Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 119 (34th Legislature, 2nd Session)

34-2-119

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, February 6, 1990. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRA YERS ROUTINE PROCEE DINGS INTRO DUCTION OF GUESTS Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct Honourable Mem bers' attention to the gallery where we have, from the College Beliveau, twenty-nine Grade 9 students. They are under the direction of Mr. Tayeb Meridji. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Radisson (Mr . Patterson). On behalf of all Honourable Mem bers, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QU ESTION PERIOD Place Promenade Appraisal Mr. James Carr (fort Rouge): Mr.

Spe aker, my question is to the Minister of Finance (Mr . Manness). Yesterday in the House, in response to a question, the Min ister of Urban Affairs (M r. Ducharme) said that he had valued the Place Promenade project at $29 million.

I am going to table in the House, tod ay, a sworn affidavit from Gary Julius, the executive director of Manitoba Housing and a member of the board of directors on the Man itoba Housing and Renewal Corpora tion, that says "the complex is currently estimated to be worth subs tantially less than the amount owing under the first mortgage." The value of the first mortgage is $18 .5 million. My question to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is: can he tell us if the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr . Ducharme), the mayor, the federal Minister, Mr.

Epp, and the mem bers of the board of the North Portage Development Corporation were aware of this appraisal when they took the decision to assume a debt of $22 milli on, or at least $4 million more than th e Government's own appraiser had said the project was worth? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Spe aker, I cannot answer that question fully. I can ind icate to the Memb er opposite, though, that when I had a meeting with the Provincial Auditor on Tuesday of this week, in the morning time, I asked him how it is that he might attempt to place his evaluation on the property in question.

The Provincial Auditor ind icated to me that would be a difficult matter but that he would probably be approaching CMHC and in discussions with them try to attempt at least to put an accurate value on the property in question. * (13 35) 5046 Appraisal Tabling Request Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker, the attempt by the Auditor to put a value on the property is one thing; the attempt by Ministers of the Crown who have to make decisions based on that value is quite another. Could the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) take it upon himself to ensure that he would table, or the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr.

Ducharme) would table, any and all real estate appraisals that were perused by the shareholders and the board of North Portage Development Corporation before the decision was taken? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice, but let me correct the Mem ber. I cannot recall my colleague, the Minister of Housing (Mr. Ducharme), at any time saying that the project was evaluated at $29 million. He said that other people that were involved in this whole issue indicated that it might be $29 million. Mr. Carr: Mr.

Speaker, any prudent decision would have involved a realistic and an independent appraisal of the worth of the project before th ere was an assumption of some $22 million of debt. Would the Min ister of Finance en deavour to make public all independent appraisals that were given to the decision makers so that the people of Manitoba can better judge the wisdom of yesterday's decision? Mr. Manness: Again, Mr.

Speaker, I will take the question as notice for the Minister, but again I repeat what the Minister said yesterd ay, and I qu ote, you have to remember that North of Portage has a $7.2 million investment in this particular property. Is that Memb er across the way suggesting that properties should have been left on the market for $1 6.5 million, thereby putting at risk the $29 million project? At no time did the Min ister indicate that the project, indeed the whole project, is worth $29 million tod ay. Mon thly Shortfall Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): Mr.

Speaker, I have a new question to the Min ister of Finance (Mr. Manness). Also in response to qu estions yesterday, the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ducharme), not in this House I might add, but outside the House to reporters, indicated that the revenue shortfall for Place Promenade would be $1 27,000 for the year of 1990. On the record, in the Winnipeg Free Press of Janua ry 8, we have the president of the North Portage Dev elopment Corporation, the same source that the Min ister quoted yesterday outside the House, who had said that the shortfall was somewhere between $30,000 and $50,000 a month. Mr.

Speaker, these figures are wildly at odds, one from the other. Could the Minister of Finance please explain the discrepancy? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Well, Mr. Speaker, I was not part of the outside press

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 conference given by the Minister yesterday. I am not knowledgeable as to what he said in the hallway. I am certainly becoming knowledgeable as to what the Mem ber opposite said in an

article in 1985 when he had some glamourous remarks to make on the whole project . But nevertheless, let me say, and I am sure, by the way, that my colleague the Minister of Ho using (Mr. Ducharme) no doubt will want to quote certain parts of that article, but in fairness the Minister and I discussed as to what degree the province may have continuous exposure with respect to the decision made over the weekend. We also try to forecast what the losses would be over the next two years once that whole project became self-sustaining .

So that que stion was asked, certainly from my point of view, from the Government's point of view, and as much information as possible was brought to bear, I think, before the decision was entered into over the weekend. Vacancy Rate Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): I have a suppleme ntary ques tion to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness). In order to establish the monthly shortfall, it is necessary to know what the vacancy rate is. Obviously the more people who are living there, the more people who are paying rent.

Can the Minister of Finance tell us what the monthly shortfall is, based on the vacancy rate that was given to him or to the Minister of Urba n Affairs (M r. Ducharme), upon which basis the decision was taken, and would he make those rent rolls publ ic? Hon. Clayton Manness (Min ister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, in all hone sty, I cannot tell him that, and I will take the whole qu estion as notice. Place Promenade Documentation Request Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker, the people of Manitoba want to know that a very important decision was taken with all of the necessary information at its disposal.

Would the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), who is a man who prides himself on compe tence and good administration, say to this House that he will endeavour to make public all of the docume nts that were necessary to make a decision on the future of Place Promenade, so not only the shareholders but the whole Province of Manitoba could be in a position to judge the wisdom of that decision? •

(1340) Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, one has to wonder what information the Member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Carr) had when he wrote an

article in the Winnipeg Free Press on June 2, 1985, entitled, "It's time to get excited, by Jim Carr at City Hall." He said, "Winnipeggers should be encouraged that a partnership between three levels of Government and two major developers will end an era of decay and deterioration which took its toll on the city's reputation. The housing com ponent to be built behind the shopp ing mall will appeal to middle-class tenants looking for an urban village setting. The North Portage plan is the best opportunity for revitalization we have seen in Winnipeg for years.

There is not much doubt that the successful completion of the project will do wonders for the city." Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order. Ord er, please. The Honourable Mem ber for Brandon East. Economic Growth Housing Starts Decline Mr. Leonard Evans (Br andon East): Information released today show that Manitoba housing starts fell by 25.1 percent in 1989 from 1988. We are eight, out of 10 provinces, Mr. Speaker, the second lowest in the country in terms of decli ne, another impo rtant indication, a very serious indication of a weak economy in this province.

New dwellings have an important multiplier effect on the economy so that weakness in residential construction spreads rapidly to other areas, dam pening the impact on de mand for furniture, appli ances and othe r household items. Has the Government any plans or ideas to offset the serious declining economic situation in Manitoba? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minis ter of Indus try, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, as the Acting Minister of Hous ing, I will take that que stion as notice for the Minister of Housing. Eccmomic Growth Housing Starts Decline Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr.

Speaker, I had hoped that this would be taken by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness). I really meant to address it, and I address this one to the Minister of Finance. The level of housing starts in Manitoba in 1989 are the j lowest since the early'80s when Manitoba and Canada , were suffering a very serious economic recession . In fact, Mr. Speaker, we have had two years in a row of declining residential construction. Will the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) now acknowledge that Manitoba's economy is suffering unde r this Government, and will he take some responsibil ity, any responsibil ity, to counteract the situation? Hon. Clayton Manness (Min ister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I did not answer the first question because he asked it ol the Government, and I thought he would be directing that question to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, let me say this Government was given a very clear mandate to clean up Government. First of all, we were asked to improve the climate within the Province of Manitoba. I think we have done that.

We have done that through redistribution, of leaving more tax money in the pockets of our constituents, indeed, of all Manitobans. 5047

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 Mr. Speaker, we have also, of course, brought forward a num ber of initiatives, the last of which being the announcement with respect to Olympia, $200 million effort with respect to our hog indu stry. There is more to do, and we acknowledge that. We will not do so in isolation. We will attempt to do so in partnership with all of the sectors, indeed busi ness and labour throughout this province. As we have said on many times, we yet have not turned the corner to prosperi ty. There is more to do.

With the supp ort of the Opposition, when we continue to bring down budg ets that are going to cause the creation of jobs through tax decreases to individuals and to business, I know that indeed Phase 2 will mean not only more jobs but more housing starts. Budget Request Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, there is no qu estion declining housing starts mean fewer jobs in Manitoba. The serious point is, although the starts declined by 25 percent last year over the previous year, in the last quarter the decline was 34.6 percent , meaning that it is accelerating.

It is getting worse and worse as the year goes on. Will the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) or the Premier (Mr. Filmon), if he wishes to answer this, but will the Government, will the Min ister of Finance, be prepared to bring in its early budg et, an early budget to deal with this situation? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I find this passing strange. Last week, the Liberal Finance Critic brought forward-h e at least had a press conference calling for an early budget.

He has not asked one question in the House to try and promote that, and yet the Finance Critic from the NOP is echoing some of the same comments made by the Mem ber opposite. So I wonder who is working in concert here obviously the Opposition. Yet, when we brought forward tax reduction efforts, the Liberals particularly have been in total opposition to it When we have attempted to remove this addiction to borrowing money and to creating short-ter m, meaningless jobs, the NOP have hit us. We have attempted to address a new approach.

We have a new economic plan, we have a new economic thrust, and Manitobans are showing, at least in some polls, that they like what we are doing. All-Party Committee Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, all areas of the province are suffering. Statistics show that residential construction is down in Brandon, Portage, Selkirk, as well as Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, would the Minister be willing, would he be prepared, to set up an all-Party committee of the Legislature to examine the current economic situation and recommend policies to the Government to offset this econ omic decline? 5048 * (1 345) Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, it is obvious there is not a Party demarcation between those two seats on the other side of the House. They are each echoing each other's approach- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Manness: -that, or some proposed questions that were developed by the MLA for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) have somehow slipped onto the desk of the MLA for Brandon East (M r. Leonard Evans). Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr . Doer) says it is a ser ious situa tion, and I acknowledge it is.

It most certainly is, but if indeed the philosophy of the New Democratic Party is one that says we should continue to increase rates of expenditure of Government at the rate of 8 percent per year, and that we would lead to deficits that are going to surpass $600 million leading to $1 billion a year, I would say philosophically we have nothing, we share no common ground, certainly as to the approach. We share common ground with respect to the fact that we want to see more people employed in this province, that we want to see more housing starts, but the method by which we get to there, we obviously differ greatly.

Pu blic Accounts Committee Place Promenade Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier (Mr. Filmon). When the Premier was on this side of the House, indeed sitting in this very chair, he argued very strongly that legislative committees should call witnesses to appear before them in order to get to the bottom of important issues.

