Manitoba Hansard — 19 July 2000 (Sitting 64, 37th Legislature, 1st Session)

37-1-64

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session- Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. L No. 64- 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, July 19, 2000 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation AGLUGUB, Cris The Maples N.D.P. ALLAN, Nancy St. Vital N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. ASPER, Linda Riel N.D.P. BARRETT, Becky, Hon. Inkster N.D.P. CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. Brandon East N.D.P. CERILLI, Marianne Radisson N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CUMMINGS, Glen Ste. Rose P.C. DACQUA Y, Louise Seine River P.C. DERKA CH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P. DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. ENNS,H arry Lakeside P.C.

FAURSCHOU, David Portage Ia Prairie P.C. FILM ON, Gary Tuxedo P.C. FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. Wolseley N.D.P. GERRA RD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GILLESHAMMER, Harold Minnedosa P.C. HELWER, Edward Gimli P.C. HICKES, George Point Douglas N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LA THLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LAURENDEAU, Marcel St. Norbert P.C. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. LOEWEN, John Fort Whyte P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY,Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon.

Lord Roberts N.D.P. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn, Hon. Minto N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. PENNER, Jack Emerson P.C. PENNER, Jim Steinbach P.C. PITURA, Frank Morris P.C. PRAZ NIK, Darren Lac du Bonnet P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. REIMER, Jack Southdale P.C. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. ROCAN, Denis Carman P.C. RONDEAU, Jim Assiniboia N.D.P. SALE, Tim, Hon. Fort Rouge N.D.P. SANTOS, Conrad Wellington N.D.P. SCHELLENBERG, Harry Rossmere N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. SMITH, Joy Fort Garry P.C.

SMITH, Scott Brandon West N.D.P. STEFANSON, Eric Kirkfield Park P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan Dauphin-Rob lin N.D.P. TWEED, Mervin Turtle Mountain P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P. -

422 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, July 19, 2000 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Commi ttee of Supply Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (Acting Chair person): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has considered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau), that the report of the Committee be received. Motion agreed to. Standing Comm ittee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources Fourth Report Ms.

Linda Asper (Chairperson of the Stan ding Comm ittee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Four th Report of the Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources presents the following as its Fourth Report. An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your committee met on Tuesday, July 11, 2000, at 10 a.m. and Monday, July 17, 2000, at 7 p.m., in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred.

Your committee heard representation on bills as follows: Bill 15-The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les droits d'utilisation de l'eau Wayne Motheral - Association of Manitoba Municipalities Bill Hildebrandt-Private Citizen Bill Hildebrandt for Michael Waldron - Private Citizen Edward Hiebert- Private Citizen Ralph Gowan - Private Citizen Rae Park- Private Citizen Sergio Fanzago- Private Citizen Lawrence Dyck- Keystone Agricultural Pro ducers Jake Voth- Private Citizen Edwin Peters- Orthez Channel Committee David Oster- Reeve of West St. Paul Michael W a/dron - Private Citizen Your committee has considered: Bill 15-The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les droits d'utilisation de l'eau and has agreed to report the same without amendment. Ms. Asper: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg), that the report of the Committee be received. Motion agreed to. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD CancerCare Professionals Labour Dispute Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the Official Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Manitobans suffering from cancer are very concerned about the news that 75 CancerCare workers are on the verge of a walkout.

4222 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 Can the Premier indicate what contingency plans are in place to keep these essential workers on the job and ensure that Manitobans with cancer do not suffer delays in their treatment? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): First of all, in terms of the negotiations that were proceeding with the health care professionals, we are pleased that 19 00 of the 2200 individuals have settled the contract. There is one other contract that is tied and one contract that was defeated by two votes. Mr.

Speaker, there is no question that individuals working in CancerCare are crucial to Manitobans and to our health care system. There is also no question that we recognize that we have a shortage of people already, something we are trying to address with recruitment of individuals to the province. We are attempting to negotiate a settlement with those individuals, that we value, in a balanced way, keeping in mind the vital roles they provide to Manitobans, the crucial roles they play in health care, and the requirements of the Government to balance wage pressures in the whole public service. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr.

Speaker, I know a lot of bargaining units have settled, but any walk off the job as a result of labour action will create additional shortages within the system. The Premier has already admitted that there are shortages of skilled workers, and that certainly could have devastating effects right throughout Manitoba, not only for CancerCare, but the other units throughout the province that have not settled yet. Can he assure Manitobans that they will not be subject to delays in the treatment and the care that they receive as a result of any work stoppage? Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, the members of those bargaining units are already on public record about their views of the existing legislation. We have shortened the waiting lists for cancer patients. It is still not short enough in our view. We need to do a number of things to resolve that. One is we are continuing to invest in CancerCare, as members opposite did with the capital program. We have followed through on the commitment that members opposite have made on a comprehensive breast cancer strategy.

We have announced a new prostate cancer strategy, hopefully having both preventative programs through early detection and treatment programs through looking at brachy therapy and other programs that are important. The therapists and the radiation technologists and people that are employed dealing with cancer treatment, when we came to office, we felt there was a shortage. We understand there has been a reduction in the number of people trained. It is a four-year program.

So we have a lot of work ahead of us in terms of both developing training in Manitoba for Manitobans, for Manitoba patients and recruitment of people outside of the province. We recognize it is highly competitive because other provinces are faced with the same shortages.

We are going to do everything possible to balance off the needs of Manitobans that are dealing with this honible disease of cancer and deal with a fair wage settlement for the people working in this area. *( 13: 35 ) We are pleased that we have made a big step forward in settling the 19 00 employees, and we are hopeful that we can settle the other lab techs, Mr. Speaker, that are still outstanding, but we recognize that we still have a big hurdle. We are working and doing everything possible to ensure that there is no work stoppage. The best way to stop a work stoppage is to settle at the bargaining table. Mrs.

Mitchelson: Well, Mr. Speaker, this government certainly misled Manitobans during the election campaign, and Manitobans know that the quick fix that they promised to the health care system within six months of being elected to office has not happened. Mr. Speaker, we know there are many issues around cancer care. We are concerned that those that need treatment receive that treatment, but there are other issues right throughout the province of Manitoba and other people throughout the province of Manitoba that may be impacted as a result of a walkout or a reduction in service. -

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4223 Can the Premier today tell Manitobans that their care will not be compromised? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, well, members opposite may want to know the facts before they start heckling from their seats. This contract expired when members opposite were in government and they were unable to achieve a collective bargaining agreement at the table. I have a number of letters from people who are working directly, including the Member for Fort Whyte (Mr.

Loewen), one of his constituents, letters saying that we understand that the new government has to deal with 11 years of neglect, but we are hoping you treat us in a fair way. Mr. Speaker, this is a serious challenge for us, and we are hoping that we can resolve it at the bargaining table. We feel that one of the conditions precedent to trying to solve the bargaining units at the cancer institute was to have a settlement with the Jab techs. That settlement has been achieved through ratification and through the votes that were announced this Monday.

Having said that, the Department of Health is now addressing very seriously the recruitment and compensation challenges for the 40 individuals that work at the cancer institute. They are, as the Member opposite stated, crucial to our health care system. Cancer treatment is crucial to cancer patients, and we are approaching this collective bargaining challenge with that obviously in mind. We know that we will have a fair and balanced approach, both for cancer patients and for cancer employees, and for the Treasury of the Province of Manitoba. Osborne House Labour Dispute Mr. Glen Cummi ngs (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, currently Manitoba's largest women's shelter is reducing admissions as it goes through a very difficult bargaining process. I wonder if the Minister of Family Services has any current information on the state of bargaining. Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for his question and his concern, which of course I think all Manitobans share. The process of conciliation is still underway with the parties, and they are meeting again.

We certainly hope that they will continue to discuss the issues before them and that a suitable arrangement in terms of a long-term contract will be reached in the next little while. But the contingency plan that was put in place starting Monday is in operation, and I am assured that all people who need service are receiving service in a secure and safe manner. Mr. Cummings: I can appreciate the comments of the Minister, but I would like further confirmation from him, given that, annually, there have been about 10 000 overnight admissions at this facility.

I wonder if the Minister can assure vulnerable women and families out there if there will in fact be adequate backup response if, in fact, a strike proceeds. Mr. Sale: I can assure the Member that accommodation for women and children currently in the shelter is being secured in other facilities providing similar services, either in Winnipeg or in adjacent communities, and that further resources available in our department in the form of housing units are also available on an emergency basis if required. We expect to be able to accommodate all those families, women and children who require accommodation. Mr.

Cum mings: I appreciate that the Minister and I both have to be very responsible in our questions and our comments because of the security that is involved and the sensitivity around this response to vulnerable women and families, but I have one final question, and that is: Will he or will this government be considering this service as part of an essential services agreement? * (13 :40) Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, obviously we have a labour dispute that is in process at the present time, and the objective of everyone around the table is to get a fair, long-term solution to that process.

I think it is really interesting that people who cut wages of workers at various points during their time in office and for whom wages of .workers were not a particular concern in any of the sectors in my department are now raising questions-which over 11 years of neglect have caused to come to a crisis at this time. We have a serious problem, and the serious problem goes

4224 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19, 2000 back to 11 years of either zero, zero, zero; cuts of 3.5 percent; a nd other reductions in support to that system. That is why we have a problem today, and we are attempting to solve it. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Official Oppo sition House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Beauchesne's 417: 11 Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and shoul d not provoke debate. 11 We understand that this minister does not care for the concerns of the women that are having a conflict problem in this province, and we understand that this minister has a problem with the past. So we have asked him about the future and the future protection of the women in this province. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Same point of order, Mr. Speaker.

