucus: that one-trip pony.

Well, if we had as many questions, opportunities and research capabilities as the official opposition, we would be asking questions on agriculture, education and that, but we would still be asking questions about this

96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 because this is what gives us our credibility as legislators, to be able to speak on education. That is, a fair democratic election. And the comment has been made: what is the rush? When tomorrow-! do not know what is happening with the Conservative nominations. Maybe some of their members are going to be mad at their own party. I know it could happen. And what happens if a number of Conservatives vote a nonconfidence vote with the opposition. We could have an instant election tomorrow, and that is why it is important to do this bill as soon as possible.

And there is no controversy here. There is no controversy here whatsoever. The official opposition today declined the opportunity to look at the bill. They declined the opportunity. I am getting to trust none of the other two parties for running a fair and respecting democracy in this province. You know, I have been accused that I am posturing for the benefit of my colleague from Inkster, but, know what? Maybe they are posturing because maybe the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) and the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) are going to fight it out. Maybe the member for Crescentwood (Mr.

Sale) and the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford ) are going to fight it out, and maybe that is why they are doing it. So, Madam Speaker, I think we should pass this bill as soon as possible. ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE (Second Day of Debate) Madam Speaker: To resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourab le member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the official opposition. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, I have a number of comments, very personal comments today.

I was going to talk about the boundary issue and I just will briefly reiterate what I have said since fall, since 10 years ago. I dealt with this issue of boundaries as Leader, as a new Leader-not as new anymore- I 0 years ago when it was very difficult because we in fact were going from 12 seats to 11, and I have always respected the Independent Boundaries Commission. We had a four-week debate from first to third reading. We co-oper ated in an all-party way with each other to organize the timing and business of the House. It was a minority government situation.

We did not play games of rising on points of order and everything else. We tried to work it out in a co-operative way. We note that in July of 1998, the government said, and I quote: We are committed to running as soon as possible on the new boundaries. In December of '98, after they saw the proposed map which was not by all independent estimations as, quote, good for them as before, they decided that they would run potentially on old boundaries, potentially on new boundaries and no commitments were given that were given in last July. Now, we have been burned before by this Premier (Mr. Filmon).

The members opposite may not have, but I want them to be reminded of something. I want them to be reminded of something, because I also remember as a rookie Leader the former Leader of the Opposition Sena tor Carstairs and I were also given public undertakings in a minority government that there would not be an election before three or four years, and he would govern like he had a majority. As soon as he felt he had the political advantage, he called the election. We were ready for it. Mrs. Carstairs was in Minaki and was not ready for it.

So, Madam Speaker, we know that only one person can decide to call this House back. We have urged since December that the House be called back to deal with the boundaries. We are committed to an independent boundary commission whether it helps us or hurts us. I want to put that on the record, because I have dealt with it in difficult times. [interjection] Well, he can do that tomorrow. He can do that today. He can do that anytime. *

(1440) Madam Speaker, he can call the election tonight. The only person who controls the election is not the members in the Liberal Party, not the New Democratic members, not even the

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 97 Conserva tive members, I might add, only the Premier in a call with the Lieutenant Governor. Madam Speaker, we believe that two bills must be passed and should be passed to have any integrity for this next election. The Elections Fina nces bills that arise out of the Monnin report should be and must be passed and the bills dealing with the bounda ries. Now, I might say to the members opposite about boundaries, because there are different forms of boundary bills. In Ottawa, for example, there is a one-year delay.

In some bills, it is at the will of the Lieutenant Governor in Coun cil. Other bills, it is upon proclamation of the LG, so when the members opposite said we will pass the bill before they have read it, I come from a different place. Madam Speaker, we can deal with the Speech from the Throne. We can deal with the boundary law. We can deal with The Elections Fin ances Act. We can deal with the pre-election budget of the Conservative Party, and we can call an election in the spring. I guarantee members here that we have some speakers on the bill, as we did in 1989.

We will co-oper ate, especially if we are allowed to co-op erate with the government, but I have said to the media over and over and over again we are not going to wait a hundred days for this government to bring in the Legislature. We are not going to wait for the government to refuse to bring in the boundary bill as we had recommended before the Speech from the Throne. We are now in a situation where we want to debate the Speech from the Throne as the government House leader had said to our House leader, and we want to deal with it accordingly.

Madam Speaker, let me also deal with one issue that the members opposite raised, and, as I say, I dealt with this in a lot tougher times than this time around. We have been, since December, nomin ating on both sets of boundaries and not nominating in all seats and having to renominate in a few places where there are major changes. Even under that situation, our election nom inations are more advanc ed under old or new boundaries than I dare say any other party. So this argument that we are old and new and this and that, quite frankly, it is wrong.

I cannot expect members to know what is going on in the internal workings of our party nor can I know what is going on in the internal workings of their party, but I want to say that we have been preparing on the basis of both old and new. There are a lot of similarities between old and new because, quite frankly, the population shifts in the last 10 years have not even been as great as the population shifts in the boundary period previous to that where one seat was lost in northern Manitoba and one seat was lost in rural Manitoba, and the member for Springfield (Mr.

Findlay) is an example of a person who left Virden and moved to another seat. There are 57 seats. When people say somebody is going to lose here or there, there are 57 seats. Madam Speaker, we are prepared to be judged by what we have said we will do, what I have done in the past, and I am not going to be intimidated by these little procedural games. I know I will deal with the Boundary Commission, and we will do it. The government had a choice to deal with the bounda ries before the Speech from the Throne, but I do promise we will co-ope rate with the boundary legislation.

An Honourable Member: After the election. Mr. Doer: No, before the election. This is my point. I do not think you understand this yet. There is only one individual that contro ls the timing of the legislation and the election. It is the Premier (Mr. Filmon). I do not, you do not, only the Premier does, Madam Speaker, and perhaps the Deputy Premier (Mr. Stefan son). I have been through this before. We dealt with it before with integrity and we will deal with it with integrity again, but we want to debate the issues in the Speech from the Throne. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

We can deal with the Speech from the Throne . We can deal with the issues of health care, education. We can deal with the issues of child poverty and kids and economic opportunities for all of our families and pass the boundaries. It is not a difficult concept for us, and we are going to stick to the agenda of our communities who cannot even believe these Byzantine kind of changes, Madam Speaker, in terms of

98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 procedures. We will pass in a co-operative way the boundaries. We would have passed it before the Speech from the Throne if the government had taken our advice and called the Legislature back.