On August 15, 19 86, during the MTX fiasco, the Leader of the Opposition, now our Premier, asked the then Premier, and I qu ote, would he supp ort that kind of initiative to ensure that witnesses are called before the committee to be able to be subpoe naed before a committee of the Legislature to answer questions? Given that the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) is clearly on the record as advocating that witnesses appear before a legislative committee, in order to get answers to serious questions, will he now take the serious steps and the necessary steps to have all of the parties involved in the funding, development and construction of Place Promenade appear before the Public Accounts Committee of the Legislature to answer questions about Place Promenade? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. The Honourable First Minister. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, what we have here is a Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs)

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 who does not know what her responsi bilities and rules are. Because she is unable to do her job, she goes around telling everybody else how to do their job. Because she is a total failure in her own responsibilities, she wants to deflect attention. She goes to school boards and tells them whether or not they should open or close schools. She goes to municipal Governments and tells them what they should be doing about their issues. *

(1350) What she do es not und erstand is th at this administration, that this Government of the Province of Manitoba has the total respon sibility of the Crown corporations within its jurisdiction. When we were talking about the Manitoba Telephone System, it is a wholly-owned Crown corporation of the Province of Manitoba, totally within our jurisdiction. Its employees are the employees of the Government and the people of Manitoba. Its board of directors is totally controlled and in fact appointed by the administration of the Province of Manitoba.

That is an entirely different situation versus an arms length corporation that is not controlled, that is not under the sole jurisdiction of the Province of Manitoba, whose employees do not work for the Province of Manitoba. Indeed, the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) cannot understand that. I regret that because that is why she cannot do her job. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order , please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Spe aker, is it not fascinating that the Premier (Mr .

Filmon) thinks it is well within his jurisdiction to send the Auditor in to investigate it, but somehow or other it is not within the purview of this Legislature to examine it when the Auditor is a servant of this Legislature. The Premier of the Day, in 19 86, wanted to limit the scope of the investigation in the same way that this Premier (Mr . Filmon) wants to limit the scope. Why can this Premier not see the wisdom of his own earlier position and call for the Public Accounts Comm ittee to review the Place Promenade situation and not dodge it like a politically reincarnated Howard Pawley?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable First Minister. Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I think the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) has probably acquired a new speech writer. It is the one that the Prime Minister must have had last November when he suggested Howard Pawley was a statesman. Mr. Speaker, as usual the Leader of the Opposition is not listening.

Indeed, we have asked the Provincial Auditor, as the servant of this Assemb ly, to go in and do the fullest possible investigation of our investment in Place Promenade-the investment that we are indeed respons ible to the people of Manitoba for-so that we get all of the questions answered, all of the innuendos, allegations and everything that has been put forward on the table and investigated in- ***** Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): A point of order , Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order , please. The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, on a point of ord er. Mr.

Carr: Since this issue was raised in the Legislature some months ago there have been no innuendos. There have been no allegations. We have asked a series of qu estions seeking information- Mr . Sp eaker: Or der , ple ase; ord er, ple ase. The Honourable Member does not have a point of order . It is a dispute over the facts.- (interjection) - Order , please. The Honourable First Minister. ***** Mr. Filmon: I have not attributed innuendos and allegations to the Member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Carr). If he is sensitive then perhaps there is reason for him to be so.

If he is afraid now that the Auditor is going to turn up information that makes him look foolish then that is fine with me, Mr. Speaker. He can get sensitive about it. This Provincial Auditor, the servant of this Assembly, is not going to be restricted in any way. He will produce all the information, which the Minister of Finance (Mr .

Manness) has agreed to make public, so that every single Member of this Assembly and every single resident of this province will know that he has made the most thorough investigation possible to try and get to the bottom of all the questions and all of the allegations and innuendos that have been put forward by anybody in this province- � Mr. Speaker: Order , please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, the RCM P investigation of MTX was not sufficient. It was requir ed to come before this Assembly. The Auditor in this case is looking at dollars and cents issues.

We want to know the basis for the political decisions. The only way we can get to the bottom of those is if the entire affair is handled by a legislative comm ittee. • (13 55) Can the Premier (Mr . Filmon) give one good reason why he will not call North Portage O<welopment Corporation before Public Accounts? Mr. Filmon: Again-and I am sorry that I have lo go through this so painstakingly slowly, but the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) does not understand 5049

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 that the Manitoba Telephone System does, in fact, come before a committee of this Assembly on a regular basis each and every year to have its annual report reviewed and investigated by the Mem bers of the comm ittee of this Assemb ly. That is an absolute requ irement of it. We were only acting in conjunctio n with th at requ irement to ensure that the telephone system was answe rable to this Assem bly and respond to the investigations of the auditor of Coopers and Lybrand and the RCMP, because they were all relevant to its operations.

That resulted in the Government of the Day firing some five or six senior officials of the corporation, changing many of the members of the board of that corporation, changing many of the operations of that corporation and all sorts of things that were totally within the jurisd iction of this provincial Government and indeed this Assemb ly. That is the way in which that should be done and that is the way it was done. Pu blic Health Amendment Act Government Support Mr. Paul !Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae).

I think all Manitobans shared in the shock expressed by Judge Norton yesterday when he found that it was not against the law to sell highly addictive and highly dangerous solvents to troubled youth in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, what was perhaps even more distressing was the finding that this situation had been allowed to persist under the previous administration as well as this administration. So lvents are the drugs of the very young and the very vulnerable and the very poor. We must do better for the vulner able in our society.

Will the Minister agree to deal with Bill No. 91, presently before this House, in a timely fashion before the end of this Session so that we can at least put these minimal protections into place? Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney � General): Mr. Speaker, I believe Bill No. 91 is the Bill , standing in the name of the Honourable Mem ber for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis). I am sure the Honourable Mem ber for St. Johns appreciates that the Honourable Mem ber for St. James (M r. Edwards) would bring the matter forward today as he has. I have had discussions with the Honourable Mem ber for St.

Johns and our work togethe r in a co-operative way is ongoing. Hazardous Products Act Solvent Inclusion Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, again for the Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccrae), the Bill brought forward by the Mem ber for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia leis) comes under The Public Health Act. However, my ques tion to the Minister is, will he have discussions with his federal counterpart to explore including the solvents under The Hazardous Products Act federally so that we can achieve a co-operative effort to curtail the sale of these solvents? We can only do so much provincially.

Will the Minister commit today to speaking to his federal counterp art about this problem which no doubt is a problem nationwide? Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I have already done that, Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Member is correct, that there is only so much that can be done at the provincial level. As I said, I have been working with the Honourable Mem ber for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis), who had the foresight to bring this matter forward. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, I look forward to some results.

Those discussions have also been taking place for over a year on gun control with no result. Solvent Abuse Rehabilitation Programs Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Finally, for the Minister of Health (Mr . Orchard), the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba has adult and family programs, but absolutely no youth subs tance abus e programs. The re are approximately 20 beds in the province for long-term treatment of addicts, but they have lineups and there are no short-term treatment programs. Where are parents to turn for help, Mr.

Speaker, in this province and in particular in rural Manitoba when they find their children addicted to solvents? Hon. Donald Or chard (M inister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the AFM provides reference to White Spruce Youth Treatment facility in Yorkton, Saskatchewan, under a conjoint agreement between the two provinces. We have made in the last year, I believe, six referrals to that institution; six referrals are pending. In terms of the activities amongst Child and Family Services, referrals are made to such organizations in the Province of Manitoba as St.

Norbert Foundation for the treatment of youths addicted to substance. St. Norbert Foundation is a funded agency of the Alcoholism Foundation and derives its revenue on a per diem basis from the sponsoring agencies who refer tho se youths. My honourable friend may make the argument that there is not enough service, but he certainly cannot make the argument there is none, because that would be false. *

(1400) Rural Police Services Report Recomme ndations llllr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I have a question for the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Penner}. Policing costs to communities in Manitoba have skyrocketed over the past 10 years under an agreement that was negotiated between the former Lyon Government and the federal Liberal Government federally in this country, whereby the agreement called for increases contributed by municipalities from 50 percent to 70 percent of the costs. The Minister of Rural Develop ment received a report from the Advi sory Com mittee on Pol icing last September that would see a major change in the way 5050

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 that the funds are collected for policing and a major increase in contributions by rural municipalities in this province. I ask the Minister of Rural Developme nt whether he has adopted this particular report from the advisory committee as policy of this Government. Hon. Jack Penner (Min ister of Rural Development): Thank you for the question. The committee reported, as the Honourable Mem ber for Dauphin (Mr.

Plohman) has indicated, that there is a need for rural mun icipalities to bear a greater po rtion of the costs, and the recommenda tions in the report also indicate that the province needs to assume a larger share of the cost of the policing for comm unities in Manitoba.

Ho wever, the re are a num ber of other recommenda tions that are contained in the report that I believe need some furthe r discu ssions with municipalities as well as comm unities all over the province, and I have indicated clearly to the municipal organizations, both the urban organizations and the UMM that I would like further discussions with them on how to implement not only the cost-sharing of police services, but as well, providing the services equally to both communities. Mr. Plohman: The report sets as one of its obj ectives that it should provide benefits to the most needy commu nities.

I ask the Minister if that is one of the objectives, and if his Government has accepted that obj ective, whether he sup ports the recommenda tion of this report that would see the provincial policing grant decli ne significantly for several vil lages in this province -Ste. Anne by 27 percent, MacGregor by 37 percent, Winnipegosis by 60 percent. Does he sup port that kind of a decline in the provincial grant for policing costs being applied to those commu nities? Mr. Penner: Mr.

Speaker, I think the Honourable Mem ber would also like to indicate that the report indicates a subs tantial increase in funding to some communities similar to what the decrease is to others, and therefore I think it is important that we enter into further discussions with those communities that will be affected by the recomme ndations in the report. Then when those discussions have taken place I think we are going to be in a better position to make a decision on this matter. Mr.

Plohman: I have not said that there will not be increases to several communities, but I am concer ned, I am very concerned about the major impact of the decreases to those comm unities because they will not share in the benefits. Winnipegosis cannot survive a $15 ,000 cut in their grant. I ask the Minister whether he would accept the recomme ndation from the Village of Winnipegosis to have that increase phased-in, or that decrease in that grant phased-in over a five-year period in a similar way that R. M.s' increases will be phased-in. Will the Minister accept that principle? Mr.

Penner: There are many responses that I have received from the various mu nicipali ties and comm unities across this province since the report has been made public and has been provided to the various communities and the municipal organizations. Similarly, I think it would be irresponsi ble of myself or our Government to take the recom mendations put forward by one community and base our deliberations and consideration of funding towards policing to rural comm unities based on the recommenda tions of one comm unity .

I think the repo rt is a much de ep er docu ment than th at and provides some general overviews that I think have some reasonable application in this for our province and, therefore, I think needs to be discussed further with those communities affected by it. Medical Profession laboratory Misuse Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard). People of Manitoba were shocked to learn, through the media, that a few doctors in Winnipeg have been involved in a conflict of interest regarding misuse of lab facilities for a possible financial gain.