If the Opposition House Leader was concerned about provoking debate, he should read his comments in Hansard as to what he just said. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader, it is not a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. Crisis Shelters Essential Service Mr. Glen Cummi ngs (Ste. Rose): On a new question, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett). This government made a decision, made a funding decision that they now have to live with in te rms of how they balance their budget and wh ere they spend their priorities.

This Minister of Labour, however, perhaps will be more forthcoming in the answer to my question. Does this government have any willingness to consider whether or not this type of se rvice should be under The Essential Services Act? Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, we have a situation where our government provided, for the first time in 10 years, a significant increase of more than 5 percent to shelter servkes in this budget.

The issue we have before us is an issue that has come over II years of neglec:t, and we have a serious concern for women and their children and for shelter services in Manitoba. That is not going to be resolved by some kind of quick action to deal with some legislation in the past. It is going to be dealt with at the bargaining table with fair negotiations, which we support. Mr. Cumm ings: Mr. Speakt�r. there has not been a threatened strike at this facility in recent memory.

My concern is for the services that vulnerable women and children are seeking at probably the most important time in their lives when they need service. Again, I ask the Minister of Labour: Does she have any interest in pursuing The Essential Services Act? * (13:45) Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Family Services has stated in his answers this afternoon, we are confident that the negotiations which are ongoing will bear fruit and that we will be able to have a successful conclusion to our contract negotiations. That is what we are focussing on.

Canadian Farm Income Program Coverage Levels Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, Canada's Agriculture ministers have negotiated a three-year Canadian farm income program that offers far less assistance than what they previously had.

Will the Minister-and she admitted freely in the Western Producer that the new agreement did, in fact, offer a lot less than we had before explain to farmers how she artd why she would come home with an agreement and sign on to an agreement that would put our fanners at risk and offer them a lot less support than the previous administration had negotiated for farmers in this province?

July 19, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4225 Hon. Rosano Wowchuk (Minister of Agri culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, this is an issue the Member has raised many times and one we have had much discussion about here in the Legislature during the Agriculture Estimates. I began my negotiations with the other provinces and the federal government with eight provinces wanting to move towards a system of paying for disaster assistance based on cash receipts versus risk, and the federal government joined with those other provinces to move to that formula.

That has resulted in an increase of funds for other provinces and for Manitoba to be maintained at the level that they have been in the past. Certainly this was not new to the previous government. The previous Minister of Agri culture began these negotiations when he was at the last Agriculture ministers' meeting in Prince Albert last year. Mr. Jack Penner: Can the Minister explain, then, when she came home, that she was, and I quote her: "very proud of the new agreement that we have signed"?

How can she have this kind of pride in an agreement that is cash-receipt based instead of risk based in the province of Manitoba, while putting Manitoba producers in a very difficult, untenable position? How could she sign an agreement like that? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we have finally been able to come to a conclusion on an agreement that has been in negotiations for over three years. I am also pleased that we now have a disaster assistance program that producers can count on rather than having ad hoc programs as we have in the past. There is less money there.

We hope that producers will not have to draw on that program, that they can get their money from the marketplace. But we have told the federal Minister of Agriculture that, should there be a serious disaster, we will be back in Ottawa to stand up for our farmers. Mr. Jack Penner: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister: What will happen to our farmers in Manitoba, seeing we have had a massive reduction in freight assistance, seeing we have had a massive reduction in AIDA assistance, and AIDA will be gone, and the new program will force our farmers to compete head to head with the American treasuries and the European treasuries? How does this minister perceive farmers to be able to compete in the marketplace with the treasuries of the United States and the Europeans under the provisions of this new CFIP program? * (13:50) Ms. Wowchuk: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I am really glad that the lights have come on for that member to realize that freight assistance is an issue. This is an issue we have been talking about for years, and it was that government that encouraged the federal government to eliminate the Crow benefit because there was going to be all this opportunity for Manitoba. Now they are saying that our farmers are suffering. They were part of that negotiation to eliminate the freight rate, and definitely it is very difficult for our farmers to compete against the federal treasuries, against the U.S.

That is why we have to have subsidies around the world reduced so that our farmers do not have to compete against the treasuries of the federal government. Union Dues Political Contributions Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Labour misused the words "reasonable" and "balanced" to describe her party's shameful attack on workers' democratic rights. Even the UFCW believes their members should have a right to be consulted about whether or not their union dues are used for political purposes.

Apparently none of the democratic rights of workers are safe from this clearly anti-worker minister. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister if she agrees with the UFCW which says in its most recent newsletter: Members have the right to say they do not want their dues used for political purposes. Does she agree with the UFCW, and will she give this right back to Manitoba workers? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, for one, again, of the very few times in the 10 years I have been in this Legislature, the

4226 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19, 2000 Member for Springfield has rendered the Minister of Labour speechless. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, I would refer the Member to Question Period yesterday where we raised the issue, where the issue was raised of Bill 4, the amendments to The Elections Finances Act. The amendments to The Elections Finances Act that are before the House this session, and have been before the House actually for months and months and months, specifically prohibit donations from corporations and unions to political parties.

That is the answer to the question. Minister of Labour Debate Request Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, why will this minister not accept my challenge to debate her anti-worker, anti-business legislation on CJOB's Chuck Adler show live? Why will she not defend this anti-worker, anti democracy bill? What is she frightened of? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, if I am understanding the background of the question of the Member for Springfield, this morning I was in cabinet.

But I am prepared anytime, anyplace, to debate anyone, including the critic for Labour, on this piece of legislation. This morning I was in cabinet. That is why I was unable to attend to that particular program. Labour Relations Act Amendment s-Consultations Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask this minister, in regard to Bill 44, which business group that she consulted with recommended any of these changes that she is proposing, and would she be willing to table that? * (13:55) Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr.

Speaker, the Labour Management Review Committee, which is made up of five represen- tatives selected by the business community, five representatives selected by the labour com munity and an independent chair, Mr. Wally Fox-Decent, looked at all of thf: proposals, every single one of the proposals that has made its way in one form or another into Bill 44. All of them went to the Labour Management Review Committee.

The Labour Management Review Committee spoke among themselves, and I believe, although their deliberations were confidential, that both sides talked among themselves, among their larger community, corning forward with their positions on the issues. Of the proposals that were sent to the Labour Management Review Committee, seven of those proposals in total or in part had a consensus position on behalf of both labour and management, something that has not happened out of the Labour Management Review Com mittee in any of the times that the former government brought forth labour legislation.

Sustainable Development Strategy Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Conservation. The Minister, in this House, has indicated his concern for global warming. I ask the Minister today whether he can indicate the level of greenhouse gas emissions at the present time in Manitoba compared to the base line of 1990, and what the projections are for them to be in the year 20 I 0 if no action is taken. Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conser vation): I thank the Member for the question.

Let me advise the Member that this government has been working in co-op1eration with the federal government, as he knows, and I have told him that in my responses to his previous questions in the House. He knows, as well, that there is such an agreement ��ailed the Kyoto agreement. The federal government has not officially ratified the agreement, but it is a signatory to that agreement. During the signing of that particular agreement, of course that meant that the Canadian government and the provincial governments would have to start planning and gearing up for the implementation of that international agreement.

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4227 Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary to the Minister of Conservation: Since a Sustainable Development Strategy without an action plan on global warming is incomplete, can the Minister explain why his Sustainable Development Strategy, the COSDI report, does not include the action plan which he is talking about to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Manitoba? Mr. Lathlin: I would beg to differ with the Member's assertions because we are currently working on developing an implementation plan or once the agreement has been ratified.

But we are not even waiting for the federal government to ratify the agreement. We are now, as we speak, taking measures to ensure that we are part of an overall national response to these issues. I think the Member also knows that, in comparison to other provinces, in Manitoba, although the problem of global warming, emission of gases and so on is a very serious problem, in comparison to other jurisdictions, we rank well above the bottom of the list. Mr.

Gerrard: My supplementary to the Minister: Since there was a July 1 deadline for producing this strategy, and you did not meet that and that was a legal deadline, I would ask the Minister whether he believes that individuals are not necessary to meet legal deadlines for getting drivers' licences or hunting licences or fishing licences or paying taxes. I mean, if individuals were as cavalier as his ministry, this would be a very poorly functioning province. Can the Minister please explain why he is being so cavalier? * (1 4:00) Mr. Lathlin: Again, Mr.

Speaker, the words being put forth or the ideas being put forth by the Member, those are his opinions and he is entitled to them, of course. But let me, once again, tell him that when we came into government, of course there were deadlines that were set in place by the previous government, but in fact what they forgot to do was to develop and establish the necessary infrastructure that is required to implement the agreement, and there was no work done, absolutely no work done.

So, for a while there, yes, I will admit we were in a catch-up mode, but we are well on our way to catching up, and the work is being done as we speak. Free Trade Agreements Premier's Position Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the First Minister. On July 10 , a special report from Time magazine tells us about the party that the Premier hosted at the Houstons country and western bar in the border city of Brandon, Manitoba, along with a number of governors and American officials.