The only time the Speech from the Throne that I can recall has been halted and the fundamental rights of each of us to speak on the Speech from the Throne-and there are 23 of us who want to speak on the Speech from the Throne-the only time we have done that was when a loophole was developed in the Sunday shopping law and all parties co-oper ated in passing a law that was distributed beforehand in one day to deal with the sanctity of Sunday shopping. We did that in a co-operative way, in an all-party way, and the legislation was handed out well in advance.

If that is the issue that people want to develop against us, so to speak, after we have been calling on the bounda ry bill to be brought in for 100 days, so be it. I am prepared to take it, and I am not worried about it because I would not recommend that we break rules of this Legislature on the Speech from the Throne after 100 days. If it was an emergency situation, we will deal with it.

You know, Madam Speaker, the Liberal Party who uses closure in Ottawa, who uses patronage to get people out of seats when boundaries do change-and I would mention to the member opposite that the former member for Selkirk got the head of the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board so somebody else could run in that seat, and we do not need anybody putting too many halos over their head when the Ottawa patronage machine has been used to the benefit of one individual, and we will- An Honourable Member: Yes, with a one-year hoist, right? Mr. Doer: A one-year hoist.

Madam Speaker, we have been out of this Chamber for a long time, and this is our second day of debate. Some people are getting a little impatient, but it has given us an opportunity to meet with many Manitobans as we continue to travel around this province to spend time with our neighbours and friends, spend some time with our family, but primarily meet with constituents in communities. I think it is safe to say that we are all proud Canadians in this Chamber.

I know we all wish our armed services the most safe conditions possible in the conflict that now is proceeding with NATO in the Kosovo region of the former Yugoslavia. I know that all of us are very concerned about safety and the safety of people if ground troops are deployed in that situation. I want to applaud the people, the humanitarians in our community, the proud Canadians from coast to coast to coast who have offered to take people in and offered and proposed to take more people into our great country of Canada. Except for First Nations people, we are all products of immigration.

We are all here from different lands over different times under different circumstances. My wife's family came from the potato famine of Ireland. Other people in this Chamber have come from other economic situations, except, as I say, the First Nations people, who have been here for easily 6,000 years. Madam Speaker, we are also all very proud Manitobans. I think that all of us are absolutely committed to making our province better and greater for all our citizens.

Where we may disagree on the methodology and the means to achieve those objectives, we are all committed Manitobans who have believed that this is the finest place in Canada to live and want to do everything in our power to ensure that our family is able to stay and reside in this great community. *

(1450) I have had the chance to travel around this province. I had a chance to visit my mother's home in Neepawa, where she was born and raised, just a couple of weeks ago after I visited nurses talking about the beauty of Neepawa and the fact that there was-[in terjection] Well, Madam Speaker, the minister might want to hear the other part of this. In the morning I had met with nurses who had talked about the fact that there was-do not have a baby in the summer if it is raining in Neepawa, because their birthing room has 12 buckets in it to deal with the leaks in the hospital roof. So I was able to enjoy the

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 99 visit to my home but also able to listen to people on the front lines of health care. I was also able to listen to a nurse in Neepawa who was really worried about her three kids, because she told me that she has three kids, two years apart, who are in a situation where each of them, over the next six years, all three are eligible for university.

She did not think that their family could afford to have some $90,000 in debt for each one of those indiv iduals to go to-we ll, some of the Tories may not have this difficulty-but did not think that she was going to be able to have her kids go to university. She was extremely worried, extremely worried about what that would mean for those kids in high school who would then have a situation where they were losing hope in high school and losing opportunities for staying in this province. I heard that again in Brandon, Grade 11 students in Brandon. The member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) was there.

Kids in Grade 11 said: Why should we work hard in school if we cannot afford to go to university? Or should we not be looking in another province where they have a tuition fee cap like British Columbia as a more accessible and avai lable community to go to? So, Madam Speaker, some of us were lucky to be able to work on the switchboard in some of those schools and make enough money to go to school, but there are a lot of kids that are not. We should worry about a society where some children-and fewer and fewer children can go to university based on economic considerations.

Education and accessibility to post-secondary education should be based on educational merit and the desire to go to university and community colleges, not on the size of your parents' wallet or the size of your parents' purse. That is what we are concerned about in terms of making Manitoba a better place to live. My father was born in the north end, and he was concerned about my ability to stay in this province, as now I am about my kids. I was interested in listening to the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) the other day talk about his children and what they felt about politicians.

Maybe my daughter is a little younger. I was coming back from a St. Vital nomina tion meeting the other night, and I asked her about the meeting. She said, well, you spoke too long. That is probably true. You can always get truth from your own kids. But I like your points, she said in recovering in her comments to me. She also commented about-I was asking her for her opinion. It was kind of interesting, just before the comments from the member for The Maples, I was asking her about politics. What are politicians? What are politics? She said, you know, politicians are people who want to do good for other people.

I hope she keeps that view. I believe she sincerely meant that about everybody in this Chamber. I would like to think that she is obviously-there will be lots of revenge of kids with parents in the next number of years. I have seen some kids who, I thought, coming from members opposite, maybe have some pretty interesting views. I do not know whether any of our kids would have similar views to members opposite. Obviously they are free minds and free spirits and should be freely associating with the political party of their choice.

More important than anything, I think we all have a respon sibility to make sure that that objective of doing good things for other people is what kids believe, because when I grew up my mother was a Diefenbaker fan and my father liked Pearson and then really admired Ed Schreyer. Politicians were considered to be pretty important people. Duff Roblin was considered to be a man of integrity and honesty and commitment to the community. Yes, Ed Schreyer was as well. John Diefenbaker with his kind of populism.