Can the Minister of Health tell this House whether he will fully investigate the matter and what measures he will be taking to consider that this situation never arises again? Hon. Donald Or chard (Minis ter of Health): Mr. Speaker, I presume my honourable friend is referring to the

article that was today in the Winnipeg Free Press. Let me indicate to my honourable friend that this issue stems back to 19 85, where the Col lege of Physicians and Surgeons foresaw the potential difficulty of private sector laboratories offering to physicians, or physician groups, certain incentives for use, which would be outside of the professional conduc t of those physicians both as sponsors of the lab and indeed possibly as the groups so elicited for business. That investigation was a lengthy one.

It was determined, as was announced in the College's January newsletter, that indeed 11 of the 17 sponsors of that particular laboratory were contravening the directive of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, and the � appropriate disciplinary action, as provided by the College of Physicians and Surgeons, has been taken. Mr. Sp eake r, my honourable friend asked the qu estion: what am I doing? The College of Physicians and Surgeons is responsible for those standards and have acted to curtail inappropriate violation- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Health Care Service Dup lication Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kikkman): Mr.

Speaker, our health care costs have risen by 17 8 percent, while the population has grown by only 6 percent for the last 10 years. This has been due to the aging population, new technology , increasing patient demands and possible duplication of services. Can the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) tell this House when the centralized computer services will be 5051

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 installed in Manitoba to identify and curtail the duplication of services and to save millions of dollars for taxpayers? Hon. Donald Or chard (Minis ter of Health): Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend has made one of his most intelligent statements in a

preamble to a question. He has ind icated what I have told him consistent ly, and it is the graph that I produced in the tabling of the Health Services Development Fund, that over the past 10 years our cost in health care has grown by 17 8 percent and population by 6 percent. I appreciate my honourable friend's reiteration of that as a challenge and a problem faced not only by this province, but across Canada and in the provincial territories, a problem that I have elicited the support of my honourable friends in Opposition to create solutions.

Today my honourable friend seems willing to advance something, but just the other day he is acceding to an interim report on extended treatment beds, which involves spending of considerable money, without any consideration of the cost. Mr. Speaker, my honourable friends in the Liberal Party have to be consistent. Are you in favour of prud ent management of the health care system, because that is certainly the agenda we are on- Mr. Speaker: Orde r, please. Order. Walk-In Clinics Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, we have given him a lot of recommendations and he knows it.

He is on the record of praising us that we have been the main to promote the mental health services in Manitoba. For the last 18 months, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) prom ised a num ber of times during Estima tes that he will bring a policy on the walk-in clinics in Winnipeg. Can he tell us today when he will bring the policy to deal with the proliferation of walk in clinics and potential for overser vicing? Hon. Donald Orchard (Mi nist er of Health): Mr.

Speaker, that is exactly an issue that we wish to have a subs tantive discussion in co-operation with the MMA in resolving the walk-in clinic as an issue in health care. We look forward to those kinds of discussions. Let me deal with my honourable friend's question specifically about laboratory testing. When I came into office, we instituted a menu order form for laboratory tests wherein physicians had to specify the test that was asked for.

That was not a popular change in the approach to ordering tests, but that one single initiative appears to have saved in excess of $1. 5 million a year in laboratory testing so that services can continue to be improved and made available to the citizens of Manitoba as a result of those effective management tools and cost containment. * (1 41 0) 5052 Forest Fires Public Inq uiry Mr. Harry Harapiak (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns).

Last summer during the height of the forest fires, the Minister was in Thompson, and in an interview with the Thompson Citizen in discussion with the fires he said: I have ordered a broad inquiry into the whole way in which the Government has handled the situation this year dealing with the fires. Why has the Minister decided to abandon the in depth inquiry into 1989 fires, in the Government, which he promised last summer and has instead gone for the public relatio ns meeting between interested organizations and William Newton, a consultant which the Department of Natural Resources has hired? Hon.

Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I am really somewhat amazed at where the Honourable Member for The Pas (Mr. Harapiak) is coming from. Right as we meet at this time, meetings are tak ing place in at least 13 or 14 different communities. A commissioner has been appointed by the province, Mr. William Newton, who is conducting these hearings. We had sent specific letters out, to particularly some of the leaders of some of the northern communities.

At the time that I made that statement that the Honourable Mem ber refers to, there was a special request made that the hearings be conducted not here in the City of Winnipeg, but indeed in some of the communities where the fires did their damage, and that is precisely what we are in the process of doing at this time. I look forward to the information that we will be receiving from those hearings. Public Inq uiry Notice Mr. Harry Harapiak (The Pas): Mr.

Sp eaker, he acknowledged that the meetings are taking place outside of the City of Winnipeg, and we realize that the Native organizations need to be met with, but why were they not given more notice? They were given one week's notice from the time that they were starting up. Why were they not consulted with? Will the Minister abandon this public relations effort he has started? Will he go into the in-depth inquiry he promised last summer and involve the organizations that were involved in the fire at that time? Hon. Harry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): Mr.

Speaker, I have to remind the Honourable Mem ber that I was specifically qu estioned on one of my trips with my friend and colleague, the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr . Downey), by representatives of th e Native communi ties, particularly the MKO organization, not to begin these meetings while they were still busy trying to sort out the claims with the Emergency Measures Organization's personnel that were in the area, that have, I would say in record order, analyzed hundreds of claims, replaced burnt cottages, replaced damaged equipment.

They asked us to let that work be done before we sit down for that more objective analysis of

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 how we could best fight fires in the future. I have to refute the Honourable Member's contention. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. *

(1420) ORDER S OF THE DAY Hon. James Mccrae (Government House leader): Mr. Speaker, in the Chamber for the next 29 minutes we will deal with the Estimates of the Department of Edu cation and Training, and for the next 25 minutes in Room 255 we will deal with the Estimates of the Department of Justice. I move, seconded by the Honourable Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cummings), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the Ho us e resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Sup ply to be granted to He r Majesty with the Honourable Member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshammer) in the Chair for Ju stice, and the Honourable Member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) in the Chair for Edu cation and Training. CONCURRENT COMMI TTEES OF SUPPLY SUP PLY- JUSTICE Mr. Chairman (Har old Gilleshammer): Order, please. I call this

section of the Com mittee of Supply to order. This afternoon we shall commence consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Ju stice. We will commence with an opening statement by the Honourable Minister. Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): The year 19 89-90 has been a year of transition for Manitoba's justice system. It has also been a year in which great progress has been made on a num ber of issues vital to its health.

We began the year by the formal creation of a Department of Ju stice that com prises all aspects of the administration of justice, including court services, corrections, criminal prosecutions, civil litigation, constitutional and family law, law enforcement and prope rty rights. We also took major steps to add ress the recom mendations of the Dewar Inquiry into the so called "ticketgate" matter. The department's Criminal Ju stice Division was reorg anized into the Publ ic Prosecutions Division containing three branches: regional prosecutions, Winnipeg prosecutions, and special prosecutions and programs.

The former system was criticized by former Chief Jus tice Dewar for inadequate case management and control. The new structure is designed to be flexible enough to respond to the needs of the increasingly complex justice system that we expect to see in the 19 90s and beyond. At the same time, it is designed to respect the rights of the individual citizens that the system exists to serve. Simu ltane ously with the reorganization, the department created a special group within Pu blic Prosecutions to address the chronic problem of court backlogs.

The goal was to eliminate unnecessary delays in court appearances by the end of 19 89. With the excellent co-operation of all those involved in our justice system, thousands of cases were reviewed and trial priorities set. Meetings were held with defence lawyers to iron out issues and reduce procedural disputes in court. Ways were found to make maximum use of courtroom time. A couple of weeks ago I was able to announce the project's complete success. The standard date for trials in provincial court is now two to three months after the laying of charges for persons in custody and within six months for others.

This is compared with anywhere j from 12 to 14 months, between the laying of charges � and a trial date, a year ago. Changes that also originated with Justice Dewar's report were made to The

Summary Convictions Act. These changes allow for jud icial discretion in the granting of a discharge and a new hearing, but require that the reasons for such discretion be recorded. Legislation has also been introduced to strengthen the indep endence of provincial court judges and create a new judicial appointments process. The changes were recommended in a review of The Provincial Court Act carried out by the Manitoba Law Reform Commission shortly after it was placed on a solid legislative footing.

The goal is to enhance the independence of provincial judges by making the nomination process more open, providing for independent review of their compensation, and enh ancing the role of the chief judge, while protecting that person from being arbitrarily removed from office. The delays at the Manito ba Land Titles office, • originally slashed by a major effort in 19 88, continue � to be kept under control.

As of January 19, the time for comp leting the registration of transfers and mortgages on properties with comput erized titles is four working days; for properties with paper titles, transfers take nine working days; mortgages seven. Manitoba has long been recognized as a Canadian leader in the area of family law, both in our legislation and our systems. In 19 89-90 our Government has taken major steps to preserve Manitoba's pre-eminence.

In Octob er, we introduced a legislative package that when appro ved will make Mani toba's laws on inheritance reflect evolving relationships in the modem family and ensure that family members are treated fairly after a death. In today's world many people will marry more than once and will have children with more than one partner. The new legislation ensures that the interests of family members are safeguarded. It focuses on the inheritance rights of present and former spouses, suppo rt of 5053

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 children from a parent 's estate, and provisions where a person dies without a will. Also, in Octobe r, we expanded the services of Manitoba's unified family court to the entire province, the first province in Canada to do so province-wide. The unified court combines both legal and social components, the Family Division of the Court of Queen's Bench, made up of judges comm itted to and experienced in family law, and the Family Conciliation Branch of the Department of Family Services, which provides professional media tion and assessment services.

The unified family court replaces the traditional adversarial approach of ordinary courts with a focus on finding humane and constructive solutions even when reconci liation is impossible. When there are children involved, the court works to rechannel energies into the best interests of the children. •

(1430) Since the unified family court was introduced, the response to it has been universally positive, not just from professionals such as lawyers and social workers but also from various women's groups and fathers' rights groups. The main problem was that it was available only to people who lived in the Winnipeg and Selkirk areas. People who lived in the rest of Manitoba did not have access to the same services. Their family law services were conside red "reasonably adequate." To me and our Government, "reasonably adequate" was not good enough for services that deal directly with Manitoba families.

The answer was to expand the services province-wide. In Octo ber, with the federal Minister of Justice co-operating by appointing three new family division justices, that expansion became reality. As Manitoba's Justice Minister one of my major goals is safe neighbourhoods throughout the province for child ren, senior citizens, visitors and for ordinary citizen s. Crime preve ntion is a prio rity of our Government and of my department. From a crime prevention point of view the most significant action taken in 1989-90 has been the impleme ntation of Canada's most com prehensive program against impaired driving.