It goes on to say that Manitoba Premier Gary Doer trooped on to the stage to sing a duet with Amanda Stott, a 17 -year-old local heart-throb. My question to the Premier is: Was the duet in praise of free trade and the NAFT A agreement? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I think the song was black is black and white is white, Mr. Speaker. I think it is interesting that Manitoba's great job of hosting this western premiers' meeting and the western governors' meeting Amanda Stott was so good, the American ambassador wanted to take her back to Memphis or Atlanta. I think it is interesting that it is in Time magazine.

We were pleased to see Amanda playing along with Great Big Sea and others at the wonderful street party here in Winnipeg last week. Again, it is very good that Manitoba and the International Peace Gardens, which is not properly identified in the picture with the Governor of Idaho, is featured in this magazine. Good neighbourly relations have always been part of our values. We believe in com munity, we believe in co-operation, and we believe in being good neighbours. Mr. Enns: Mr.

Speaker, it truly does my heart good to hear this socialist Premier, First Minister, talk in such glowing terms about the relationship that we have with our largest trading partner. We heard nothing, though, not even an echo, of the time that he and his party, both provincially and federally, did everything they could to stop NAFT A and the Free Trade Agreement.

4228 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19, 2000 My specific question, when meeting with the governors, now that our trade in the western part of the provinces has reached $26 billion, is the Premier now prepared to acknowledge that it was one of Prime Minister Mulroney's greatest moves for this country by bringing about free trade and the NAFT A agreement? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the next question I am going to get from members opposite is to celebrate that other great contribution of Brian Mulroney and that is the GST. We will not be celebrating those initiatives.

One of the largest negotiated settlements in exports-[interjection] Perhaps they do not want to listen, Mr. Speaker. One of the largest export agreements ever made between Canada and the United States, between Manitoba and the United States, was the Northern States Power Agreement, negotiated as part of the Limestone Agreement, which is producing some $350 million in export revenues. That was not done with the aid of NAFT A, because trade has been going on and increasing for years.

I personally believe that with finite energy resources like oil and gas, particularly when you look at the natural gas prices going from 16 percent to 32 percent, we should have had a sovereign energy policy like Mexico, under NAFT A, so that Canada, which has distances that are long and weather that is cold, could protect its energy resources and not be paying 32 percent for natural gas next year. That is what we believe, and no thanks to Brian Mulroney. Mr. Enos: My final question to the First Minister, a simple question.

In between the singing and the partying, did he at any time take this opportunity to suggest that he, like former Prime Minister John Turner said he is going to tear up these agreements-remember when he picked up that telephone book, sir? Did he at any time suggest that he would be recommending to the Canadian government to abrogate, to get out of NAFT A or free trade with the Americans? Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, I also remember the former prime minister of Canada took an agreement dealing with the Charlottetown Accord and ripped it up in Quebec City saying Canada would fall apart if the country did not accept Charlottetown. So there have been examples of politicians ripping up documents in the past. I have not been one of those examples. Manitoba Century Summit Labour Legislation Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, the Century Summi1t brought labour, business and government leaders together to develop a partnership for Manitoba's economic growth.

I have read the final report, and nowhere in there is there any information containing the legislation, the information in Bill 44. It is clear that the First Minister (Mr. Doer), the Minister of Labour, who talked about partnership and consensus, now believe in partial consensus. Can the Minister advise those attending the Century Summit why her government failed to inform them of the regressive labour policies that they were bringing forward? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr.

Speaker, as I have stated many times in the House, the Labour Management Review Committee was consulted about every element of the Bill that eventually became Bill 44 that is before us today. We have discussed in the election campaign and sin•:e the election campaign the need to look at and review all of the labour legislation in the province of Manitoba, and we are in the process of doing that in my department. A good government takes a look at all of the legislation that has been passed in all of the government departments under a former government. It is only the right thing to do.

We are in the process of doing that. We are convinced that with consensus, or partial consensus, on seven of the elements that are in Bill 44, we have a sound basis for a solid, reasonable labour relations climate in the province of Manitoba. We are convinced that that will continue to be the case: after the passage of Bi11 44. Mr. Gilleshammer: Why would this govern ment not listen to the advice of the participants at the Century Summit who talked about building on the momentum tha� already exists in this province?

They talked about lowering taxes; they talked about the burgeoning income that government is getting because of the economy.

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4229 Nowhere did anyone state that they should return to the labour laws of the past. Where did this come from? * (14 :10 ) Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, we are lowering taxes. We are lowering the income tax; we are lowering the property tax; we are lowering the small business tax in the province of Manitoba over the next three years by three points. We are listening to the people of Manitoba. We listened to the people of Manitoba, and that is why they elected us on September 21 last year. Mr.

Gilleshammer: Can the Minister explain to Manitoba's business community how giving employees the final say in proceeding with binding arbitration will encourage negotiation? Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, the alternate dispute resolution mechanism that is in Bill 44 is modelled on the first contract legislation first brought forward in the province of Manitoba in 19 84. In the 15 years since first contract legislation has been in place in this province, 830 contracts were eligible for first contract legislation; 830 first contracts were negotiated.

Of those, 20 percent went to the Labour Board under first contract legislation. Of those 830, less than one percent of those contracts that were eligible for first contract legislation actually had any part of their contract negotiated or imposed by the Labour Board; 99 percent of the first contracts that were signed in this province did not have any form of imposition. That is a very successful rate of return, and we expect it to be the same negotiated settlement under this dispute resolution mechanism as well. Elections Finances Act Amendment s-Justification Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr.

Speaker, yesterday it became very obvious that the First Minister is very sensitive about the Young New Democrats taking his personal motives for introducing his own elections finances legis lation and attacking them. Maybe it is because even they can see that this government is nothing more than the old, tired Pawley-Doer NDP trying to live in the past.

My question to the First Minister: Does he realize that Manitobans, even members of his own party, feel he is forcing through this bill on bad faith in his mistaken belief that it will shackle his political opponents and not for the benefit of democracy and fairness? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I indicated yesterday in the House, and I will say it again today, that we are interested in the advice of members opposite at the committee stage, but we made a promise to the people of Manitoba to go into this next century banning union and corporate donations.

You can vote in the old way to keep the status quo, or you can vote for the future, to ban union and corporate donations. I challenge you to speak up and tell us where you are at. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Flooding Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): It is truly unfortunate that this NDP Government is showing such callous disregard for the plight of flood victims throughout Manitoba. Many residents in my constituency of Springfield have been seriously affected by the onslaught of water.

The least they could have expected from this NDP Government is understanding and sympathy. Instead, the Premier (Mr. Doer) of this province makes fun of the plight of the flood victims in Springfield. The Member for Concordia sure was interested in Springfield during the election campaign, visited there often, but once he was roundly rejected, Springfield no longer matters to this Premier. Pure and utter political discrimination, despicable behaviour.

What has the Premier said to the residents of Springfield, and I quote from Hansard: What we should give Springfield is a plunger, and that is how they can deal with their problems. Such a statement coming from the First Minister of this province is absolutely unacceptable. Well, the residents of Springfield are horrified with this Premier and his government. First, the Premier refuses to contribute well over

4230 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July I9, 2000 the $200,000 for drainage prevention in Springfield. Now he tells Springfield they can have a plunger. Mr. Speaker, statements such as his now characterize this government dominated by spin doctors and a mentality of irrespon sibility. To the Premier: I think you know what the residents of Springfield would like you to do with your plunger. Manitoba Agricultural Hall of Fame Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin-Roblin): I want to take a few moments today to congratulate this year's inductees into the Manitoba Agricultural Hall of Fame.

Susan Gertrude Jasper of Hartney, Walter Edmund Kroeker of Winnipeg and the late Dr. Jack Nesbitt. On July II, the inductees were honoured by a ceremony celebrating their various and out standing contributions to agriculture here in Manitoba Mrs. Jasper is 97 years of age and has been involved in several organizations such as the Women's Institute and the Provincial Council of Women. In the I950s she represented the Canadian Federation of Agriculture at the United Nations. She also enriched her community with her talents as a musician, gardener and piano teacher. Mr.

Kroeker was a partner in the family farm, which became one of the province's largest potato producers. He was a member of several boards, including the Canadian Horticultural Council. Mr. Kroeker was also involved in broadcasting, serving as a director of southern Manitoba broadcasting, now known as Golden West broadcasting. Doctor Nesbitt was born in Shoal Lake in I925 and passed away in I998. He was involved in his family's dairy operation and creamery. He went on to become a faculty member at the University of Manitoba in the dairy science department.

He served on the Manitoba Milk Control Board and was instrumental in the formation of the Manitoba Farm Bureau as well as the Keystone Agricultural Producers. He had a personal commitment to fostering leadership skills among the young through his involvement in 4-H and other youth programs. I am sure all members of tihis Assembly join me in recognizing the accomplishments of these agricultural pioneers. They are: all worthy addi tions to the Manitoba Agricultural Hall of Fame. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (1 4:20) Leif Ericsson Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Mr.

Speaker, the year 200 1 will mark the millennium anniversary of Leif Ericsson's arrival in North America. The Norsemen or Vikings, as they were often called, were the first European people to arrive in North America. They set foot on the eastern coast of this continent nearly 500 years before Columbus landed. Hundreds of years later Icelandic and other Scandinavian pioneers, the descendants of the Norsemen, would join in the exploration and settlement of Canada. In Gimli the Icelandic heritage is celebrated yearly.