It was not my politics, but it is certainly-although he had some of the similar positions on trade and free trade. Of course, Tommy Douglas is an absolute icon, and Stanley Knowles, for those of us who were raised in the community with these people. It was interesting. You know, Shirley Douglas was at our convention. She did a great speech on health care . She did point to some of the kids in the convention hall and said: Make sure your kids get involved in politics. She said: Tommy used to take me to everything.

I do not know whether that made her a terrific actress or a wonde rful social activist or maybe all of those things, but I think all of us have a responsibility

100 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 to continue to be positive with our kids, be positive with our community and be positive about the public service that we all provide. Different means of how we want to achieve our objectives, but the same goal to make Manitoba a better place. At our kitchen table at night, my wife owns a small business, and my two kids are obviously in public schools.

We usually talk mostly about education, a lot about education, a little bit about sports, a little bit about the kind of singing and cultural events that are a part of our schools and, of course, about her business. If l can get a word in edgewise I am lucky, on this Legislature and the day I had. I think that to me our parents wanted us to stay in this great community, and I want my kids to have a chance to stay in this community.

When I read the Speech from the Throne, and when I think about the challenges that we collectively have, there seems to me to be a real disconnect from what I am hearing from other young people in Manitoba. I was at a social the other day with kids or youth that were a little older, and almost every one of them-they were from families that mostly own businesses. It was an interesting group of individuals. Almost every one of those kids was talking about Calgary or Vancouver and leaving Manitoba.

I think, Madam Speaker, that we have a collective responsibility as a community to make sure that our kids, your kids, everybody's kids, have a chance and an opportunity and a belief, as we do, that this is one of the best places in the world to reside, to raise a family and to be part of a community. I believe that we have a challenge to be able to pass the torch to our family the way in which our parents passed the torch to us. I would say that when we approach this challenge there are two different visions of how to deal with it.

Members opposite believe in a vision that puts absolute emphasis on the individual as a means to achieving the objective, and we on this side believe in the values of community, the values of co-opera tion, the values of neighbours, the values of families, if you will, that share each other's successes, that are hard working and fair min ded and will give each other a helping hand when they need it in order to be part of the community or stay active in their neighbourhood.

Madam Speaker, we have no apologies for our view and our values of co-opera tion in community as a better way to deal with the challenges of Manitoba going into the 21st Century and as a better way to approach the challenges we have in 1999. I think of the flood. When neighbours worked with neighbours, when people worked with people, when people and government and the private and voluntary sector worked together, we achieved so much more as a community, as a neighbourhood, than if each of us was carrying one sandbag at a time to protect our own homes. *

(1500) We work better together, Madam Speaker, when we consider ourselves, as a province, one community. I could think of no more realistic example that separates our vision of how we would run Manitoba in a better way than the vision of members opposite of how they would run this province in a better way than the flood comments of the Premier in this Chamber when he said those people living in Ste.

Agathe, those people living in Grande Pointe, those people living in some of those communities in the Red River Valley chose to live in the flood plain and they, therefore, must be responsible for the horrendous damages done by the flood. Now that we are in pre-election period, we are getting lots of apologies, but we do not believe that people that were victims of the flood-and later on the commission report came out and said that in fact it was the government 's own action to correctly prevent the flooding for the majority of people in the province that created some of the flooding.

We, even before that report had been produced, said that we are one community. You cannot have every farmer in southern Manitoba or every farmer in the Assiniboine Valley or every farmer in the Shellmouth area live behind the Perimeter, behind the floodway. We are one community, and we are proud to go into the 21st Century as one community. Madam Speaker, we can do better as a community and as a province, and when we look

April 8, I9 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA IOI at public education and community college education and post-seconda ry education, again it comes down to the values that we have. We on this side believe in the intergenera tional support. We believe that those of us who are paying taxes because we are lucky enough and privileged enough and hardworking enough to have a job should pay some of our taxes for our young people to get a decent education and for our youth to be able to have accessibility for post secondary education and training.

Members opposite believe that if you are born to a privileged family, you can get an education, and if you are not, it is tough luck. Madam Speaker, we believe in intergenera tional support. We believe that is part of co-opera tion. We believe that is part of a community approach to education, and that is why, when we see a report, the Speech from the Throne today, that has absolutely no mention of community colleges, accessibility of post secondary education, public education, we see a government that does not get it.

It does not get it in terms of what it means to individuals in this province, and it does not get it in terms of what its impact will be for the economy. Even the business community is commenting on the Jack of skilled workers.

KPMG, CIBC, the manufacturers' association, the Canadian Federation of Independent Busine ss-all of them in the last year have commented on the lack of skilled workers because the government, the provincial government, has not produced the apprent iceship programs, the training programs, the vocational programs, the community college programs, and the university programs, and the ability to have easy transfers of credits to achieve that. They have not got the Access programs and the New Careers programs for aboriginal people and First Nations people. We, again, have a different vision than members opposite.

They see the changing world economy as a way of having low wages, low skilled, low training, low education, as a way of competing with other jurisdictions, and the New Democratic Party and members opposite that believe in a co-operative society believe the global economy can be best met with a well educated, well-trained, well-skilled workforce to meet the challenges of the future and to keep our young people in this province. Madam Speaker, I was a volunteer in the Variety Club years ago.

I was proud to work [interjection] I was proud to work-the arrogance permeates right through, yes-th is is the new guy in charge of the ethics of the Conservative Party. The individual that could not see Jules Benson going into the campaign office IS O times is in charge of ethics. I am surprised that the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) is not part of it. What did you discuss in Cuba? What did you and Fidel and Cubby discuss in Cuba? And the other person in charge of ethics in the Conservative Party is the member for Riel (Mr.

Newman), the guy who blamed us for the demonstration in front of the Legislative Building. Some ethics, some new ethics to go into the 2I st Century. I say to the member for Arthur- Virden (Mr. Downey), if I had a chance, I would introduce you to Jules Benson. You know, he was the guy that was in your offices IS O times. Madam Speaker, I digress. know "volunteer" is a bad word for members opposite. I mentioned volunteer of the Variety Club and they-I guess they have to have a meter on all the time.