We are the first province in Canada to introduc e an automa tic administrative licence suspension of drivers who are apprehended with a blood alcohol level of over .08, or who refuse to provide a breath sample. We are also the first jurisdiction in North America to impound, automatically, vehicles driven by suspended drivers. This program is tough and our Government is proud of that toughness. We believe our first respons ibility is to the thousands of drivers on Manitoba's streets and roads who obey the law, not to the few who do not.

According to the office of the Chief Medical Examiner over 350 men, women and children have been killed in Manitoba over the past five years as a result of vehicle accidents that were alcohol related. We want that death toll to stop. Bill 3 is a major step. To be effective, justice must be accessible not just to a few but to all. To be cred ible, justice must not 5054 only be accessible but it must also be seen as accessible. To achieve that reality and that perception of reality is a major goal of the public inquiry into the Administration of Jus tice and Aboriginal People.

Public hearings into the first part of the inquiry's mandate to look at all aspects of how the justice system operates in relation to aboriginal people and whether there are alternative methods of dealing with aboriginal persons involved with the law were completed early in April. The inquiry's examination into the death of J. J. Harp er and the mu rder of He len Betty Osbo rne continued late into the fall. It has been a process fraught with controversy and tragedy, but I expect the inquiry's report, which is expected in 1990-1991, to tell us a lot about our justice system.

I believe it will be very important to the future of the delivery of justice in this province, not just for our aboriginal citizens but for all Manitobans. I believe it has already made an important contribution to the system, not only by increasing the public's knowledge of how the system does work but by raising the public's expectations as to how it should work. To demo nstrate how important public expectations are to the functioning of the justice system one need only compare the Estima tes we are about to review today with those of 20 or 30 years ago.

Then there was no unified family court, family law branch or maintenance enforcement program; no Aboriginal Justice Inquiry or court communicators; no Victim Witness Assistance or Child Abuse Witness Programs; no Crim inal Injur ies Com pensat ion Board, Law Enforcement Review Agency or Huma n Rights Commission; no Constitutional Law Branch and no Charter of Rights. These parts of our justice system have evolved because the public has come to see them as important. The partnership that is the modern justice system must reflect evolving public expectations.

These Estima tes reflect those expectations both now and for the future. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman: Thank you. At this time we will allow time for the critic from the official Opposition Party, the Honourable Mem ber for St. James (Mr. Edwards), to make an opening statement. Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Chairman, might I ask at the outside how much time we have? Mr. Chairman: The time will end at 2:55 p.m. Mr. Edwards: I would like to thank the Min ister of Jus tice (Mr. McCrae) for his opening comments.

I will keep my comments as brief as possible to allow time for the Mem bers from the third Party also to have some time to make a statement. In this process we, of course, will be asking further questions of the Minister in this department in the concurrence debate. Such are the vagaries of the Estima tes process which I am learning all too well. However, I do note that this department is an extremely important one in the work of the Government and in the life of the people of Manitoba. It in no way reflects

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 the way that certainly our Party feels about this department, that there are only some 20 or 30 minutes to discuss it. We will be pursuing all of the lines of que stioning in the concurrence debate that we would normally do in Estimates. Mr. Chairman, as for the department itself and the performance of this Minister, I want to start by talking about some of the successes. I think as a Party and as a critic it is important to be responsible in recognizing some of the successes of the department as well as the failures.

The obvious successes, some of them are still before us in respect to the family law package which is presently before the House. It is about time that something got done on that front. I think we are all looking forward to seeing some of that legislation in place. With respect to the Aboriginal Ju stice Inqui ry, I do count that as a success, Mr. Chairman. I think it went through, as the Minister has indicated , many trials and tribulations and problems, and we very much look forward to the report of the commissioners.

I think it was important going through that process, that all political Parties basically respected the view that we would not comment on the day-to-day activities of that commission to allow the commission to do its work in a full and complete way and come forward with its report. We as much as possible sought not to have that enter the political forum except to give them a statute whereby they could continue their work.

As well, I must say that certainly some of the more pressing problems when this Minister took office, not particularly in the last year, but the Land Titles Office was a horrendous mess when this Government took office. There is no que stion that the times have been reduced. The burning question will be whether or not those times continue to be reduced when we actually have some house sales, seeing as the market has genera lly declined. We have learned tod ay, and it has come up in the House, that it is about as bad as it has ever been in this province.

It may not be a particularly good time to draw final conclusions on the success of the Land Titles Office. However, I do have confidence certainly in the staff at the Land Titles Office and there is no question that the times have been taken down. Some of the failures that have come to light in the last year-I have remarked many times on the problems with gun control. I know that this is primarily a federal matter. However, there is room for action on the provincial front.

It is something I have called on this Minister to do repeatedly, both with respect to the retailers of guns but also with respect to lobb ying his federal counterpart to actually do something to make sure that the Firearm Acquisition Certificate Program works and to make some progr essive changes in the restricted weapons and in particular, of course, some form of verifying mental ability to handle a restricted weapon. I have made my views clear on that.

With respect to the police in this province, which the Minister is also responsible for as the province 's chief law enforcement officer, there are obviously problems which continue to exist, in particular the relationship between the rural-urba n municipalities and the rural municipalities the mselves, and working out the policing cost in the face of a federal Government that is generally withdrawing from this area in terms of financing. I think it is going to be a great challenge. So far we have a report that has been produc ed but there has not been a solution to that problem.

Corrections on its own has legion problems. I do not believe that our correctional system is living up to anywhere near what it could be and should be. That does not make us unique in this country, unfortunately . However, it is something that we, I do not think, can let rest.

We must deal with Corrections in a way that allows us to stay true to the principle of rehabilitation as the most important goal, aside from protection of the pu blic. * (14 40) With respect to victims and victims' assistance, we saw in April of last year a Treasury Board edict put an absolute ban on payments out of the Victims Assistance Fund to vict ims groups, which was

part icu larly proble matic, because those groups were to get funding for the short term from the Victims Assistance Fund in one, perhaps two, years. With a year's work behind them many of these groups were cut off for the second year, thus seriously eroding some of the preliminary work they had done. That edict has been withdrawn and the ban has been lifted only recently. We have seen some payments out of that Victims Assistance Fund. However, it seems to be trickling out.

I do not suggest being irresponsible in making payments, but I happen to know that there are many, many groups worthy of funding who are still waiting. The Minister mentions crime prevention, and he says he has taken a significant step in crime prevention by bringing in Bill No. 3. I might also add that I think his road signs are a bit misleading. It says Bill No. 3; it is actually Bill No. 3 and Bill No. 54, because it took another Bill to get it right for this Government. So they � are a bit misleading, but I will leave that for what it is.

The drinking and driving initiative is no doubt a deterrent and to that extent it may prevent some crimes. Crime prevention as a study does not base itself on deterrents. Crime prevention is just that. It is prevention through more soph isticated means than deterrents alone. The Criminal Code and the penal statutes deter. Crime prevention is far more than that and I was very disappointed this year that the Minister did not take the opportunity to attend a conference in Montreal for legislators, which follo wed the conference his representatives went to.

It was a very much legislatively oriented one-day seminar in Montreal. Because he did not go, I was allowed to go, so I am thankful for that, but on the other hand I think he might have learned a bit about crime prevention and what it really is and can be. Court reporters-we have a shortage in this province. We have to look at, I think, finding some way of perhaps training our own. They are trained in Edmo nton and 5055

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 Vancouver, but in large part they end up staying there, it turns out, at least in recent years, and we do have to deal with that. With respect to the Court of Appeal, we have a vacancy. I look forward to an appointment being made and I have repeatedly called for some form of reporting device in the Court of Appeal. Mr.

Chairman, I think with that I will pass on to my colleague the Justice Critic for the third Party and simply indicate again that I know this Minister has indicated, and he did at Elkho rn way back in his first speech which I attended, to the Manitoba Bar Association, when he said that access to justice was going to mark his term. He has come some ways; there is a long way to go. I was very disappointed in particular at his recent decision not to allow anyone, and not just himself, to pursue any action on the racist pins and the racist docume nts which have entered this province, but to bar others.

I do not think that is consistent with access to justice. Mr. Chairman, with that I will close. Mr. Chairman: At this time I would recognize the critic for the Second Op position Party, the Ho nourable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill), to make an opening statement. Ms. Maureen Hemphill (Logan): Opening and closing I think in this case. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is interesting that the major points that the Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccrae) raises about being very proud of are in the area of crime prevention.

I know that there have been some attempts to make some improvements in some areas, but this would also be the area that I would select as being one of the gr eatest disappointments in terms of really strong action by the Government. When they brought in their drinking and driving legislation we know that it took a very strong, tough stand on drinking and driving. We were all in supp ort of that I think, all the legislators in the Chamber. All the Parties suppor ted it, and we know that it is helping, but we also know that it is not enough.

What we have is a Government that on the one hand is giving very tough messages about drinking and driving and very, very tough fines and penalties if you do it, and we do not object to that, but doing very, very little, in fact almost nothing, with the $10 million increased revenue that is coming in to deal with the question of prevention. The qu estion of prevention, as my colleague said, does not just deal with fines, does not just deal with how you deal with them when they have committed a crime, but the prevention.

We are looking at education, we are looking at treatment; we have no treatment centre, we have no place for people to go, they have to go to another province.

So some of the money that is coming from increased reven ues from some of the increased sales they are going to get thr ough their credit cards, from their cheque cashing, making it easier to get liquor, should be used for both education and prevention so that we are dealing with the effects of drinking and driving, not just taking drunk drivers off the road. 5056 We also were very concerned about this Government and this Minister's handling of the Victims Assistance Committee-felt that it was an excellent committee.

It took a while to get going but it was just at the point where really excellent proposals were coming in and being supported. I think that one of the things they wanted to do was perhaps take the money that was coming to that committee, about a million dollars, and take it into provincial revenues and have more direct control over the expenditur es of that money. I think that there was a study done by this Minister, and it is our understanding that the people that responded to the interim study said that 2 to 1 were really very, very critical of the study.

I am wondering and will be anxious to hear if this Governm ent is intending to really continue to support the work being done by the Victims Assistance Committee. We also were very disappointed in the Minister's decision not to apply for the injunction for the pins through the Criminal Code or even through the Human Rights Code, since I think both were open to him. To have made the decision, and this is one that gets to the heart of the jud icial system really, is the question of having access to the courts to determine questions where there may be differences of opinion between lawyers.

I think in this case, to have received the opinion of lawyers in his department who said they did not think that it would stand up or that it would get the injunction, was not adequate. If the Minister did not want to do it himself he should not have closed it off to the public, to have had access to the courts to determine, to have a judge and the courts determine whether that was racist material, because if all that was required was a lawyer to look at it and say it is or it is not, we would not need courts. We would not need a whole judicial system, we would just need one lawyer to give an opinion.

The injunction should have been asked for, and it should have gone to the courts for resolution. I think there is another area of concern. It was raised yesterday by a num ber of people who were talking about not being adequately or properly-or being misrepresented by a lawyer, and the problems that they encounter when they cannot get satisfaction from the lawyer and they also cannot get satisfaction from the Law Society.