A special project has been undertaken this year to commemorate 1the role of the Norsemen in the history of North America. A traditional York boat is being given a Viking burial on the town's waterfront. The burying of old and unseaworthy craft was long the practice of the Norse. Also being buried will be a chest full of artifacts meant to document the personal and local history of the Gimli area. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order. Prior to recognizing the Honourable Member for A.ssiniboia (Mr. Rondeau), could I ask the co-operation of all honourable members.

It is very, very difficult to hear the Member's statement. St. James Collegiate Mr. Jim Rondeau (Assiniboia): Mr. Speaker, today, I want to take a few moments to highlight the important work of some of the students at St. James Collegiate. Recently both myself and the Member for St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski) made a contri bution to enable two representatives of the St. James Collegiate Teens Against Drunk Driving, or T ADD, to attend the National Convention of

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 423 1 Canadian Youth Against Impaired Driving held in Edmonton. Angela Collins [phonetic] and Terence Hadley [phonetic] had a wonderful time at this conference and came back with many new ideas and renewed energy for the entire T ADD group. This group has been very, very active throughout the years. Their adviser has been doing some wonderful work in creative activities. As many of the members here are aware, T ADD groups exist all over the country, bringing together young people in a common goal to stop their peers from drinking and driving.

Every summer drinking and driving results in countless tragedies. The members of T ADD use creative methods to educate people about the dangers of drinking and driving. They also help each other make responsible choices about alcohol consumption and create a positive peer pressure to avoid drinking and driving among youth. I am sure all members of this Assembly will join myself and the Member for St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski) in congratulating this T ADD group and all T ADD groups on their hard work and worthwhile efforts to promote safety and responsibility among young people.

This will lead to a much, much safer environment. Thank you very much. Marcus McKay Search Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I would first like to record my concern for the eight-year-old boy, Marcus McKay, who is still lost northeast of Dauphin, and the concern of myself and my party for his health and well being. The primary purpose of my statement today is to talk for a moment about the need for accurate employment and unemployment statis tics in Manitoba.

While pleased with the reported recent unemployment rates in Manitoba at between 4 and 5 percent, I am mindful of the fact that a large group of Manitobans are excluded from the statistic. I refer, of course, to those who live in First Nations communities in Manitoba. There is also a concern about those of aboriginal and other less well-off backgrounds, based on U.S. data which suggest that such individuals are generally undercounted in such statistics. It is time in Manitoba that we have statistics that are complete and inclusive and accurate.

It is sad that when the numbers are reported at 4 to 5 percent, the real numbers may in fact be as high as 8 to 10 percent. It is time that we do away with excuses for inaction. Both the federal and the provincial government should be charged to make changes. If the federal govern ment will not act, the provincial government should act and provide us in this House with estimates of what the real numbers are and provide an effort to obtain those real numbers to supplement the numbers which are provided at the federal level. It is time for the province to act if the federal government will not act.

Let us make sure that Manitoba gets what it needs, accurate unemploy ment statistics, so we can know what is hap pening better in this province. ORDERS OF THE DAY Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): I wonder, Mr. Speaker, whether there would be leave to consider this afternoon an Opposition Day? Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to consider Opposition Day this afternoon? [Agreed] House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to announce that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts will meet on Friday, July 21, at 10 a.m., to deal with the following matters: Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the March 31, 19 97 and 19 98, Public Accounts; Volumes 1, 2 and 3 of the March 31 , 19 99, Public Accounts; the Provincial Auditor's Report on the Operations of the Provincial Auditor's Office for the years ended March 31, 19 97, 19 98, and 19 99; the Provincial Auditor's Report on the Public Accounts for the years ended March 31, 19 97, 19 98, 19 99.

4232 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July I9, 2000 Second, I wish to announce that the Law Amendments Committee will meet on Monday, July 24, at I 0 a.m., to resume consideration of the following bills: I3, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34 and 36.

I would like to advise, finally, that the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections will meet on Monday, July 24, at IO a.m., to consider the following matters: the I988, the I990, the I995 Statutory Reports of the Chief Electoral Officer on the conduct of Provincial General Elections; the I988, I990, I99I, I995, I997 and I998 Annual Reports on the operations of The Elections Finances Act. We will confirm whether there are other additions to that list, Mr. Speaker, in advance. Mr.

Speaker: It has been announced that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts will meet on Friday, July 2I, 2000, at IO a.m., to deal with the following matters: Volumes I, 2, 3 and 4 of the March 3I, I997 and I998 Public Accounts, and Volumes I, 2 and 3 of the March 3I, I999 Public Accounts; the Provincial Audi tor's Report on the operations of the Provincial Auditor's Office for the years ended March 31, 19 97, I998 and I999; the Provincial Auditor's Report on the Public Accounts for the years ended March 3I, I997, I998 and I999.

It has also been announced that the Law Amendments Committee will meet on Monday, July 24, at 10 a.m., to resume consideration of the following bills: 13, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34 and 36.

It has also been advised that the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections will meet on Monday, July 24, 2000, at I 0 a.m., to consider the following matters: the 19 88, 19 90 and 19 95 Statutory Reports of the Chief Electoral Officer on the conduct of Provincial General Elections; the 19 88, 19 90, 19 91, 19 95, 19 97 and 19 98 Annual Reports on the operations of The Elections Finances Act, and will also confirm if any additions are to be added to this list. Commi ttee Changes Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the Honour able Member for Emerson (Mr.

Jack Penner), I would like to recognize the Honourable Member for Selkirk with committee changes. * (14 :30 ) Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk}: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), that the composition of the Stan ding Committee on Privileges and Elections be amended as follows: Concordia (Mr. Doer) for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell); Inkster (Ms. Barrett) for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh); Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers). Motion agreed to. Mr. Dewar: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Radisson (Ms.

Cerilli), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources for Thursday, July 20, be amended as follows: Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers). Motion agreed to. Mr. Dewar: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments for Tuesday, July 25, be amended as follows: St. Vital (Ms. Alla 111) for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen); Inkster (Ms. Barrett) for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh); Brandon West (Mr. Smith) for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway); Brandon East (Mr.

Caldwell) for La Verendrye (Mr. Lemieux); Transcona (Mr. Reid) for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau). Motion agreed to. OPPOSITION DAY MOTION Examining Ways to Mediate the Impact of the 1999 and 2000 Flooding and Excess Rains Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): It gives me some pleasure to move a motion, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), that:

WHEREAS excess rainfall and flooding in the years 19 98, 19 99 and 2000 has resulted in

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4233 hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland going unseeded or seeded crops and forage crops being damaged and livestock being placed in peril, not only in southwestern Manitoba, but in a wide geographic area of the province; and

WHEREAS Manitoba's farmers have also been subjected to problems arising from low commodity prices and stiff competition in the global marketplace, resulting in dramatic and often unpredic table reductions in the farm income; and

WHEREAS Manitoba's agricultural com munity has a criti cal role to play in the overall health of the provincial economy, contributing indeed hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the economy and creating thousands of jobs; and

WHEREAS all Manitobans have a vested interest in ensuring that the province's agricu ltural sector continues to thrive; and

WHEREAS all sides of this House have agreed that the 19 99 flood constitutes a disaster, yet the federal and provincial governments have failed to come to terms on a comprehensive assistance package; and

WHEREAS all sides of this House agree that the problem arising fr om excess rain in 19 99 and 2000 is creating problems in the agric ultural community for homeowners and for business and for municipalities alike. THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the federal government to immediately revisit its stance on providing some form of financial assistance for the 19 99 flooding that affected large areas of this province and to consider supplying an aid package simi lar to that historically provided for major Canadian natural disasters, including floods, forest fires and ice storms; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the · Legislative Assembly urge the Government of Manitoba to consider examining all applic able programs, services and financial options, including budgetary surpluses and fiscal stabiliz ation funds available at both the federal and provincial government levels in order to consider providing assistance to the agric ultural community, to homeowners, to businesses and to municipalities affected by both the excess rains and flooding of 19 99 and the impending di saster of2000.

Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the Honourable Member for Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner), seconded by the Honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay),

WHEREAS the excess rainfall and flooding in the years 19 98- An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Before we dispense, I would like to ask leave of the House to change some of the changes that were made while the Honourable Member was moving the motion. The second

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS the global place resulting in dramatic and often unpredictable reductions in-where it says "their income," the Honourable Member used "the farm income." Is there agreement to that? Is there agreement? [Agreed] Order. Also, where the third

WHEREAS, where it says "c ontributing millions of dollars annually," it was "contr ibuting indeed hundreds of millions of dollars. " Is that agreed, to change it? [interjection] In the motion? Agreed? {Agreed] Order. Just to remind all honourable members that they have 10 minutes. Mr. Jack Penner: It is indeed a pleasure to rise on this motion. I believe it is absolutely imperative that we finally in this House can come to some term of agreement to support those that have suffered severely during the 19 99 flood, whether they be in western Manitoba or eastern Manitoba.

I believe it is imperative that they be given some assurance that there will be further assistance coming to them. Secondly, I also believe that many of us, including the Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk), have seen the impending di saster on many farms this year due to the heavy excess

4234 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 rains and flooding that we have seen in many municipalities in this province, including the city of Winnipeg. I certai nly hope that there can be some agreement by this House at the end of this debate, that we can finally proceed in approaching the federal government in a meaningful way to ensure that they also recognize their respons ibili ty and indeed liability.