But I was proud to be a volunteer at the Variety Club and serve with Peter Liba, who was the chair or the chief barker of the Variety Club. I was very proud of the fact, and very happy for Mr. Liba, His Honour now, and her honour, to be appointed to the Lieutenant Governor 's job in Manitoba. I know he is a person that is deeply committed to our community, and I know he is a person who is deeply committed to health care. In fact, it is kind of, I thought, fitting that a person who is now the Lieutenant Governor of this province was an individual whose letters we were tabling in the House just a year ago from St.

Boniface Hospital talking about the lack of support for the funding at St. Boniface, talking about the lack of any plan and partnership with the-[inter jection] Of course, I recall again the accreditation letters that were-Dr. Chochinov, who I met a couple of weeks ago, who talked about the infectious disease spread in the hospital because of the closure of beds, the firing of nurses, and the intolerable number of patients who had to stay in the hallways. Madam Speaker, I was shocked when the Premier then and the former Minister of Health

102 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 then attacked the administration and volunteers at St. Boniface Hospital. Thank goodness Peter Liba, in his former job as volunteer chair of the St. Boniface Hospital, stood up for the administration, the staff, and the people of that hospital and called on the provincial government to provide leadership and resources so that St. Boniface Hospital could get back on its feet. Regrettably, a year later, a year later we still see the same Tory propaganda paid for by taxpayers. We still see the announcement of the personal care beds 18 months from now.

Eighteen months ago it was going to be 18 months. Now it is 18 months again. In 1995 it was going to be within 12 months in the fiscal year. We have hundreds and hundreds of Manitobans in hallways and hundreds of nurses that have been fired and more nurses that have been burnt out. Regrettably, whether it is St. Boniface or the hospitals in Winnipeg or the hospital in Brandon that had its capital promised and cance lled eight times or the hospital in Swan River that has rotting walls, moulding walls, we can and must do better in health care. Manitoba communities and neighbours and families deserve it.

They are going to get it with a change of government after this next election campaign. Madam Speaker, I also worked with Peter Liba when I was vice-president of Special Olympics. He helped fund us in some of our formative years in the early '8 0s in raising money for the games, more particularly raising money for the 500 volunteers that we had working throughout Manitoba for the kids in our programs. As a volunteer, I met many other volunteers who were working with kids in school, in communities, in many of our programs.

The words about children in the Speech from the Throne I think are words that we all can share. But we can do much better for our kids. We have to do much better for our children. * (1510 ) I was again proud of the fact that in 1994 we put forward a Healthy Child alternatives, a set of 18 ideas for kids and children. A couple of months later I saw a report from Dr. Post! that I thought was an excellent document for kids.

In 1994, the Tories, after they had cut money out of kids programs in '91, '9 2, '9 3, the Tories in the Speech from the Throne in 1994 promised early interven tion for children and programs to deal with the intolerable waiting lists in the province. In March of 1995 they again promised it. I asked the question in '95, I asked the question in '96, I asked the question in '97, I asked the question with parents in 1998: Why do you have a two-year waiting list for kids, preschool kids in Manitoba? Why do we have a waiting list of two years for those children who cannot get early assessment and proper treatment?

I think it is an absolute disgrace that the government across the floor waited four and a half years and made a pre-election announcement for kids. You should never play politics for kids. A promise made in '94 should have been a promise kept in 1995. The only guarantee those kids will have that assessment programs and programs for audiology and speech therapy and behavioural challenges are going to be met on a long-term basis is to elect a group of men and women who are committed to those programs on a long-term basis, and I dare say, Madam Speaker, that that will happen.

We have the highest child poverty rate in Canada. I guess the question is: Have you surrendered to that horrible, horrible distinction or are you trying to change the

definitions or are you going to put in long-term, meaningful programs to do something about it? The school trustees have talked about this. I have met with Harvest volunteers who have talked about this. The Social Planning Council has many ideas. Many people on the front lines have good ideas to deal with child poverty. We should have programs for foster parents for aboriginal and nonaboriginal children that make it possible to have stable family settings for those children who regrettably do not have so. We should have the transition from foster parents to adoptive parents be easier, not harder, in our society.

Why can we not agree that foster parents who want to adopt children can have an easier time doing it under our society that cares about each other? We who care about our community will care about our children and make it easier to have our kids go from a situation where they have no parents to foster

April 8, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 10 3 parents to adoptive parents. That is a commitment we make today and a commitment we will follow through in government after this next election campaign. I am also very concerned about community safety. My first job in the provincial government was working in the summer at Vaughan Street Detention Centre.

I was given the opportunity while I was going to university to become the then deputy superintendent of that detention centre, and it was a tough place to work, I do not mind saying, as a 21 -year- old dealing with kids who were 17 years old, a lot of tough kids, a lot of kids who were in for very serious charges. It was a challenging place, an interesting place, and a tough place, and I learned a lot about our community.

I learned a lot about kids who were in there who with a little bit of a helping hand would be out of there and out of there for li fe, and I have had the opportunity to meet many since working there who have now straightened out, as they say, and have got alive in an activity in our community. I also learned that there were no recreational programs or programs for kids in the inner city of this city. I then became a volunteer president of the YAP drop- in centre, which became the first Boys and Girls Club in Winnipeg, and I was the first president of it.

The reason why I believe that you had to work at Vaughan Street and you had to go out in the evening to work in the community is: How can you always just deal with the toughest kids that should be-in my opinion, there were some there who I never wanted to see out in the streets again, but some there that I knew if they were out in the streets again they had to go to some place to do something meaningful to have a chance, to have opportunity, to have a peer group, to have a friend, to have a mentor, to have somebody who would give them a helping hand if they could not get it at home.

Now, obviously, everybody here believes home, family, a structured, loving setting is the best place for kids. We know that. We know that. But if that is not the case for some of our children, we must have contingency plans, and it has to be in the community, in the nursery schools, in the public schools, in the community clubs, in the programs that can make a difference, because often all these kids need is just one person to spend some time, spend some attention and give some guidance. I learned a lot as a volu nteer at the Boys and Girls Club, and particularly at the YAP drop-in centre.