I do not have a lot of solutions there, but just to raise the question, I think that something needs to be done for the protection of people when the society that is the responsible one for policing itself does not deal with misrepresentation and with very legitimate complaints, does not seem to be doing that adequately. The whole question of the public having some right to protection from professional incompetence is something that I think should be looked at. In terms of the family law, I think we all want to see imp rovements there and that there are some improvements.

I just wish to bring to the Attorney General's (Mr. Mccrae) attention that there are women's groups and organizations that have had a lot of involvement in the development of the law as it exists today and have been I think a very important part of bringing in and changing the law. There are some concerns that they do have in spite of wanting it to go

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 ahead and wanting the improvements. They have some amend ments that they would like to be made and we would just ask that there be an open mind when that opportunity comes, because we think some of the recommendations they are going to be making will improve the legislation that you want to put through. *

(1450) I want to make one other point about safety and crime prevention. The Attorney General (Mr . McCrae) talked about safe neighbourhoods and that one of the things they were working for was safe neighbourhoods, one of the most important things, and to that end he sugg ested that the drinking and driving law was giving us safe neighbourhoods. Well, I think it is giving us safe streets.

I think that is what is it giving us, and I suppose some of the streets are in neighbo urhoods, so you migh t take it as far as to sugges t safe neighbo urhoods, but when you are dealing with the qu estion of safe neighbourhoods, it is not drinking and driving that is going to help us. It is progressive programs like the commu nity-based policing program that has been piloted in the inner city, is now being piloted, has demo nstrated that the crime rates are going down when the police are on the streets, in the neighbourh oods, know the people, getting to know the kids.

Most of the crimes that are committed are done between kids 18 - and 25-years-old, and a lot of the reason, some of the reason is because they have nothing else to do.

I guess I am saying that if the Minister and the Go vernment is re ally concerned about safe neighbourhoods they certainly need to be looking at a broader programming than just getting drunk drivers off the streets, and looking at being very sup portive I think in whatever way that he can to the city and the police department to expand, and not wait for another two or th ree years from our pilo t projects to demonstrate the value, but to expand community-based policing. Then we would really be moving I think a long way toward improving the safety of our neighbourhoods. Mr.

Chairman: At this point, we would invite the Minister's staff to join us at the table for consideration of these Estimates. We would ask the Minister to introduce his staff. Mr. Mccrae: Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate, I take it- maybe I could introduce the remainder of the staff at the back of the room as we go through line by line, but I do not know that is going to happen. I see my colleague, the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Albert Driedger), here waiting for his Es timates to be considered.

I know he is as anxious as I am to talk at length about the very positive things that are going on in his department just as I am about mine. I have asked two officials to come forward at this point. Mr. Pat Sinnott is our Director of Finance and Adm inistration. It gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce you to our new Deputy Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Mr. Graeme Garson, Q.C. I do not think he needs any introduction. I know everyone around this table knows who he is and knows something of his background. We are just very pleased as a department to have Mr. Garson on board.

We know that will bode well for the department. In their opening comments, Honourable Mem bers referred to a num ber of items. I have made note of them. I realize time is short today. I have made note of them, and I take their comments ser ious ly. I appreciate the positive comments they made, but I also recognize that there is always more work to be done.

I do recognize what Honourable Mem bers have said, not to say I would not like to debate each and every point they have raised because I would, but I will not take the time out of respect for the opportunity for Honourable Mem bers in the next five or six minutes to ask qu estions. Ho pefu lly the y will be pointed qu estions and brief qu estions. I know I would like to have some time left for the Honourable Minister of Government Services (Mr.

Albert Driedger) so we could deal with his Estima tes, as well as the Estimates relating to Canada-Manitoba Enabling Vote, Flood Control, Emergency Expenditures, and on and on and on. It is unfortunate that these two Honourable Mem bers could not get their colleagues to understand that justice in Manitoba is a very, very important matter. The Department of Justice needs to be heard from, but be that as it may, maybe these Mem bers will climb up the ladders in their caucuses and have a little more say next year. Mr.

Chairman: Item 1 deals with Admin istration and Finance: Provides execu tive direction and co ordination of Department programs. Provides research and planning services; central accounting, bud getary and financial services; personnel administration; records management; system dev elopme nt and comp uter services; and communication services to all divisions. Item (

a) Minister's Salary will be deferred until the consideration of the rest of these Estimates. Item (

b) Executive Sup port:

(1) Salaries $301 ,700- the Member for St. James. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, specific to my comments before, is the Minister prepared at this point to table the opinion he received with respect to proceeding under the Criminal Code against the recent racist material which has entered the Province of Manitoba? Has he had a chance to discuss it with his colleagues, and is he willing to table that docu ment? Mr. Mccrae: I thank the Honourable Mem ber for the qu estion. It is unfortunate that the Honourable Memb er for St. James (Mr. Edwards) and indeed also the Honourable Mem ber for Logan (Ms.

Hemphill) should show such a lack of confidence in the expertise in the Department of Justice. We have, in the Department of Ju stice, the best lawyers in this province and as far as prosecutorial expertise the best lawyers in this whole coun try. I am quite confident that the advice that I am getting is sound and good. 5057

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 The Honourable Mem ber for St. James might be interested in knowing that I had occasion this morning to meet with the B'Nai B'rith League, representatives of the Sikh commun ity, and a representative of the Manitoba Association of Rights and Liberties. We had a long and productive meeting -I suggest a fruitful meeting. Maybe the Honourable Mem ber has no confidence in what is going on in the Department of Justice, but the people I met with this morning left that meeting feeling satisfied that we were handling this issue as sensitively as is possible under the circumstances. Mr.

Edwards: On the contrary, Mr. Chairman, I also have a lot of respect and confidence in the lawyers who work for the department. It is for that reason that I would like to see their opinion, because I am very interested to read it and I may well be convinced. I gather that the Minister's answer is no, he is not willing to do that. For that reason I will- � Mr. Chairman: Order, please. I am interrupting the , proceedings of this

section of the Comm ittee of Supply because the total time al lowed for Estima tes consideration has now expired. Our Rule 64. 1(1) provides, in part, that not more than 240 hours shall be allowed for the consideration, in Committee of the Whole, of ways and means and supply resolutio ns respecting all types of Estimates and of the relevant Supply Bills.

Our Rule 64.1 (3) provides that where the time limit has expired, the Chairperson shall forthwith put all remaining questions necessary to dispose of the matter, "and such questions shall not be su bject to debate, amend ment or adjournment." I am, the refore, now going to call in seque nce the questions on the following matters: The Department of Justice, Resolutions 95 to 101; the Department of Government Services, Resolutions 58 to 64; the Canada-Manitoba Enabling Vote, Resolution 141; Flood Control and Emerge ncy Expenditures, Resolution 14 2; � Allowances for Losses and Expenditures Incurred By , Crown Corporations, Resolution 143; General Salary Increases, Resolution 14 4.

I would remind Mem bers that these questions may not be debated, amended or adjourned, according to the Rules of the House. Resolution No. 95: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $4,553,000 for Justice, Admin istration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 96: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty-on a point of order, the Mem ber for St. James. ***** Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, perhaps you can give me some guidance on this.

I am not familiar with the Rules of the concurrence debate, but it was my understanding that we would move in and at the end of the concurrence 5058 debate these motions on all of the remaining mon ies available would be passed at that time. Mr. Chairman: Yes. My direction is that we will pass these motions at this time and there will be a separate concurrence motion brought to the House. ***** Mr. Chairman: Resolution No. 96: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $6,71 8,000 for Justice, Criminal Ju stice, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. ***** Mr.

Chairman: The Honourable Member for St. James, on a point of order. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, if we are out of time, how can we be continuing to vote on items before the committee? Mr. Chairman: I quoted to you Rules 64. 1(1) and 64.1( 3) earlier, which states as procedure is as we are now doing. The Mem ber does not have a point of order. ***** Mr. Chairman: Resolution No. 97: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $5, 109,600 for Justice, Legal Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990- pass.

Resolution No. 98: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $38, 18 3,200 for Ju stice, Law Enforcement, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 99: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $21 ,267,700 for Ju stice, Court Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990- pass. Resolution No. 100: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $22,807, 10 0 for Ju stice, Protection of Individual and Pro perty Rights, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 101: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $43,814,0 00 for Ju stice, for Corrections, for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 19 90- pass. ***** SUP PLY-GO VERNMENT SERVICES Mr. Chairman: Resolution No. 58: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,209,700 for Government Services, Adm inistration, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 Resolution No. 59: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 1 7, 568,900 for Government Services, Property Management, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1990-p ass. *

(1500) Resolution No. 60: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 ,052,800 for Government Services, Supply and Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990-pass. Resolution No. 61: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,882,000 for Government Services, Project Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 62: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $52,600 for Go vernment Services, Land Value Ap praisal Commission, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990- pass. Resolution No. 63: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $7 1 5,500 for Government Services, Disaster Assistance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 64: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $25,30 1, 10 0 for Government Services, Expenditures Related to Capital, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990- pass. SUP PLY-CANADA-MAN ITOBA ENABLING VOTE Mr. Chairman: Resolution No. 141: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $24,71 4,300 for Canada- Manitoba Enabling Vote, Canada-Manitoba Ena bling Vote, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. SUP PLY-FLOOD CONT ROL AND EMERGENCY EXPEN DITURES Mr.

Chairman: Resolution No. 14 2: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1, 700, 000 for Flood Control and Eme rgency Expenditures, Flood Control and Em ergency Expenditures, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 19 90- pass. SUPPLY-ALL OWANCE FOR LOSSES AND EXPE NDITURES INCU RRED BY CRO WN CORP ORA TIONS AND OTH ER PRO VINCIAL ENTITIES Mr.

Chairman: Resolution No. 14 3: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,400,000 for Allowance for Losses and Expenditures Incurred by Crown Corporations and Other Provincial Entities, Allowance for Losses and Expenditures, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990- pass. SUP PLY-G ENERAL SALARY INCREA SES Mr. Chairman: Resolution No. 144: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $14 ,000,000 for General Salary Increases for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

That concludes our consideration of the Estimates in this committee. I would like to thank the Minister and the critics for their co-operation. Thank you. Committee rise. SU PPLY-EDUCA TION AND TRAI NING The Acting Chairman (Mr . Gaudry): Would the Committee of Supply come to order, please. This

section of the Comm ittee of Supply has been dealing with the Estima tes of the Department of Education. We are on item 7. Bureau de !'education Franc;:aise, (

a) Division Administration:

(1) Salaries $95,400, shall the item pass-the Honourable Mem ber for Sturgeon Creek. Mrs. Iva Yeo (Sturgeon Creek): Last year at the end of Edu cation Estima tes, I met the Assistant Deputy Minister of this department on the stairs and asked about the state of the court hearing. He assured me that it was pending. I think we are still waiting for judgme nt to have been made. I am wondering if it is still pending. Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): The ruling was received by my department this morning at eleven o'clock, Mr. Acting Chairman. Mrs.