When one looks today on the huge amount of money that is required to raise a crop, whether it is a crop of barley or whether it is a crop of potatoes, that can range all the way from $200 an acre input costs to some $800 or $900 an acre input costs. Many of the specialty crops that are raised specifically in those areas that are heavily flooded this year, including flooding that happened last year in the southwest area, sunflowers, indeed any kind of row crop at all, demands a very high level of management and income.

It is impossible for many of these farmers to bear the load of a no-crop situation at the end of the day. * (1 4:40) Our Crop Insurance Program that we have talked about many times, including much discussion in Estimates, is severely, severely inadequate. When you compare that, Mr. Speaker, to some of the programs that are available in the provinces of Ontar io and Quebec, and when you look today at the program that our Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms.

Wowchuk) put her sig nature to, the CFIP program, it is clear that people in this province must get together, must band together and lobby Ottawa to treat Manitoba fairly in the future, whether it is during a di saster kind of a situation or whether it is simply an agreement that will negate the impact of federal decisions over the last number of years.

The reduction of the Crow rate without adequate subsidiz ation, as the Amer icans have done-and I find the Minis ter of Agriculture's comments very interesting sometimes when she responds to legiti mate questions that we have, that she throws back this agreement on the Crow benefit. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have been very supportive of doing away with the Crow, putting a competitive system in place.

I was very supportive of a Free Trade Agreement, a true Free Trade Agreement that would allow us to compete on an equitable and individual basis with our competitors from the United States and Europe or any other farmers in the world. I truly believe that we can, as indiv idual producers, meet that competition head-on and that we could do a good job in a competitive marketplace. Yet this minister, this Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) consistently con fuses the issue. She knows full well-and if she does not, then the Premier (Mr.

Doer) needs to seriously look at putting somebody else in that position that understands 1the agricult ural situation. We know that today the Amer icans have increased their support, non-agr icu ltural, outside of agricultural support to agricu lture to almost 50 percent of the income that farmers in the United States derive on their farms. We know that the Europeans are now up to 60 and 65 percent of agricul tural support to agric ulture, other than incomes derived from the land or from their operations. We are at less than 7 percent in this country. [interjection} Well, Mr. Speakt�r.

I find it very confusing that the Minis ter of Family Services (Mr. Sale) will yell across this Chamber continually and demonstrate his ignorance of the agricultural situation. Clearly, if he would ever take some time and go to Manitoba farms and sit down across the table with young Manitoba farmers, he would know how important this debate is. Yet he sits there and yells from his chair as if he knows nothing more to do than maybe he should leave this Chamber and go look after the affairs of his own department. That might help the situation. Mr.

Speaker, I think it is imperative that this Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) and our Premier (Mr. Doer) call on Ottawa immediately and enforce upon them the fact that many of our young farmers are going brokt� and will grow broke if there is not further assistance offered by this government and that the Canadian federal income plan that has been negotiated is totally, totally inadequate and that the increases that Ottawa has afforded Ontario of 28% increase in their support, 38 percent for Quebec increase in

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 423 5 support, 92 percent for British Columbia. Yet we in Manitoba are supposed to tell our farmers that you have been cut loose and you are on your own; there is no support for you. I think that is absolutely inconceivable that our minister would put her si gnature to an agreement such as that. So I say to you, Mr.

Speaker, it is absolutely imperative that we negotiate a new kind of agreement for the di saster that took place in 19 99 in all of the prov ince of Manitoba and support those farmers in their attempt to be able to raise enough funds to support their families and keep their family farms in place. It is the small farmers who are feeling the biggest amount of hurt, and this is constantly the group of people that the Min ister of Agricult ure has said she supports.

I say to her, and I say to the Premier today, that it is imperative that we get on with that fact and indi cate some significant support to those farmers.

There are significant funds left in our Stabiliz ation Fund that we so long and hard fought for and ensured that there would be money in place without having to borrow money, so that we could provide di saster assistance to some of our community if and when they needed it whether they were in the city of Winnipeg or whether they were in Brandon or whether they were in any of the other smaller rural communities or whether they, in fact, were individ ual producers. We believe we left a legacy to the people of this province.

Not only did we leave a legacy, we left a significant bank account that this province can draw upon. I think it is imperative that this Premier demonstrates his will to support those farmers and support them today and not let them hang out by themselves and drown in the misery they are facing today. I think the Min ister of Family Services (Mr.

Sale) would serve well if he would take a trip out to some of these rural communities and sit down with those young farm famil ies and li sten to the sorrow that they have to face, closing their schools in their community, closing hospitals in rural Manitoba, and that is what this new New Democratic Government is all about, close all the services in rural Manitoba. I would suggest to the Minis ter of Family Services take a trip. Go look. Go talk to the people. Go ask them how much hurt there is in rural Manitoba. I say to you, Mr.

Speaker, that your minister will have a different tone when he comes back and will have a different perception, because he sits within the perime ter, does not even bother to go out and discuss this issue with the people of rural Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, there are sig nificant actions that can be taken by this government without federal government agreement. We know how crassly the federal government has treated the farm community. They cut them loose. They took $750 milli on away from the farm community when they did away with the transportation subsidy.

They took $2.5 bill ion more away when they did away with the GRIP program . They took another $600 million away when they did away with the AIDA program, and yet this federal government will not have enough heart to come back to the people when they face a disaster. The Min ister of Agricu lture (Ms. Wowchuk) sat in her seat and yammered and said: Who supported that?

Yes, I supported the dis solution of the Crow, but I said very clearly to the federal government and I said very clearly to the then critic for Agricult ure that in order to accom modate, there must be other programs of simi lar value put in place until the Europeans and the Americans realize that they have to come to their senses and allow the competitive process to continue. Then and only then, will our farmers be able to stand on their own two feet and compete in the marketplace. I say to the Minis ter of Agriculture, if she truly understood agriculture, she would support this motion. Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister of Highways and Government Services): I want to indi cate initially that I am particularly disappointed in what could have, I think, been an effort to have some consensus in this House, because tradi tionally we have dealt with disasters in this prov ince, I think, on a consensus basis. When we were in opposition for 11 years, I can recall numerous emergency situations, disas ters, the '93 situation, '97, '98 and '99. In each

4236 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 and every case, yes, we would ask questions about policy issues, but there was a general consensus that the best approach when you were dealing with a disaster was to have an all-party approach, was to have an approach that put partisan interests aside and put our focus on the needs of people in terms of putting on a united front in dealing with the federal government. * (1 4:5 0) I want to say to members opposite that if they want to get into political debates on disasters, they also have to be prepared in that particular case to be more factual.

That is why, after my comments, I will be moving a number of amendments which I think can impr ove on this resolution and take out some of the statements I think which create difficulty. I want to say, particularly to the previous member who just referenced the Fiscal Stabiliz ation Fund, I have watched this member stand up in Question Period, writing the blank cheques against that fund. He said it was this great legacy that was left to our government.

I want the Member opposite to know perhaps they did not tell him when he was in government that the Fiscal Stabiliz ation Fund in this province has been drained signifi cantly. It is now $19 2 mill ion. It is now less than half of the target amount. I want to say to the member opposite, and perhaps the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) was not aware of this either, I am sure he was too busy reading Time magazine at the time, but I say they spent $340 million out of the Fiscal Stabil ization Fund in the last two years they were in government. Now, some of it went to di saster assistance.

I mentioned this in the House before. The only dis aster I think that they were really worried about when they were spending that money was the impending electoral disaster of September 19 99, and indeed it was a disaster for the Conser vative Party. So do not let anyone, particularly the hardworking people of rural Manitoba who know a lot about fiscal realities, let them not buy any of that from members opposite. I would get into how tht!y spent all the proceeds of the sale of MTS, a company that took close to a hundred years to build, in how many years? In three years.

I say to members opposite that they have seriously constrained our province's fiscal ability to deal with disasters. I want to put that on the record. Now, in terms of a numbt:r of specifics. note the Member opposite brought in a reso lution that referenced a number of disasters, but spent most of the time on more of a personal vendetta with the Minis ter of Agricul ture and agri cultural policy. That is a good debate. We should get into that debate in this House. But I want to address the emergency situation, because I think that is what most Manitobans would be expecting us to do today.

I want to start by dealing with what we faced in this province the last number of weeks. I say to the Member opposite, by the way, that a number of us have taken the opportunity to go to areas affected by disaster. I went with the opposition critic to Headingley. I went to La Broquerie. I went to Brokenhead. Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, if we were not in this House, and I respect the fact that we are and we have good reason to be here, I would have liked to have visit ed other areas, and obviously, when time permits, I will be doing that.

I want to say we have had a combination of a significant amount of rainfall combined with some significant events. I want to say to members opposite too, because I was somewhat surprised again with the rather partisan tone of what happened, that we are following the same procedures that have been in place with OF A for many years. In 19 98 and 19 99, the disasters that took place in Russell and in southwest Manitoba in those years respectively, we are following the exact same procedures. That government, when they were in office, followed the same process, identifying the damage that is out there.

We received 13 resolutions, we have 4 more that we are anticipating, 21 municipalities in total indi cating damage. I want to say that at that point in time we will be ablt! to give some indi cation of eligibili ty for disa'>ter assistance. I know it is of concern to people out there. I have said I understand the fr ustrations out there, but I

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4237 say to members opposite in parti cular that I find it unfortunate that they are doing what we never did in opposition, which is trying to make an issue out of what is the standard procedure. EMO has been in contact with munici palities. We are getting that detailed information. I know there are concerns on everything arising from flooded basements. A number of MLAs have contacted me directly on concerns from their constituents and the impact on municipal property, other property. We are doing our best to take a proactive approach.