I learned you could take kids that were off the streets with a minor program, putting a teacher around a pool table to get those kids from the streets to the pool table to the classroom. If you go with the kids and move with the kids, you could do a lot with the kids. I believe therefore that we have to have an approach that deals with the justice system to make sure the backlogs are less, and we have to have hope and opportunity and meaningful hope and opportunity for our kids.

We should not be cutting Access programs, we should not be cutting New Career programs, we should not be reducing the opportunities for students' social allowance. We have to give kids a helping hand and families a helping hand, just like we would do with our own family member if they needed a helping hand.

We as a community make a lot more sense if we give each other a helping hand to have a meaningful life of dignity rather than to have a life of institutionalization and dependency, and that is why we will work as a community to provide the community safety on the one hand but provide opportunities and prevention on the other hand. That is why we are different than members opposite, because they talk about the justice system and do nothing about it and they do nothing about the community, and we will work with the community in office.

This I promise you and this we are committed to. * (1 520) Madam Speaker, I worked with the Core Area Agreement as the mini ster responsible and we knew that you could not just invest in bricks and mortar; you had to also invest in people. The training programs have been dramatically reduced. The opportunities for quick training with the private sector have been reduced. Access, New Careers, you know what the first decision the government made on the Core Area Agreement when they came into office? You know what the first decision was you made?

104 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 You probably do not even know this, do you, because the Winnipeg Education Centre was slated to be built in the inner city of Winnipeg on Logan and Ellen, and you know who cancelled that program? Members opposite. They cancelled it and now they are running around like Nero with a violin while the inner city II years later is in really serious problems taking notes. We would have built the Winnipeg Education Centre in the inner city of Winnipeg.

We would have followed through on our commitments and that is where the government went wrong II years ago, and they have not made a correct decision since. Madam Speaker, we need a housing strategy and the member today from Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) asked about that. Now the housing strategies of the '90s and the next century are going to be different from the housing strategies of the early '70s. The early '7 0s and late '60s there was a strategy to deal with land banks to keep housing affordable.

That does not make any sense anymore, but there are lots of sensible community-based programs and lots of programs to rebuild neighbourhoods with people through education, training, housing, infill housing, co operative housing, pension fund investment in housing, renovations, programs and conservation. Those are not difficult programs. They should not be just announced and leaked out to the Free Press as sort of a pre-emptive election strategy. They should be part of your programs day in and day out to make a difference, and we see housing as part of the challenges.

We will not deliver on housing for four weeks before an election. We will deliver on housing with the communities for four years after the election. That is our pledge to the people. An Honourable Member: How would you do it? Tell me: how would you do it? Mr. Doer: You give us the keys, and we will show you how to do it. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we talked about a co-operative society- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition. Mr.

Doer: Madam Speaker, when we talk about a co-operative society, we believe that orderly marketing in the Canadian Wheat Board and the provision of the Canadian-[interjection] Oh, that will get a rise out of the people opposite who believe in the individual competitive nature of people. Madam Speaker, we believe that farmers working together in an orderly marketing system will do better than farmers competing against each other. That is why we have no hesitation in supporting the Wheat Board. We have no hesitation in supporting the consensus decision making of our elders and First Nations people.

We have no difficulty understanding that this Legislature should work in a more co-operative way on economic development. Business, labour and government must work in a more co operative way. Look at the success of the Crocus Fund, Vision Capital investment decisions made by labour that I dare say with the Shamray decision have been better decisions made by the so-called experts from the government side. These are the kinds of examples we have to build on and we can do better on. Madam Speaker, urban planning and urban development must be a co-operative effort.

I was the mini ster responsible for negotiating with Jake Epp with The Forks Agreement, and we worked together with planning groups and community groups. We worked together as the three levels of government to bring The Forks into public ownership. All Manitobans now will take their friends and relatives to The Forks because they are proud of The Forks. But it was an effort between the private sector, the public sector and the three levels of government. That is our vision of how we deal with the 2I st Century.

You want to know how we are going to work in government, you go down to The Forks and you look at how we did in the past. That is how we will deal with the future. Madam Speaker, we must do better on urban planning. We always believe that each individ ual plan, whether it was in Brandon or Gimli or Dauphin or Roblin or Swan River or Winnipeg,

April 8, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 10 5 each individual plan in the Capital Region of an area must be evaluated on its total impact on its citizens. That is why we had no difficulty. The former mini ster and the member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) was very instrumental in expanding the urban limit line of Brandon to ensure the taxes from Simplot came to the community, and what great foresight when we see the taxes of Maple Leaf staying in that community. We need the same kind of vision here in Winnipeg.

We cannot just take "approved" and put it on your forehead and every individual plan that comes through to take away the green space outside of the city of Winnipeg to convert the agricultural space, to have to buy schools and hospitals and ambulances and libraries. We cannot sustain a development that is way beyond our means, and we can do better in terms of urban sprawl and what its impact will be on the Capital Region. We will say yes to plans that make sense. We will say no to plans that do not. We will ensure that the city of Winnipeg gets proper balance for its development.

You will never see another BFI program at the expense of the city of Winnipeg under New Democratic government to rip off our future. Madam Speaker, we will also use public enterprise for the benefit of all citizens. As the minister responsible for telephones, when we had problems of safety in areas, we would put telephones in those communities because it was a public service as well as a Crown corporation. We put phones on highways in remote areas for the safety of our people.

Hydro is now using lighting in areas of the city, and we believe that the public Crown corporations should be used for the benefit of all our citizens. We believe the community should own our Crown corporations. We should not have our Crown assets shipped out of Manitoba to be owned by people outside of this province. The only thing that has happened since the sale of the telephone system is that the private shareholders have gotten richer, the board of directors and the management have gotten richer, and the consumers and employees in Manitoba have become poorer.

The privileged few have gained and the many have lost. That is why, Madam Speaker, a better way for our future has to be that Manitoba Hydro will be owned by the people for the benefit of the people, and we are proud to say that members opposite, as Justice Monnin had said on page 16 , he has never encountered-and I do not have to finish the rest. It was the same case with the Telephones, never encountered more liars in my life. I suggest it is the same thing for the people of Manitoba on Hydro. The Tories cannot be trusted with public enterprise.