Yeo: I supposA it is too early to anticipate the Minister sharing the ruling with us at this time. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Acting Chairman, it is far too early for us to have done any sort of analysis on the ruling. Indeed, it took the Court of Appeal some 15 months to come up with the decision. It is certainly not a clear decision, from my understanding of it, in one way or another, and certainly there are many aspects of it that will have to be analyzed and reviewed.

I would reserve comment until such time that we have had ample time to look at it very carefully, because certainly it is a very important ruling for the province and especially for the Francophone communit y. * (14 20) Mrs. Yeo: I am delighted, and I do not argue at all with that response.

The French graduate studies students' grant to study in Manitoba-some $28,000 is an ongoing grant am not sure whether this should have been under the previous appropriation or not, but I am wondering if there is a similar grant from France as well to entertain Manitoba students going over to France to study, as well as ours that entertains French students to come to Manitoba. Mr. Derkach: The grant of $28,000 is given to two French nationals who study in Manitoba at the post- 5059

Tuesday, February "'6, 1990 graduate level. In return the Government of France pays tuition fees and lodging costs for 18 teachers from Manitoba, who are allowed to study there for four weeks during the summer months. Mrs. Yeo: If there was a grant the other way as well, if there was a grant that the French Government had for our students to go and study in France, if we are in fact encouraging French students to come to- Mr. Derkach: Mr.

Acting Chairman, the reciprocity, if you like, is in the tuition and in the lodging costs that are paid for by the French Government for 18 of our Manitoba teachers going to France. Mrs. Yeo: A few years ago Dr.

Arthur LeBlanc of the University of Manitoba Continu ing Ed Department stated some concerns about the English track un iversities, or the predom inantly Eng lish track universities, not being able to keep up with the French Im mersion student graduates from the various French Im mersion programs throughout the province or even from the franc;:aise programs, although I think a lot of those students in fact go on to St. Bon iface College.

I asked questions with regard to increasing French courses, the availability of French courses at our English universities during last year's Estimates, and I wondered if there had been any progress, any new programs that were organized at the various English universities in the province. llllr. Derkach: Mr. Acting Chairman, that is a decision that is really in the area of universities to make, and I supp ose if the demand is there that is then up to the un iversity to make that kind of judgme nt and then follow up with action. The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): Item 7.(

a) Division Administration:

(1) Salaries, $95,400-p ass; 7.(a)

(2) Other Expenditures, $22,200-(p ass); 7.(

b) Curriculum Dev elopme nt and Impl eme ntation:

(1) Salaries, $860,600-pass; (b)

(2) Other Expenditures, $1 77, 10 0- pass; 7.(

c) Educatio nal Sup port Services:

(1) Salaries, $234,800-pass; (c)

(2) Other Expenditures, $69,700- pass; (c)

(3) Assistance, $1 ,002,700- pass; 7.(

d) Official Languages Programs and Administrative Services:

(1) Salaries, $370,500 -p ass; (d)

(2) Other Expenditures, $41 0,900- pass; (d)

(3) Assistance, $456,400- pass; (

e) Library and Materials Prod uct ion:

(1) Salarie s, $378,000-pass. Item 7.(e)

(2) Othe r Expenditures, $1 67,400-the Honourable Mem ber for Flin Flon. Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Acting Chairman, I am wondering why there has not been an increase in this particular area. It is one of the areas where clearly the Department of Education has lagged behind in the provision of materials, particularly library materials, to the various francaise immersion programs as well as to libraries in general. I am wondering ii the Minister can indicate what the $167,000 currently provides, by way of materials.

What other expenditures are we talking about there, and is 5060 this particular portion of the budget sup ported by the federal Government in exactly the same way as all the other sections? Is the Minister satisfied that the amount of money that is being spent is meeting the needs of the increasing num bers of students who are taking French progr amming of one sort or another? Mr. Derkach: First of all, the types of materials that are sup ported under this kind of appropriation are books, films, videos, resource material, and indeed the federal Government pays 50 percent of these costs.

The Mem ber asks the qu estion why this area was not increased. I have to indicate to him that his Government, under the most recent Minister in his Government, Mr. Penner I believe, as a matter of fact cut out of their budg et the French language bursary program for teachers. When you talk about French Im mersio n programs and the necessity of French services, certainly this was a serious cutback on behalf of the former Government.

I have to indicate to you that we have reinstated that program, a program which I think is very important for Francopho ne Manitobans and for French language teachers in this province. In that area we have as a matter of fact increased our support to the French services of this province and indeed this is an area that we will be considering over the next course of a few months. * (14 30) The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): Item 7.(e)

(2) Other Expenditures, $1 67,400 -p ass. Resolution No. 34: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $4,245, 700 for Education and Training for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March 1990- pass. Item 8. Expe nd itures Related to Capital, (

a) Acquisition/Construction of Physical Assets:

(1) Red River Commu nity College, $930,000-the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. Mrs. Yeo: What I wanted to ask was a question about the South Winnipeg Technical Centre related to taxes. I did ask a question not too long ago, within the past week, about the fact that South Winnipeg Tech has requested exemption as a public school in the province, because in fact they are under the jurisdiction of Assiniboine South, Fort Garry and St. Vital School Divisions.

I und erstand there has been correspondence which I have not seen, but between the South Winnipeg Tech and the Minister's Office and I believe the Minister said that this was out of his responsibil ity, that in fact it was a city thing. Some individuals in the finance department of SWTC believe that there is a provincial hook here in that they should be granted the same as public schools in the province, and in fact it is a public school. Mr. Derkach: I do not recall any kind of correspondence between my office and South Winnipeg Technical Institute with regard to this issue and indeed my staff

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 do not have any recollection of that kind of information either. I will take that question as notice and I will get back to the Mem ber. We will research to see whether or not there is some corr espondence that perhaps I am not aware of at this time. Mrs. Yeo: Mr. Acting Chairman, I have a dreadful copy of a letter that was written on December 12, 19 89, to the Minister. I do not have a response from the Minister. I would be pleased to pass it across the House right now if the Min ister wishes.

In it the individuals from South Winnipeg Tech have requested some assistance, because it is my understanding that these people have not paid taxes because they have felt that they were the same as other public schools throughout the province. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Acting Chairman, this certainly is an issue that I have to indicate is somewhat new to me. I would certainly like to take that question again as notice and be able to do some research on it in terms of what it is the specific request is for.

If it is a taxation issue, it is one that probably has to do with the South Winnipeg Tech and the city and really not between the South Winnipeg Technical Institute and the province. If there is some dispute there, certainly I am not aware of the details of it and would be prepared to take it as notice and get back to the Mem ber. Mrs. Yeo: Well I would have thought this was something to do with the Public Schools Finance Board because of the issue.

The capital buildings projects that were stated in 19 87 for Winnipeg No. 1 School Division indicated that the 19 87 project was the replacement of Champlain School, the demolition of the old building. The 19 88 project was the replacement of Margaret Scott School with the demolition of the old building and the 19 89 project was the replacement of Robe rt H. Smith School with the demolition of the old building. I am wondering what happened to the 1988 project? What was the 1988 project that was und ertaken on behalf of Winnipeg No. 1 School Division? Mr. Derkach: Mr.

Acting Chairman, this gives me the op portun ity perhaps to stand in my place and rebut some of the allegations that were made by the Mem ber for lnks ter (Mr. Lamoureux) who ind icated that we are not respon ding to the capital needs of Winnipeg School Division in an adequate way. I have to tell you that in fact Margaret Scott was denied as a project, a capital project, for Winnipeg School Division. The Mem ber for lnks ter knows that. Mr. Acting Chairman.

Winnip eg School Division was told very specifically by the Public Schools Finance Board to name another project in place of Margaret Scott, because Margaret Scott School was denied. They were told that repeatedly. To date we have not had Winnipeg School Division come forth to rename their capital project for 19 88, and, yes, they are still eligible. However, a letter is going out to them to indicate that we need to know fairly soon what their replacement project is, because if they do not intend to name one, then we have to move ahead with other plans. Mr. Acting Chairman, the Member for lnks ter (Mr.

Lamoureux) also indicated when he came to see my special assistant, that Winnipeg School Division was not giving him the information. For that reason he came to my office to secure the accurate information on capital plans for Winnip eg School Division No. 1. ***** The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): The Honourable Member for lnks ter, on a point of order. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (l nkster): On a point of order, I hope I will get an opportunity to ask a direct question that will contradict what the Minister has just finished saying.

I take offence to the fact that at no time did I say that Winnipeg School Division No. 1 was not co operating with myself. I would ask that the Min ister withdraw those remarks. The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): The Honourable Mem ber does not have a point of order. The Honourable Min ister. ***** * (14 40) Mr. Derkach: Thank you, Mr. Acting Chairman. Yes, indeed, he did ind icate that, and for that reason I instructed my assistant to co-operate and to give him the kind of information that he would need, simply information that would be, I thought, used for his own enlig htenment.

Indeed, the Mem ber then used that information as a basis for his grievance that he raised in this House. That was fairly interesting, Mr. Acting Chairman, and it indicates why we impose the rule that was set, not by us, but by a former Government, that if a ML A wants information, then that information should be sought through the Minister's Office, because it clearly puts staff in a very, very awkward position when this is the � kind of game that is played. � Mr . Acting Chairman, I have to tell you very emphatically that we have examined all aspects of the situation around Margaret Scott School.

The criteria that are applied to Margaret Scott are those that are applied to all other capital facilities in this province. There are some 400 vacant spaces in surro unding schools in that area, 400 vacant spaces that could be filled. Mr. Acting Chairman, it would be an unwise use of taxpayer dollars if we were to ignore the spaces that are available at Isaac Newton or any of the other three schools and then construct a brand new school to replace Margaret Scott. It would be an irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars. That is something that the Mem ber for lnks ter (M r. Lamoureux) does not un derstan d. Mr.

Acting Chairman, I have to indicate to you as well that Winnipeg No. 1 was given the opportunity to replace one school per year. That was to take care of 5061

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 the deteriorating condition of the schools that exist in Winnipeg School Division No. 1. They -(interjection) the Mem ber for Ellic e (Ms. Gray) says, yes, and they gave you Margaret Scott, but Margaret Scott did not fit the criteria. Is that so difficult to unde rstand? Why did they not fit the criteria? Because there were a num ber of spaces available in surro unding schools where students could be accommodated and that is basically the reason. An Honourable Member: Let us be fair about this. Let us be fair. The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): Order, please.