We bought back more staff in terms of EMO. That is what the people of Manitoba expect. I also want to say, and I want to put this on the record as well, that what we are looking at in the 21 municipalities is dealing with items fairly. I want to note that many of the types of costs that have been identified in a very prelimi nary way are very simi lar to some of the costs that were covered in '97 and in '99. In fact, they were covered in '93 , '97, '98, '99.

I would hope that members opposite in parti cular would acknowledge this because I was rather disappointed to received a resolution from a municip ality in the southwest which I do not think recognizes the fact that there has been coverage in the southwest. The argument is over the amount and the type of the coverage. For example, some of the items that were of concern were covered in '97 and '98. I want to say on the record that this government will treat people the same when it comes to disaster assistance, whether they live in the southwest, the southeast, the north, anywhere in this provi nce, Mr. Speaker.

Our commitment, when a disaster arises, is to be fair to every citizen of this province, no matter where they live. I want to stress again the need to have a balanced approach in terms of southwest Manitoba. I have met on numerous occasions with farmers, municipal officials and others from southwest Manitoba. I want to indicate that it is not an issue of whether assi stance has been provided; $23 mill ion is the current estima te of the amount of coverage under DF AA for damage to property, both municip al and private. Ms.

Bonnie Korzeniowski, Acting Speaker, in the Chair At issue were some of the more extended costs, the $71 million that the Province put up to cover other costs, basically input costs. I want to indi cate that when we contacted the federal government, what is interesting is every time we talk to them directly, the answer is no, but in terms of some of the indirect communication, there have been numerous examples where the federal government has been trying, I think unfairly, to get people's hopes up by suggesting there may or may not be something, but every time we talk to them face to face, the answer has been no.

By the way, I have not once had the opportunity to talk to Art Eggleton, the Minis ter of disaster assistance. This same mini ster, we have requested a meeting seven times, is so arrogant-and I say this on the record because other ministers have met with us on very short notice-that after seven requests for a meeting, he has refused to meet.

One of the suggestions from farmers in the southwest, and I want to put it on the record today, the farmers that we met with last week said that if it means having a meeting, prefer ably in southwest Manitoba but even here in Winnipeg, with the farmers, the federal minister and the provincial minister, let us do it.

I want to put on the record that I invite Art Eggleton not just to fly in to Shilo and fly out when it is convenient but to come to the province and meet with people, and I think that is the only incumbent thing for any minister of the Crown to do, face the people. [interjection] Well, the Member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) says they met in Ottawa. The federal minister has refused to meet with the provincia l government. I think that should speak volumes about the prob lems we face. We have a Prime Minis ter who came to the province and said there was no disaster designation. Not true.

We have the Order-in-Council that represents it. We are still saying to the federal government we have more than $20-milli on, stand-alone money, on the ta ble. We say, Madam Acting Speaker, that that money is there,

4238 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 and we challenge the federal government to look at additional assistance. That is why, Madam Acting Speaker, I would like to move an amendment that will clarify in far greater detail this motion and will also I think allow us to have a consensus which is important on this issue. That is why I move, seconded by the Minis ter of Family Services (Mr. Sale), THAT the proposed motion be amended as follows:

a) by adding the following after the first

WHEREAS clause:

WHEREAS in January 2000, the Government of Manitoba announced excess moisture insurance under the Crop Insurance Program to address future problems such as those which occurred in 19 99; and

b) by adding the following after the second

WHEREAS clause:

WHEREAS the current government of Manitoba was successful in getting a one-time payment of $1 00 million, cost-shared, for Manitoba farmers in recognition of the negative effects of federal government cutbacks in agricul ture; and

c) by striking out the fifth

WHEREAS clause and substituting the following:

WHEREAS all sides of the House agree that the 19 99 flood constitutes a di saster, but the federal government has failed to provide compensation for conditions that are clearly recognized as compensable under the Disaster Financial Assis tance Act (Canada); and

WHEREAS the current government of Manitoba contributed $20 million to the 19 99 crisis which the federal government has refused to cost-share on any basis; and

d) by striking out the BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED clause and substituting the following: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the federal government to work co··operatively with the Province to pursue any option that will provide funding as identified in the Disaster Financial Assis tance Act for municipal, agricultural, commercial and personal losses incurred as a result of flooding in 19 99 and 2000. * (15 :00) The Acting Speaker (Ms. Korzeniowski): The amendment is in order. Point of Order Mrs.

Louise Dacquay (Seine River): With the greatest respect, no one on this side of the House has had an opportunity to see tht� text copy of the amendment. I am wondering if the Member who moved the motion could have a copy of that. The Acting Speaker (Ms. Korzeniowski): Order, please. We will just take a moment to make some copies. That is a reasonable requ est. * * * * (15:10 ) Mr. Ashton : Based on some consultation with members opposite. I am wondering if there might be leave to change the s��cond additional

WHEREAS in the motion. Instead of saying "g overnment cutbacks in agriculture," change that to "g overnment cutbacks to transportation assistance." It is just a slig ht (:orrection to the text. The Acting Speaker (Ms. Korzeniowski): Is there leave to change the amendment as outlined by the Minis ter? [Agreed] Mrs.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the Official Opposition): I am pleased to have an opportunity to stand today and put some comments on the record on the amended resolution and indi cate that I do not believe, just with one cursory glance, that all of the WHEREASes that have been added or amended or changed are those that can he supported by our party, but I do want to indicate, Madam

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 4239 Acting Speaker, that I believe I need to put comments on the record on behalf of farm families that have been waiting very patiently for some action from this government. I think, in all fairness, these famil ies are finding that their patience is wearing out. We have not seen the kind of action from this government that many farm families have been waiting for. Indeed, many have called us, contacted members on this side of the House and indi cated that the issues from the flooding in 19 99 have not been addressed.

This government has failed our farm families badly. They have failed to provide a nickel of help to the farmers of the southwest for the di saster of 19 99, and they have failed to negotiate a good deal with the federal government. During the last election and immediately afterwards, the Premier and his colleagues extolled the new working relationship that they would have with the federal government if and when they were elected. They still talked about it when they were sworn into office.

Well, we do have a new relationship with Ottawa and with this government in Manitoba, but the only person that seems to be happy about that new relationship is Paul Martin and the federal Treasury. It certainly has not made Manitobans or Manitoba farm families happy. This government has failed Manitoba farmers. They loudly predic ted that they would solve the impasse with Ottawa, that they would come home with the money for our farmers in the southwest. Well, I say to this Minis ter of Agricu lture (Ms. Wowchuk) and to the Premier (Mr.

Doer) show us the money, because the sad truth for the farmers in Manitoba is that there is no money. They said they would do what the former Min ister of Agric ulture, the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) would not do. I want to indi cate today that they were rig ht. The former Mini ster of Agriculture never would have signed such a bad deal with the federal government, and he would not have given up the fight. So where are we now? The only money the southwest has seen is the $70 million that we provided when we were in office. Not a dime has flowed to those farmers since.

We have this government saying that they have put money on the table to match the federal government's money, and the federal government just has to come through with its portion. Well, I say to the Mini ster of Agric ulture and the Premier today that it is time for them to stop ditheri ng, to stop blaming the federal government, and spend the 50-cent dollars that they say they have on the table. We are not asking them to put the federal government's money on the table.

We are saying put the money in the hands of the farm families today who need that very support that this government, this Premier and this Minis ter of Agriculture say is on the table. Madam Acting Speaker, if they are serious and if they are acting in good faith and they have any consideration at all for the farm families who are in trouble that money should be put in their hands. They are waiting, and they deserve an answer and some support from this government. You know, the Premier sent his Minis ter of Agricult ure to Ottawa on behalf of our farmers, and she walked out of the meeting.

I do not believe that she has the ri ght to walk out of a meeting when she is there representing farm famili es in Manitoba. She can do whatever she likes on her own time, and that is fair ball, but when the farmers in Manitoba have paid with their hard-earned tax dollars to send this minister to Ottawa to lobby on their behalf and to stand up for their interests, she really is not accepting her respons ibil ity to stay at the table and get the job done for those families.

I mean after she walked out of the meeting, and the next time the Premier sent her to Ottawa on behalf of farmers in Manitoba, things got even worse. For the first time, we as a province have agreed to accept less than our fair share after a stroke of the pen by our Minis ter of Agriculture. Our farmers are guaranteed that they will get less by the actions of this government, this Premier, and this minister. We are going backwards in this province, and we have the Premier and this Minis ter of Agricu lture to thank. Madam Acting Speaker, this government said they would help the farmers in the

4240 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 southwest, and they have not. They said they would have better relations with Ottawa, and they are worse. They said they have money on the table for the farmers of the southwest, but they will not give it to them. They went back to Ottawa to sign a new agreement and came back with less money than what they left with. This New Democratic government may have their hands at the wheel, but someone should tell them that they have hit the ditch. Farm families in Manitoba are in trouble and they are looking for help.

They are looking for answers, and they are not getting any from this government or this minister. They are not looking for excuses or for finger-pointing from this Premier and from this minis ter. Maybe the Premier's ears and his govern ment's ears are so full of advice from the union bosses in the province of Manitoba that they cannot hear the legitimate cry from farm families who need help and need help now. These are families that in 19 99 were devastated. They were not able to get crops in through no fault of their own. It was a natural disaster.