They only care about the privileged few, and only the NDP can be trusted to keep Hydro in public ownership for the benefit of all. We believe this Legislature can do a lot better. We believe this Legislature will do a lot better with the change in government. We must have an elected Speaker. We have proposed for four years that that position be elected. We may have agreements and disagreements with past Speakers, but we believe-[inter jection]-well, again, the Tories have not learned from the Monnin inquiry, have they? They are still arrogant. They are arrogant and cynical.

We are one of the last Legislatures in Canada to have an elected Speaker. We have a private members' bill that we can pass tomorrow. Maybe we will get leave to pass it tomorrow if that is more important than something else. The only way people will be guaranteed of an elected Speaker is to put in a group of men and women who were committed to an elected Speaker in 19 94. It is not this Premier and this caucus; it is members on this side. We are committed to that. It is absolutely unacceptable that our legislative session went 280 days before we sat. What kind of power does the Premier have with members opposite?

What do you discuss in caucus? Do you go there and say, oh, we have got to be afraid to go back to the Legislature? Oh, the opposition has got lots of stuff. We better sit under our desks and in the bunker. Madam Speaker, I remember the Tories of Sterling Lyon. The Tories of Sterling Lyon liked it in here. They had the courage of their convictions. They were proud of what they were doing. We were not, but they had the courage of their convictions. What has become of the old mighty Conservative Party? It is old all right, but it is not mighty any longer. It is weak, weak-

106 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 kneed, and really lacking of any energy, any gas, any commitment to what they believe. * (1 530 ) You know, when we swore in the Lieutenant Governor, it was like Groundhog Day. We had all these Tories come out of the groundhog holes and appear in the Legislature, and then they went back in till spring appeared. We must do better in this Legislature. We must have a sitting of this Legislature in the fall. We must have a sitting in this Legislature in the spring. We reject the idea of the Liberals to have fixed dates.

I think we tried that, and it did not work that well. The closure kind of process in Ottawa is unacceptable to us, but we are committing ourselves publicly now to having a fall session in 19 99 when we are elected to government after this next election campaign. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Mr. Deputy Speaker, this Legislature should not sanction the production of political ads to be paid for by the taxpayers and being circulated in our communities, and we will ban political ads for image advertising to be paid for by the taxpayers.

I would much rather hire nurses to work on the frontlines of hospitals than to spend a half a million dolla rs on Tory propaganda for the health of the Conservative Party. If you think this is working, you are wrong. We are going to take that pamphlet back to every citizen and say: Do you want a nurse, or do you want Tory propaganda? They will choose a better way of going with nurses in hall ways rather than pamphlets in the mailbox from the Conservatives after this campaign. Accountability-[ interjection] Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Could I ask the honourable members who want to carry on a conversation to do so in the loge. The honourable Leader of the Opposition has the floor at this time. Mr. Doer: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am speaking of accountabili ty in this Legislature working better. I remember the Premier (Mr. Filmon) of this province saying, after we had a bill in this Legislature on the takeover of Inter-City Gas-1 remember the Premier debating it for four months and that committees of the Legislature debated it for four months.

The Premier of the province said: Oh, we should have an inquiry about the takeover at $18 0 million of the gas company. We had a 30 percent rate reduction during that debate from the gas company, so we finally achieved one of our objectives. Then we had to make a decision after we achieved the price objective of whether to continue on with the takeover or walk away from it, but at least this Legislature had a debate. It had a vote, I might remind the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), and it had a full discussion.

Now we have a situation where close to $500 million in debt and equity and tax provisions have been negotiated in the backrooms of cabinet and Hydro without one smidgen of debate in this Legislature and without

an act of this Legislature. How do members opposite justify adding a half a billion dol lars in responsibilities to the people of this province that we underwrite without a full debate? Maybe you have [interjection] The member for Lakeside mi ght be spending way too much time in Cuba and China, because they are starting to run this province like they are a single- party state with a single-pa rty dictator. I would suggest that members opposite should be committed to a fulsome debate. We want to know, why are we taking it over for twice the price? What is it going to mean for rural gasification?

I know the tax provisions will be better of a publicly owned corporation, but how do you square that with the Jines you gave us on Telephones? How does it fit? What kind of protection do we have for commodities? We always were worried about the price of the gas in Alberta and Saskatchewan rather than the cost of the pipes here in Manitoba because that in essence is the energy source. How competitive is Hydro going to be in a situation where they own both energy sources?

The only thing we are sure of on this side, that members opposite cut a secret deal to fatten the calf, the golden calf of Hydro, to prepare it for future privatization, and, again, we want to evaluate the gas company and keep Hydro owned by the public, unlike members opposite.

April 8, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 10 7 Mr. Deputy Speaker, this Legislature has also been denied an opportunity to debate the numbers properly in Finance. The Auditor came out last week and said that he cannot tell where all the money is going. That is the second time now. The members opposite are getting more and more arrogant, even in areas that are supposed to be their strength. They are getting cited by the Auditor for contempt really of the Legislature. Last year the Auditor would not say that the numbers fairly reflected the books.

This year the Auditor said what we said last year and the year before that, that the surplus was really close to $200 milli on, not the $26 million to $46 mil lion the government had claimed. That denies the people of this Legislature, and it denies the people of Manitoba the opportunity. When you mislead the people on the numbers, you mislead people on the options. That is why I was proud last year that, when we came out with an alternative budget, it was within $1 million of the Auditor' s numbers. Mr. Deputy Speaker, last year we said that our No. 1 priority should be health care.

Our No. 2 priority should be more funding for education and trammg, particularly skill development. Our No. 3 priority should be kids with real programs, not just these pilot projects of great PR advantage with no results, and that we should start reducing the property tax burden on people throughout our communities. The clawback and the property taxes that were made by members opposite, that raised seniors property taxes and raised individual property taxes, should have been reinstated with that surplus last year as we had proposed in our plan.