We are on Capital Expenditures, and please do not deviate. Mr. Derkach: That is right. I will try to keep my remarks specifically to Capital Expenditures, which involves the repl acement of schools. Mr. Acting Chairman, the Mem ber for Sturgeon Creek (Mrs. Yeo) has stood in her place several times and asked questions about Margaret Scott School, and I have tried to address those questions in the most fair and the most up-front way that I can. If the criteria are applied equally across the province, th ere is no argument.

If there is new information that we do not know. if there is a new influx of people into that area which will take up all the vacant spaces, then, yes, we will take another at this particular facility. There are other ways to address the crying needs in that particular area of deteriorating schools. We have ind icated that Winnipeg School Division No. 1 should name another project to replace Margaret Scott School. Indeed, if there are schools that are falling down in that area-and we know there are old schools in there-they have the opportunity to name another facility to be replaced. Mr.

Acting Chairman, I do not know how the Public Schools Finance Board can deal more fairly with anyone than they have with Winnipeg School Division No. 1. They have dealt with Winnipeg School Division No. 1 in the same way that they have dealt with St. James or Birdtail River or Assiniboine South. The criteria must be the same. Yes, we acknowledge the fact that there is a need for spaces in some of our su burban areas because the schools are growing.

Wherever possible and as quickly as possible we have a program where high quality relocatable units can be put on in a matter of months so that we can accommodate the students as quickly as possible. Mr. Acting Chairman, I would be happy to sit down with Winnipeg School Division No. 1 to discuss all of these issues, we have in the past. The Public Schools Finance Board has discussed the issues with them, and we are prepared to do that at any, any time. Mrs.

Just on one last round here regarding the Fort Garry School Division and the area of Whyte Ridge, the Minister did send me a letter in June of'89 stating that Whyte Ridge school was on the drawing boards. 5062 I un derstand he has actually seen some plans. I have also received some statistics just in the last-well 23rd of Janu ary, indicating that Whyte Ridge continues to grow at a rate of approximately 25 percent per six month period. There are now over 600 occupied homes. There are 265 preschool age children and there are almost 300 children in the K to 6 category.

There are also children in the Grades 7 and 8 category that they have no t been reco rding, because it was the un derst anding that there would be a K to 6 school. The people of Whyte Ridge, I un derstand, would prefer to have a K to 8 school in light of the fact that the High School Review recommends high school to be 9 to 12. They consid er the fact that perhaps a K to 8 school might be more advantageous if in fact the Min ister is going to recommend the 9 to 12 aspect for high schools.

I wonder if the Minister has recently reviewed the num bers of ho uses in that it is an affordable type of settlement, if you will, far more affordable for young families than is for example a place like Lindenwoods, which I believe is having its second school bu ilt. It is a very family orie nted type of commun ity. Some of those children are on the bus for a sign ificant length of time. Many of the families have to be split up. In other words, there would be a child in Kindergarten, a child in Grade 3 and perhaps a child in Grade 6, each of those children in different schools.

I think this is an area that requ ires immed iate atten tion unde r the heading of Capital Expenses. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Acting Chairman, the Member is right. There was some approval given to Fort Garry School Division to hire or get the services of an architect to start planning for the school. I have to indicate to the Mem ber that there has been no formal approval as such given, but they were told that they could hire the services of an architect to start planning for the school.

Whether the school is K to 6 or K to 8 is certainly something that is up to the local school division to decide and certainly something the Public Schools Finance Board will look at once the proposal comes before them. The numb er of students in that area we un derstand is 15 0 and not over 300 as the Member indicates. Those are the num bers that the Public Schools Finance Board has to deal with at the present time. Yes, the project is one that is going to be needed, we un derstand that.

When the division was given approval to hire the services of an architect, as a matter of fact it took the school division a considerable length of time, some six months I believe, to take that step. Therefore, I think the Public Schools Finance Board did react as quickly as they could in a very timely fashion. Then there is some responsibility on the school division to take it from there. Mrs. Yeo: The nu mber that I have is 532 children on this particular print-out that I received on the 23rd of January 19 90.

I would suggest that there was some degree of urgency and recommend that some Sunday afternoon the Min ister hop in his car and take a drive

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 around there and see the num ber of children who are playing on the empty school ground and the number of young children who are up and down the street. That is an area that requires in my opinion immediate attention. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Acting Chairman, I can only give the Memb er the total as they are gathered by the school division and by the Public Schools Finance Board. I can tell the Member at the present time there are 15 0 students being transpor ted to two other schools from that area. Mr. Lamoureux: Just a very quick, brief que stion. The Minister of Education (Mr .

Derkach) says that it is not his role to dictate policy to Winnipeg No. 1, or indeed to any school division. When a school division wants to replace, and has put as a top priority the replacement of Margaret Scott School, the reason why it was not changed is because the board has decided that they did not want to change it. I would suggest to you that it is not the Winnipeg No. 1 school board that is making policy decision.

In fact it is the board, because if the board can deny the funds in order for the school board to go ahead with it even though the school board itself has made a conscience decision to go ahead and have that school replaced. The Public Finance Board is the one that denied the project's green light. I cannot for the life of me see how the Minister of Education (Mr . Derkach) can state that it is not the Public Finance Board that is dictating policy when in fact in this particular case they are dictating policy. * (1 450) Mr. Derkach: Mr. Acting Chairman, the Member for lnks ter (Mr .

Lamoureux) does not understand an appropr iate procedure of following a criteria that is set do wn. The Publi c Schools Finance Board has a replacement program policy in place, which says that if a school division applies for a project then that project is then subject to full assessment by the Public Schools Finance Board so it meets a set of criteria. If we did not apply any criteria then we would have schools springing up all over. There would not be any rationale to how schools sprung up throughout the province. Indeed, we would have new schools being closed and we have enough of that in the province.

We have enough of that in the Member for Stu rgeon Creek's (Mrs. Yeo) own area. In the St. James area the re are brand new schools, or basically new schools, which are closed. Why are they closed ? Perhaps becaus e there was not enough planning done beforehand, but also because the population is not there.

We are not going to build schools, regardless of where it is, whether it is in rural Manitoba or whether it is in the City of Brandon or the City of Winnipeg, we are not going to build schools in areas where there are not sufficient numbers of students, where the student numbe rs do not warrant and where indeed students can be accommodated very nicely and very adequately in neighbouring schools, schools which are less than a block away. In total there are four schools in this particular situation that are less than half a mile away. Mr.

Storie: I wanted to get into this debate because I believe as well that the Pub lic Schools Finance Board is setting policy here that is inconsistent with many of the other things that happen, not necessarily within the jurisd iction of the Public Schools Finance Board, but within the jurisdiction of the Department of Education and the Minister of Education. The Minister of Education has watched and school boards have had to in their opinion close schools in many school divisions throughout the province. They have done so because that was their decision.

They believed that was the most expedient, the most cost effective, and in educational terms the best for that particular school division. In no instance has the province interfered in the school divisions in the province to say, it would have been more econo mical if you closed that school and bussed those kids over there, or you should close that school, quit operating it, the operating costs are too high, you are wasting taxpayers' money.

In no instance that I am aware of has the Department of Edu cation told the school division in the interests of taxpayers -(interjection)- exactly, the school divisions make their decision, and there are many, many schools operating in the Province of Manitoba that are much smaller than the total school population that is available at Margaret Scott school. The fact of the matter is -(interjection)- Mr . Chairperson, the Minister wants to say, where is the closest school? The closest school is Isaac Newton. (interjection)- He waoted the closest school.

It is also a junior high school with other activities going on. The point I am making is, the school division is requir ed to make those calls as well. The province does not interfere in one instance, and the Public Schools Finance Board does in another. I am not saying for a minute that the public schools finance criteria are not reasonable in many respects, but the school trus tees were elected also to make those decisions. There is only so much money available from the province to make decisions with respect to capital. That is always the way it has been.

School divisions choose their priorities within the available resources provided through the Public Schools Finance Board. One hund red and eighty students, and that is the current popu lation at Margaret Scott school, is not an unreasonably small school- The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): I am interrupting the proceedings of this

section of the Com mittee of Suppl y, because consid eration has now expired. Our Rule 64( 1)(1) provides in part -(interjection)- Ord er, please; order , please. More than 240 hours shall be allowed for the consider ation in Committee of the Whole, and Ways and Means, and Supply Resolutions respecting all types of Estima tes and of the relevant Supply Bill. Our Rule 64( 1)(3) provides that where the time limit has expired, the Chairperson shall forthwith put all 5063

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 remaining questions necessary to dispose of the matter. Such qu estions shall not be su bject to deba te, amendment or adjournment. I am therefore now going to call in a sequence, the qu estions on the following matters: the remaining resolut ions in the Departm ent of Educ ation. the Department of Finance, the Department of Legislation, Executive Council, resolutions related to Supplementary Supply pursuant to the message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor tabled on December 13.

I would remind Mem bers that these questions may not be debated, amended or adjourned according to the Rules of the House. Resolution No. 35: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty the sum not exceeding $32, 145, 500 for Educ ation and Training for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. ***** Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Chairperson, on a point of order. The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): The Honourable Member for lnkster (Mr. Lamoureux), on a point of order. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.

Acting Chairperson, for the record I would like to suggest that the division on the official Opposition's position on all of these would be not to pass, that in fact our division would show that we would not be in support of passing it in this particular type of manner, but we can proceed at this point. ***** The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): Resolution No. 28: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $4,591 ,300 for Education and Training, Administration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. SUPPLY-LEGI SLATION The Acting Chairman (Mr.

Gaudry): Resolution No. 1: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3, 12 0,600 for Legislation, Other Assembly Expenditures, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 2: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,649,900 for Legislation, Provincial Auditor's Office, for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 1990- pass. Resolution No. 3: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $598,400 for Legislation, Ombudsman, for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 4: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $411 ,900 for Legislation, Elections Manitoba, for the fiscal year ending the 3is t day of March. 19 90- pass. 5064 SUPPLY-EXECUTIVE COUNCIL The Acting Chairman (Mr. Gaudry): Resolution No. 5: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,288,000 for Executive Council, General Admin istration, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. * (1 500) SUPP LY-FINANCE The Acting Chairman (Mr.

Gaudry): Resolution No. 49: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exce eding $850,8 00 for Finance, Administration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 50: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1, 51 7,000 for Finance, Treasury Division, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90-pa ss. Resolution No. 51 : RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $4,647,600 for Finance, Comptroller's Division, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 52: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $8,960,500 for Finance, Taxation Division, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990- pass. Resolution No. 53: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 ,532,5 00 for Finance, Federal-Provincial Relations and Research Division, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 54: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1, 11 8, 100 for Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90-pa ss. Resolution No. 55: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,238, 10 0 for Finance, Treasury Board Secretariat for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 56: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $248,800,0 00 for Finance, Tax Credit Payments for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1, 162 ,9 00 for Finance, Expenditures Related to Capital for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. SUPPLEME NTARY SUP PLY Mr. Chairman: Resolution No. 1: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a further sum not exceeding $1 ,000,000 for Agriculture, Manitoba Crop Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1990-pa ss. Resolution No. 2: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a further sum not exceeding $700,000

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 for Agriculture, Educa tion Tax Red uction Programs for Farmers for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 3: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a further sum not exceeding $650,000 for Co-operative Consumer and Corporate Affairs for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Resolution No. 4: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a further sum not exceeding $49,000,000 for Natural Resources, Regional Services for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass.