We, when we were in government, came to their aid and provided the much-needed $70 million in their greatest time of need. and they have asked for little more from this government than to give them what they deserve. * (15: 20) I find it shameful that we have to sit in this Legislature day after day and beg this govern ment to take some action. Farmers are proud people.

They do not want to have to beg on a daily basis, but they do want to be able to feed their families and they want to be able to get the assistance that other parts of the province and other communities have received in times of disaster and times of need. They are only asking, Madam Acting Speaker, for fair treatment from this Premier, from this Minis ter of Agriculture and from this government. It is sad to have to stand in the House today and debate a resolution that calls on this government to take action, to just look at the fairness and the balance that they talk about on a regular basis.

Every time they stand in this Legislature, they talk about fairness and balance. Well, they have not provided any fairness. They have not provided any balance, and they have not provided a penny to the southwest area, to those farm families that are in need from the di saster that happened in 19 99. All we are asking is for a bit of compassion and a bit of consideration on behalf of this Premier, this Min ister of Agriculture and this government to show those families that they truly have the ear of a government that should show the kind of support that they deserve.

So, Madam Acting Speaker, with those comments on the record, I would urge this minister to show compassion, to show that she cares and to show the fairness and balance that they espouse on a daily basis and provide the much-needed assistance. The Acting Speaker (Ms. Korzeniowski): The Interim Leader of the Opposition's time has expired. Hon.

Rosano Wowchuk (Minister of Agri culture and Food): I want to say that I am pleased to have the opportunity to say a few words with respect to the motion that has been brought forward by the Opposition and amended by my colleague, the Minis ter responsible for Government Services (Mr. Ashton). As I looked at the resolution, I am remi nded that we have a government motiion on the Order Paper that has been sitting for some time now and we are looking for the Opposition to show their support for this motion that we put forward.

In fact, we put this motion forward before my colleague and I went to Ottawa to try to get the federal government to recognize that indeed the southwest part of the province was not being treated in the same fashion as the people in the Red River Valley had been treated or people who had suffered other di sasters ..

Madam Acting Speaker, the members for some reason refused to support our motion and refused to give all-party support to a motion that we would have very much liked to have when we went to Ottawa to indi cate that there was all party support for having the federal government reconsider their decision as far as di saster assistance was being of fered to the southeast part of the province. They refused to support that motion, and it continues to sit on the Order Paper.

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 424 1 We have a motion here that has been brought forward now, and it is an issue worthy of discussion. I just want to make a few comments. The Leader of the Opposition in her comment said that since we have taken over in government we have done nothing for the producers. I do not think the producers will say $10 0 million is nothing. I do not think producers will think that the money we put into AIDA enhancements is nothing. Nor will they think that the money we were able to secure under the agreement that we have is nothing.

Madam Acting Speaker, the producers also appreciate the work we have done on the unseeded acreage program that we put in crop insurance. I have to tell the members opposite that producers have said they are very pleased that that is now part of crop insurance. Producers have also said that they appreciate the changes that we have made to crop insurance to enable producers to have their coverage enhanced, and in fact, that change we have made is going to put some additional money into producers' hands if they chose the option to buy additional coverage. There are changes.

The members opposite refuse to recognize that there have been changes, but the important thing is that producers recognize these as important changes. Certainly producers want continuity in their programs, not ad hoc programs. Madam Acting Speaker, the members talk about the fact that we have less money in the program.

The amount of money that is in the safety net program is the same money, but there is less money in the disaster assistance portion because that is where the money came from to top up the other provinces that were getting additional money because of the change from funding safety net programs based on risk towards cash receip ts. The decision was made to shift the money out of disaster assistance funding into the safety net portion. There is less money.

We hope that people do not have to draw on that money, but should there be a disaster and farmers have to draw on their CFIP program, the dollars will go where the disaster is. We hope that disaster will not be in Manitoba. We hope that there wiiJ be no disasters at all. There are still negotiations going on on that program. I would very much like to see the program take the form that, should there not be a disaster one year and there should be surplus money in the program, that money will roll over for additional money should there be a disaster in the following year.

I find it quite interesting that the members say that they are quite surprised with this agreement when this was the agreement that the previous minister began negotiating on in Prince Albert last year when they started this move shifting towards funding on cash receip ts versus risk. It is not a position that we supported, and clearly that was one of the reasons why we had to leave the meeting.

At some point, Madam Acting Speaker, when there are eight provinces and the federal government, you come to a point when you know that the federal government has agreed with all the other provinces, then you have to move forwar d. We have to move forward. We have a safety net program. We have a review that will take place at the completion of the program, and hopefully, at that time, we can convince other provinces that this is not the rig ht way to go. We have a monitoring system in place now to see what the impact of these changes is.

Certainly, we would have much prefer red to have the program funded based on risk as it was before. But sometimes, when you get into negotiations, you come to a point where you know that you are not going to get anymore. We were very pleased that, rather than losing $10 milli on, which was what was intended, we were able to maintain Manitoba at the same level. So Manitobans will be maintained at the same level.

Unfortunately, other provinces will be able to offer much richer safety nets, and we have to monitor that very closely and hope that we have conditions where we will not have to draw on these programs. * (1 5:30) It is very interesting that the Member is so concerned about the impacts of the loss of the Crow. There are members opposite who were preaching the benefits of the loss of the Crow, and now they are saying that they did not go far enough. Well, when they were agreeing to the

4242 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 elimination of the Crow, they also should have guaranteed that the kinds of funding that we farmers needed were going to be there. That never happened, and our farmers have been suffering ever since the change of the Crow. There was some money that came in, but Manitoba never benefited the way of the other provinces. [i nterjection} Madam Acting Speaker, the Member says he has no use for liars, well, neither do I have any use for liars. There certainly have been some stretched comments that have been put on the records over this last little while.

Madam Acting Speaker, what we say in this resolution is that, yes, we have to get the federal government to recognize their responsibility and we have to have fair treatment for all producers, no matter where they are in Manitoba. But, certai nly, when we look at the southeast part of the province, I have to tell you, when we have met with the producers from the southeast part of the province, what they are telling us is that we have to improve drainage. They are very critical of the previous government who cut the budget for water resources and neglected drainage over their term of office.

Over their term of office, they have neglected it, and producers in southeastern Manitoba are telling us that they want to see those drainages improved. Madam Acting Speaker, we had a meeting with producers and we are going to work with them to resolve that problem that has been created by the previous government. That is what the farm organizations are saying; that is what producers are saying.

Certainly, should there be a very serious situation with livestock, we will deal with it, but the claims are coming in for crop insurance and we would hope that producers will have their crops turned around where they will still get a very good crop. The issue of disaster assistance that ts outstanding in this province is quite unfor tunate. Manitoba's money is on the table. We went to Ottawa with our money on the table and asked the federal government to recognize the difficulties of the people ofthe southwest part of the province. Unfortunately, they have refused. I raised the same issue with Mr.

Vanclief when I was in Frederic ton and asked him if he would reconsider or whether he would lobby on behalf of the farmers of Manitoba. He quite clearly said- The Acting Speaker (Ms. Korzeniowski): The Honourable Minis ter of Agric ulture's time has expired. Mr. Glen Cumm ings (Ste. Rose): I wanted to speak to the amendment to this opposition resolution because I, along with my colleagues and I think I may have cut of f a couple of my colleagues-feel somewhat motivated, having listened to the Mini ster of Agriculture and being di sappointed with the approach that she is taking to responding to this motion.

There were a few comments that would be considered quite unparlia mentary if they were put on the record, coming from those of us who have a little dirt under our fingernails on this side of the House, listening to the Minis ter of Agriculture put misleading information on the n�cord. Well, the Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) now has started to chirp from her seat. She should remember that we did not interrupt her when she was speaking.

I will remind her that while she sanctimoniously says there have been changes made in the crop insurance coverage regarding unseeded acreage, she refuses to acknowledge that it was the previous Minis ter of Agricu lturt� who introduced it. She may have signed the final direction to the crop insurance board to make that change. It was announced in Brandon the same time as the previous adminis trati on-[in terjectionj You were there. If you did not hear it, you were not listening. You were there.

This minister tells us repeatt�dly that she was there when the announcement was made, and then she denies hearing the Minis ter of Agricu lture say that he was going to extend crop insurance for the future to cover unseeded acreage. That is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts by the Min ister of Agriculture. If she wants to play politics with it, that is fine, but I suggest that playing politics with the problem that the people in rural Manitoba, the agricul tural producers, have cutTently is not the way to go. We are here to discuss seriously an issue regarding whether or not there is anything that

July 19 , 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4243 the prov incial government can be doing at this stage in their administration that would deal with past wrongs that have occurred in terms of the disaster of 19 99 and whether or not this minister, without breaking any rules of administration, without breaking the piggybank, is prepared to discuss whether or not there is a potential wherewithal of the current administration to deal with a very serious financial dilemma com pounded by negative markets around the world.

I know and we all know that the provincial government cannot of f set the hurt of world grai n prices. That is indeed a federal responsibil ity, but there are things that are happening where farmers have suffered from the compounding of bad weather, bad prices and downright disaster in many parts of the province last year that is now leaving them in a situation where they must start using up their equity.