We can balance the budget and fairly deal with the surpluses, and our vision for how we will deal with those surpluses in the future is to make sure that the community, through health care, education and training, has a balanced budget with no tax increases, tax decreases and property taxes and health and education that was available for all, rather than a system to give an income tax cut that will benefit, like Mike Harris, only the very wealthy in our communities. We have community priorities for the surplus.

They have individual priorities for the privileged few with the surplus, and again we are proud to take that forward in the next campaign with our alternative budget. An Honourable Member: That is NDP policy. Spend your way out. Close the hospitals. Mr. Doer: Mr. Deputy Speaker, when we deal with this Legislature doing better, we must also deal with the whole issue of- An Honourable Member: And then they advertised it in B.C. An Honourable Member: Who closed Misericordia? An Honourable Member: The guy in B.C. did it. The guy in B.C. closed them. The Premier of B.C. closed- Mr.

Doer: I think Greg Lyle closed them all actually-Ontario, Manitoba- * (1 540) Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. We can wait until the members are finished their conversation to carry on with the debate, if you would like. The honourable Leader of the official opposition, to continue. Mr. Doer: Thank you. I want to close by talking about a last point of how we can do better. I have already talked about the boundaries act and our commitment as 10 years ago to deal with that. We remain committed, and we remain committed to both the boundaries act and The Election Finances Act. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, members opposite may not feel the same degree of passion on this issue that we do. The Liberal Party-and, you know, we did not want to do it, make this statement-b ut the Liberal Party was convicted under The Elections Act of 1995 with a person called Joe Anderson, another aboriginal candidate, in Minnedosa. The Conservative Party, only by statute of lim itations, was, according to Elections Manitoba, guilty of breaking the election law with the vote-rigging exercise that was conducted in 19 95.

108 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 19 99 Mr. Deputy Speaker, we know that one was an isolated example, and one was a consistent campaign to deceive and use the most vulnerable people in our society in a way that is both morally and ethically reprehensible. We want the boundaries, and we want the new laws before an election is being fought. Now, members opposite may not feel the passion that we do about that issue, but we feel it because we went through it. Our MLAs went through it in Swan River. They went through it in Interlake.

They went through it in the Dauphin constituency. [interjection] I think this is a very serious subject. I think this is very serious. Day after day after day, we asked questions last year, last June. But everybody in this House contributes money to their own political party. Everybody in this House declares that. Everybody in this House has a pretty good knowledge of what people can afford in an election campaign, and I saw the election return. We knew that an investigation had to be conducted. So when people look the other way, when people choose to look the other way, we thought it was very serious.

Now, in 1998, in January, we had heard some inkling that this was not just a rumour, but it was, in fact, there was confirmation that we received and confirmation that we always believe in having more sources, and the second confirmation was achieved in June of 19 98. We believe the Premier should have taken action. He should not have attacked us. He should not have attacked Darryl Sutherland. He should not have conducted this kind of Republican response to really very serious issues arising. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I believe the Premier, when he read the Interlake newspapers when they said people were admitting in the Conservative camp that they were giving advice and support to the Native Voice campaign, he had a responsibil ity right then and there to call in his senior staff to find out what was going on. He did nothing. The only person that passed the boundaries are the members of the party and senior people, the campaign manager and other senior people of members opposite. The Elections Act does require a leader, by the way, to take responsibil ity for activities in their own party.

It does require a leader to take responsibil ity, and I take responsibility. I moved a motion two years ago after we had phone calls to open-line shows and letters to the editor and letters in the constituencies, I moved a motion for the first time ever on Mr. Sokolyk' s salary line in the Premier's office. I felt that the dirty tricks that I believed were going on then were unacceptable in the Manitoba tradition, and like trained seals the members opposite stood behind the Premier and Mr. Sokolyk and voted to retain his salary in 1997. Now, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, why is it that members on this side understood the character flaws of the Premier' s principal staff and campaign manager before the Premier acknowledged after the fact that there were indeed significant flaws in the conduct of the campaign manager and the chief staff member of the Premier? How can we have a situation where the head of Treasury Board, the former Conservative treasurer is directly involved as a civil servant in the approval of the budget, the issuance of cheques, and the alleged cover-up that took place after that?

The people that were named as contributors to one of the candidates-markers were called in. Mafia terms were used. Mafia terms. Markers were called in for cheques to be issued under the radar screen for both the Conservative Party or for the Native Voice party of Manitoba. I would have expected more. I was interested to read Bruce Cherney's report today or yesterday in the Real Estate News. We are getting editorials everywhere about this issue. The political underworld, it is called. I did not know this, you know. You Jearn something every day.

I did not know that former Tory Premier Sir Rodmond Roblin was not held accountable for the original scandal of 1915 in dealing with the construction of this Legislature and the construction of other buildi ngs with the simila r funds. He makes a parallel comparison between that finding and the present findings. I would remind members opposite that even former Justice Monnin said: With all the

April 8, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 10 9 evidence before me, I am still not convinced that all the evidence that is available is before me. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, if members opposite think that this issue is dead, it is alive and well. Regrettably, it is not healthy, and it is not democracy. We believe, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we should be working with all of our citizens as one community. We should be working with our First Nations people who have the highest poverty rates and the highest unemployment rates and the greatest health challenges and the highest mortality rate as children.

We believe we have to work together in partnership. As the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) stated two days ago, they only received the vote, yes, from John Diefenbaker a few short years ago in relative terms. To have those people used in a deceitful way in this campaign, I think, is a disgrace. I am proud of the fact that Manitobans send people all over the world, the former communist countries, former fascist countries, former dictatorships, South Africa where blacks were not entitled to vote.

I am proud of the fact that we send people all over the world to help countries move from dictatorships and totalitarian forms of government to democracy. The revelations of the seven or eight people as part of the Fil mon team, I think, is unprecedented. I think it is more serious than even some of the financial scandals that you hear of from time to time in other governments in other jurisdictions, because I think that people who are elected by democracy must be committed to democracy. We believe that this Premier no longer has the legitimacy to remain as Premier.