Resolution No. 5: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a further sum not exceeding $17 ,400,000 for Flood Control and Eme rgency Expenditures for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 19 90- pass. Resol ution No. 6: RESOL VED that there be granted to Her Majesty a further sum not exceeding $500,000 for Environmental Innovations Fund for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 90- pass. Committee rise. Call in the Spe aker. IN SESSION COMMI TTEE REPORT Mr. Neil Gaudry (Acting Chairman of Com mittees): Mr.

Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Mem ber for Ellice (Ms. Gray), that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. ***** Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader, what are your intentions? Hon. James Mccrae (G overnment House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call the Bills in the follo wing order: Bills 31, 70, 40, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 57, 59, 60, 73 and the remainder as listed on the Order Paper. The Honourable Mem ber for Flin Flon (Mr .

Storie) wants to have this repeated again. After 31, 70, 40, 47 to 52 inclusive, 57, 59, 60, 73. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS BILL NO. 31 -THE LA BOUR RELATIONS AMENDMENT ACT Mr. Speaker: On the prop osed mo tion of the Honourable Minister of Labour (Mrs. Hammond), Bill No. 31, The Labour Relations Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les relations du travail, standing in the name of the Honourable Mem ber for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the Mem ber for Elmwood will be available in several minutes. He had to leave the building. He has been called back. I am prepared to speak on several other Bills and, with leave, to allow the Mem ber to complete his remarks. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Elmwood? The Honourable Government House Leader. ***** Hon.

James Mccrae (Government House Leader): We would grant leave, but only under the follo wing circumstance. I unde rstand the Honourable Mem ber says the Ho nourable Mem ber for El mwood (M r. Malo way) would be back in seven minutes . (interjection)- We would like not to see a good part of the day go by without discussion of Bill 31. Bill 31 is the first Bill we are calling and we are not allowing it to stand. If the Honourable Mem ber for Flin Flon (Mr.

Storie) can tell me how soon the Honourable Mem ber for Elmwood would return, then perhaps we might allow that on the agreement that we would return to Bill 31 at such and such a time. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Mem ber for Flin Flon, on the same point of order. Mr. Storie: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the sup port of the Go vernment Ho use Leader. I will check immediately. Bill No. 40, which the Minister has also called, is standing in the name of the Mem ber for The Pas (Mr. Harapiak). If you want to proceed with that, I will immediately come back and give him a fixed time. Mr.

McCrae: I appreciate what the Honourable Mem ber for Flin Flon is saying, but as the Honourable Mem ber knows, speech length in this House is up to 40 minutes. I do not propose to wait 40 minutes to get on with Bill 31. I hope that is clear. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. ***** Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader. * (1 510 ) Mr. McCrae: So that we can accommodate here, if you could move imme diately to Bill 40 and th en immediately upon the Honourable Member for Elmwood (Mr .

Maloway) rising to speak on Bill 31, then we would revert to 31 and then resume the list as I laid it out, if that would be satisfactory. Agreed? Mr. Speaker: Is it agreed that we are going to change the lists around a little bit? We are going to start with 40, and I unde rstand we are going to go to 31, 70, 47, and so on and so on and so on. Mr. McCrae: 40, 31, 70, 40, 47. Mr. Speaker: Right, exactly how I said them. Is there leave of the House? We are changing the sequence, and it will read: 40, 31, 70, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52-the Honourable Government House Leader. 5065

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 Mr. Mccrae: Now that we see the Honourable Member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway)-and we have to always be careful not to make reference to Members being absent, we are not going to do that in this case-if we could refer to the list as I originally gave it to you , Your Honour , then we could carry on . Mr. Speaker: The list will be exactly as outlined the first time. BILL NO. 31-THE LABOUR RELATIONS AMENDMENT ACT (Cont'

d) Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Labour (Mrs. Hammond) , Bill No. 31 , The Labour Relations Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les relations du travail, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). POINT OF ORDER Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for The Pas, on a point of order. Mr. Harry Harapiak (The Pas): It is my understanding that we have made a decision to go with Bill 40. I have a few brief comments to speak on Bill 40, and I think it would give the Member for Elmwood a few minutes to -(interjection)- Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could proceed on Bill 40, and I would give the Member for Elmwood- Mr. Speaker: Order, please .

In order to assist the Honourable Member for The Pas, there had been a decision previous to the original one, which said they were going to move Bill No. 40 up. Then there was leave of the House to revert back to the original list that went out. So the first one on the list today is Bill No. 31. The Honourable Member for Flin Flon, on a point of order . Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): If I understand you correctly, the Member for The Pas is not losing his right to speak on Bill 40. Mr. Speaker: No, he does not lose his right . Mr. Storie: Okay. ***** Mr.

Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I am very pleased today on rathe r very short notice to stand and speak to Bill No. 31, which of course has been on the Order Paper now for some time. All of the Members of our caucus will eventually be addressing that particular Bill. Of course , we have some very definite ideas about how the Government should or should not proceed on this particular Bill. There is no question about it, that we have put on the recor d many, many times that we intend to go to the wall on this particular Bill and suffer the consequences on that.

We brought this Bill in a number of years ago , I believe four years ago now. At that time we had to resolve the question as to whether or not we should or should not proceed with it. There was some debate at that time and some representations made by some members of the union movement in opposition at that time to the Bill. In fact, over the period of a few years now that this Bill has been in place, the track record has proved to be somewhat successful.

I am told that people who did make representations in opposition to the Bill back a couple of years ago are now supporting the measure, supporting the Bill, and in fact do not favour a repeal of final offer selection. Mr. Speaker , the fact of the matter is, this particular Government has felt it necessary to respond to their friends in the business community who have not liked the concept of final offer selection from the very beginning. It remains to be seen how committed they are to fulfill their promise to the business community to repeal this particular Act.

I sense that there are a number of people in the Conservative Caucus who are not necessarily that wedded to the measure and who feel that perhaps it is sabre rattling on the part of the Government and an attempt really for the Government to appease their friends in the Chamber of Commerce and the business community who were wishing to have this repealed . Mr. Speaker, the history of this particular Bill has proven that it is a very workable measure.

Conceptually, when one thinks of it, when one looks back to the labour turmoil that we have had in this country over the last number of years, one has to come to a conclusion that there must be a better way to solve labour-management troubles and to avoid massive days lost in strike action , which benefit nobody, which benefit neither the workers in the company nor the management of the company. There have been cases where managements have gone out of business because of prolonged strikes. There have been cases where workers have suffered greatly because of strikes.

Strikes basically are a last resort and they are resorted to only when a resolution cannot be effected to a conflict. In today's world , in an enlightened environment, it only made sense to us at the time to try something that in fact was not new, something that had been tried in other jurisdictions, had been in practice I believe even at the University of Manitoba among the professors in the faculty association, something that had worked successfully , a concept whereby each party to the negotiations would bring in a final offer.

The final offer would be given to a selector who would pick an either/ or situation, would pick either the management's or the labour's proposal. That whole process, Mr. Speaker, is designed to make both parties reasonable in their offer, so you do not have a situation where one party is asking for a $5 an hour increase and the other party is offering 2 cents an hour. The proposal and the idea behind the proposal is to effect a solution whereby both parties will be reasonable. 5066

Tuesday, February 6, 1990 The solution is not fraught without some sort of problems. I am certain that the people who sup port this repeal measure will go to extremes to point those limitations out. I am sure there are limitations to every measure that people take. To every action there is a reaction. On balance, we felt at the time, in spite of some opposition within the labour movement, that it was a forward-thinking, contemporary thing to do. Not only that, but what we did was build a sunset clause into the legislation. I believe the sunset is five years.

If it were not just political posturing why would a Government, already I believe as long as three years into this legislation, with a sunset clause of five years, attempt to repeal it if it were not window-dressing to their supp orters; if it were not to sort of try to impress upon us a principle- God knows what principle that is- but why would they want to do it? Why would they not just simply let nature follow its course and in two years-as a matter of fact it will take us two years to resolve this debate.

We will probably keep you here in the Legislature for the next two years discussing this particular measure if you persist in wishing to pass it. (interjection)- To the Minister of Commun ity Services, who has taken offence to my remarks, she has to be reminded once again that she is not in a majority situation. As long as she is not, even in a majority situation Governme nts normally show a certain amount of tolerance and is gr anted a certain amount of leaway to he ar all comments that want to be put on the record.

In fact, I recall four years ago sitting in comm ittee for 200 presentations on the human rights comm ittee when that Member was in Opposition raising a fuss about whether or not gay rights should be included under the Hu man Rights Code. The Conservative Party at that time certainly did their utmost to drag, pull and draw people into the comm ittee to make presentations on that. At no time did the Government move to try to limit the time of the presentations or the scope of debate on that particular measure. We sat through and Members who were there will know we sat through 200 presenters in Jul y.

It was rather a hot experience and I do not think many of us wish to go through that same experience again. Nevertheless, we have here the makings of another de bate, ano ther series of rep resenta tions and presentations such as we had those three or four years ago. We have the potential here to once this Bill is sent, if it ever does get to comm ittee, to have the 200 presenters, albeit it is a little colder now and perhaps the people will not be injured under the extreme heat and conditions we had last time.

Nevertheless, the potential is still there for this particular measure to take a considerable amount of time for the Government to achieve what it wants to achieve. * (1 520) The qu estion is, what does it want to achieve and why does it want to achieve it? I have said that I feel that it is there only because the Chamber of Commerce has laid down the law and said to the Conservatives, well, if you want to be the big business party in the next election, if you want our supp ort, if you want our financial support, because now they have two options, they can always give the money to the Liberals.

So now you have this competition now between the Liberals and the Conservatives for money from the corporate backers. The Liberal Party never used to be able to get much in the way of contributions but after the'88 election all of a sudden their coffers were topped up rather quickly. I understand people were even falling over themselves from the corporate sector to donate money to them because the corporations want to make certain that they have more than one horse in the stable. I think that whole activity and action is not lost on this Go vernment because they understand how the system works.

Particularly when you have blown a sure thing in the last election and ended up with only 20 seats and have the Liberal Opposition breathing down your back you have to work doubly hard to justify your continued existence to the people that are backing you. I think that is a problem that the corporate backers in this pro vince faced. When they looked at this situation they basically asked the Conservative front bench to once again prove their loyalty to those corpora te backers. This is one of the ways they are doing it. If you look through the 94 or 96, oth

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-2-119
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 2nd hansardpdf 119.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ca091b12cef8084f88180eba5c6062abfb82b63f

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