We believe that he should have brought in the boundaries and called the election immediately. We believe that the members opposite should stand up for democracy in their own caucus and their own party. * (1 550) Mr. Deputy Speaker, regrettably, with the lack of legitimacy, with the failure to respect democracy, but with a government that is arrogant, out of gas, has lost the courage of their convictions, has no heart and no ethics, I therefore move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms.

Friesen), that the motion be amended by adding to it after the word "session" the following words: But this House regrets that this government has failed to meet the goals of Manitobans by failing to uphold basic democratic principles as key government officials were involved in a vote-rigging plot, which, as the Monnin inquiry states, "constitutes an unconscionable debasement of the citizen's right to vote. To reduce the voting rights of individuals is a viola tion of our democratic system," and has thereby lost the trust and confidence of the people of Manitoba and this House. Thank you. Motion presented. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: The motion is in order. Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am extremely pleased to be able to participate in the debate today respecting an address in reply to the Speech from the Throne and on the amendment moved today by the honourable Leader of the Opposition. I join with the Leader of the Opposition and others in of fering my thanks to Lieutenant Governor Peter Liba on his participation in the opening of our session. I offer my congratulations to Mr. Liba and Mrs.

Liba as they embark on the responsibilities they have as the vice regal representatives here in the province of Manitoba. I wish them well. I have been pleased to have an opportunity to have some business dealings with Mr. Liba in the past when he was Mr. Liba as opposed to Your Honour. As Health mini ster in Manitoba and my dealings with him as chair of the St. Boniface Hospital Board of Directors, we had an amicable and fruitful and productive working relationship and that would be my expectation for the future as we carry on with our responsibili ties in this place.

I would also like at this point, since I did not have a chance on changeover day-if that is what it is called-when one Lieutenant Governor

11 0 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 8, 1999 ceases his responsibilities and a new one takes over, to pass on my best wishes to Yvon Dumont and Mrs. Dumont as they carry on with their new lives. Indeed, I have been pleased already to have dealings with Mr. Dumont in his capacity of chief executive officer of the Louis Riel Institute. I know he will serve that institute with the distinction which has characterized his service in his other functions in the past. I have had the pleasure to work with Mr. Dumont not only as Lieutenant Governor of Manitoba but as president of the Manitoba Metis Federation.

As a chief spokesperson for Metis people from right across Canada in constitutional negotiations, discussions always found Mr. Dumont to be an extremely decent individual who brings an honest and straightforward approach to whatever he does. I join also with others in welcoming the new pages to our Legislature. I know sometimes we run them off their feet a little bit.

I will apologize in advance for that and hope that I do not ask for too many favours in that respect in terms of running messages and things like that, but we could not operate this place without people like that who are prepared to serve their fellow Manitobans in the capacity as pages in the Legislature. I had the experience for a number of years to be an employee in a Legislature, that is the House of Commons, and to work together with pages and other staff. A number of years later, I found a former page in one of the professions right here in the province of Manitoba quite successfully carrying on.

I think that it may be that the experience here will serve the pages well as they address the challenges of the rest of their lives. So good luck to all of them and thanks for being here. I offer a personal congratulations to our new Sergeant-at-Arms, Mr. Mac Al len, because I believe that Mr. Alle n will discharge his responsibilities with distinction. I think we are all going to be well served by his services as Sergeant-at- Arms, and I like to see someone of his calibre taking on that responsibili ty. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the throne speech opening this Legislature in 19 99 is probably, of all the throne speeches I have heard, the one that has the greatest vision. I do not say that to say that other throne speeches have not been of extremely high quality, but I think that the throne speech that we are debating this week does indeed have in it the kind of vision that I believe my children and those who come after them will appreciate was there, because they will be the ultimate beneficiaries.

As we stand back and look at the opportunities and the challenges we face and the best way to maximize the benefits of living in Manitoba, I believe that the throne speech and all that it represents will go down in the history of this province as one of the more visi onary of all of the throne speeches that have been put forward to the people of Manitoba. It is not only visi onary in that it looks forward but that it also sets out the significant achievements of the recent past in Manitoba that have done so much to Jay a foundation for a very successful future.

You know, it was not that many years ago that I was feeling a little nervous about the future for my children because, in those days, there were higher unemployment rates, there were record levels of government spending and borrowing and profligacy. This caused me a fair amount of concern.

It still does today but less so, because I can see that, through the stewardship of ministers of Finance in recent years here in Manitoba and the Fil mon administration, some control has been placed on the profligacy and some common sense has been applied to the spending of hard-earned taxpayers' dol lars and quality programming has been put in place to ensure a much better future. We are already seeing results, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We are seeing results in our trade figures; we are seeing the benefits of diversification of our economy.

Certainly in the area I am privileged to represent, we are seeing diversification especially in the agricultural sector, which is and wiii yield significant benefits for generations to come in that part of Manitoba. Indeed, when one part of Manitoba benefits, the rest of the province does as well. We know that the spin-offs go far beyond simply western Manitoba, spin-offs of developme nts like those represented at, for example, Simplot and at Ayerst Organics and shortly Maple Leaf Foods. We will see significant activity being -

April 8, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 111 carried out in a sustainable fashion, which means that our generation and those who come after us will benefit from these developments. The developments would not likely be happening if it were not for a climate of optimism that has been carefully cultivated here in the province of Manitoba. I have been in this legislature since 19 86, arrived here the very same day as the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer), but since 19 88 I have been privileged to serve on the government side of the House and to be part of laying that groundwork for a strong present and a stronger future for Manitobans. * (1 600) It has not been an easy 11 years, but it has been productive. It is clear to me that no good will come simply by taking the easiest way out. Prior to our arrival on this side of the House, we could see the folly of that particular policy. We changed that policy and we now see the benefits of those changes. I am pleased to be part of those changes.

I li stened to the Leader of the Opposition this afternoon in his response to the Speech from the Throne, and I have to admit, there were some positive points and some not so positive points in what he had to say. As a father and parent,

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-5-3
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 5th hansardpdf 3.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	c81107205b082fc2e46ad5f07f402b24b2f0bbb9

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