The AIDA program does not seem to be able to deliver dollars in a timely fashion, and I challenge this minister to prove to us that the money that was reduced from the Province's share of AIDA for not supporting negative margins, I challenge her to show and prove that that is not where the money came from that she used to sprinkle across all of - The Acting Speaker (Ms. Korzeniowski): Order, please. I would like to remind the Honourable Member to please dir ect all comments through the Chair. Mr.

Cum mings: Madam Acting Speaker, be cause I was not facing you dir ectly does not mean I am not intending my comments to be through the Chair. I do challenge this minister to show that the money she used to sprinkle across agri Manitoba in the last number of months was not funding the negative margins. It is entirely too much of a coinci dence for many of rural Manitoba's agric ultural producers to have to accept the fact that that is not where the money came from.

Frankly, that action, what it has done is make it so that for those who suffered the most and did, in fact, generate negative margins, we are, in fact, compounding their prob lem by not recognizing those negative margins. Now, from a political point of view, I suspect the Government and the Minis ter probably are not going to be crippled politically by that decision. The majority of their votes do not come from agri Manitoba. The majority of the voters in her riding and in Dauphin probably do not suffer from that same prob lem. I notice the Member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers) waving to me from across the way.

Probably he can argue he does not have a lot of negative margins in his constituency. I suspect there are some in the Gil bert Plains area, though, and I suspect Grandview, as well, as the Member would add to the lis t. That is exactly why I say that the money that is not in the AIDA program as the prov incial share for negative margins is pro viding a double whammy to those who suf fered from what were disaster conditions last year in the production of their crops.

You know, agricult ure today, for the edification of those who are not involved in agricu lture, who might be hearing this or currently sitting in the Chamber, the biggest percentage of net income on 80 percent of the farms in this country today comes from off-farm income, in other words, whether it is the spouse working off-farm, or both husband and wife taking part-time jobs or, in some cases, full-time jobs of f of the farm and bringing that money back into their operation, and that number may even be higher than when that last survey or compilation was done.

That is a very, very sad reflection, Madam Acting Speaker, on whether or not agricu lture is in a buoyant state. There are, in fact, operations out there that are well capitalized, that are highly effici ent. They are moving ahead as rapidly as they can. Some of them have diversified. They are doing exceedingly well on an outward appearance, but they are a rapidly decreasing number. At the same time, they are the only source of relief that the other 80 percent has. They can sell to them.

They can lease to them, and they can leave the industry. * (1 5:40) I suggest that this government is failing to recognize that it has a responsib ility to those people who are now leaving the industry. There are things that they could do that are quite within the financial and the resp onsibili ty area of this government, that they could deal with those

4244 LEGISLAT IVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 issues. I have pointed out one, the negative margin issue. The Mini ster did the right thing politically. She sprinkled like fairy dust about $16 or $19 million across all of agri Manitoba. That is considered agricultural aid. Every time the Minis ter stands up, she refers to that money. Every time the Premier stands up, he refers to that money. I am telling you that money should have been directed towards the areas where there was indeed a disaster and there was a financial hurt.

Politically, that is an argument that no one on that side of the House seems to be prepared to accept, and that is an argument that, frankly, when it comes down to counting the votes, they will probably do quite well on. So I suggest that they have a rig ht to be somewhat uncomfortable when somebody calls them to task on that redistribution of those dollars. When I look at this amendment to the motion that is in front of us today, I suggest that the Min ister of Government Services (Mr.

Ashton), in his wisdom, has provided an amendment that probably takes the teeth out of this resolution, makes it so that it will not be an unanimous resolution of this House. For that, he and his government will have to bear respons ibil ity, because every time they stand up and say we will not pass a unanimous resolution in this House, they have to remember that they accept half of the responsibility for that.

It seems to me that, as agri Manitoba changes, as it goes through these tough times, we have seen other jurisdictions, and especially Saskatchewan and Alberta, but particularly Alberta, that have forged forward and dealt with the issue and then gone to Ottawa and been able to claw back the dollars from Ottawa. The previous admini stration did that in terms of the announcement for the unseeded acres in the spring of 19 99. This government and the Premier have clearly said there is money in the rainy-day fund that they so derisively talked about over the year.

There is money there, but he says he wants to spend it for priorities of his government. It is very clear that agricu lture is not one of those priorities. Mr. Cris Aglugub (The Maples): This after noon I am very pleased to be able to say a few words about the amendments that we have before us today. As we all know, all members of the House are concerned about the areas of Manitoba which have received excess moisture in the past few weeks. Last week the Mini ster of Government Services toured the affected areas in Headingley, and the Agriculture Minis ter toured the areas around Steinbach and Springfield.

Other areas affected incl uded Portage, the Interlake, Virden, Shoal Lake, Hamiota, and Neepawa. Hail and tornado went through Hamiota on the weekend. The departments of Conservation, Govern ment Services and Agriculture are working proactively with the communities and producers to deter mine what information or assistance individuals in communities require. Estimates of crop condition and crop losses are being developed and continually updated by the Department of Agriculture. It is impor tant to note that there are programs and procedures in place to deal with situations of this kind.

Producers are making use of the Crop Insurance Program which was designed for cases like this. There are approximately 270 Crop Insurance claims across the province; 10 0 of those claims have come in during the past week. Crop Insu rance expects the number to continue to increase over the next week. In Manitoba, we have a tradition of dealing with these types of natural dis asters in a co operative, non-partisan way. We experienced this in 19 93, again in 19 97, and we certai nly want to continue this tradition. When the Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms.

Wowchuk) was in southeast Manitoba, many of the concerns expressed there wen� with regard to drainage. We know that members opposite have raised concerns over the cuts to the former Department of Natural Resources under the previous government and the em�ct of these cuts on the maintenance of drainage or drains. We appreciate their acknowledgement of the difficult circ umstances that the department, the producers now find themselves in as a result of these decisions.

In a press release last week, the Keystone Agricu ltural Producers stated that it is not so much where the water is coming from, but rather where the water is supposed to go. Addressing

July 19 , 2000 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4245 drainage issues in the province will help alleviate the effects of excess moisture. This is why we continue to urge all members of this House to work co-operatively together, as we have done in other flooding ci rcumstances, to provide as much support to all those experiencing flooding conditions in the Province of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker in the Chair Since forming government, we have introduced the following supports to farm families: improvements made to the Crop Insurance Program to make it more flexible and responsive includes culverts for excess moisture, culverts for new crops such as hemp, and the introduction of the flexible price option for producers. In February, the Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) announced a $1 00-million package, which is called the Canada-Manitoba agricu ltural payment for Manitoba producers to address the current income crisis.

The package is cost-shared, with $60 million fr om the federal government and $40 mill ion from the Government of Manitoba; $23.6-million worth of enhancements were made to the 19 99 AIDA program . Most recently, Manitoba reached a new three-year safety net agreement, the Canada farm income program with the federal government. When the original formula for the new safety net program was proposed by the federal government, Manitoba would have seen a reducti on. However, the Minis ter of Agriculture negotiated to ensure that Manitoba would maintain the same level of funding.

In addition, we also negotiated to make the new income disaster assistance program three years, rather than two years that was proposed. Those are my comments, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much. Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I regret that the Minis ter of Agricul ture (Ms. Wowchuk) on several specific issues considers to bare herself, if I can use that expr ession, of any measure of respect and integrity by insis ting, for instance, on the fact that the decision for expanding, and I say expanding because unseeded acreage was always available under the Crop Insurance Program .

A number, not many, some 6 percent of the contract holders availed themselves ofthat program 10 , 15 , 20 years ago. It was always available. So to present unseeded acreage as a brand-new edition to the benefits that Crop Insurance provides is simply not true. That is so easy to determine, so easy to document. I am surprised that the Minis ter would leave herself open, to put herself in that kind of a position. Of course, as my colleague the Member for Ste. Rose (Mr.

Cummings) pointed out just a little while ago the Min ister herself was present in the company of farm leaders, press, principally from western Manitoba, in Brandon when I announced among other things real and substantive aid to those farmers in need, $50 an acre, and at the same time announced-and she was pres ent-that instructions had gone out to the Crop Insurance Corporation to ensure that the unseeded acreage program would be changed. * (1 5:50) The program was there. The program was there before I was there. It was there when Sam Uskiw was Minis ter of Agriculture for Ed Schreyer and the New Democrats.

It was there before that. It was there at the bir th of Crop Insurance in 19 59-19 60. I remind all: Crop Insurance is here because of the Conser vative adminis tration of Duf f Roblin and the Conser vative adminis tration in Ottawa. It was brought into being in the year '59. In '58 it was a pilot project. I am very proud that Manitoba led the way. Crop Insurance was born in Manitoba. That now is enjoyed by farmers right across this country. George Hutton, my predecessor, brought it in along with Mr. Hamilton under the Diefenbaker adminis tration that brought it in.

Now that program was expanded and I announced that expansion in July. It was just about this time a year ago that I announced that directions were given to the Crop Insurance Corporation to expand the unseeded acreage from a voluntary program to a mandatory one. That is the only change that took place. I am

4246 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 19 , 2000 disappointed, disappointed in the fact that the Honourable Minis ter of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) puts her reputation on the line by attempting to deny this little bit of history. More specifically though to the resolution, I honestly believe what this government should be doing and what we all should be doing, we have for different reasons-and different people can take the credit for it. Certainly the federal Prime Minis ter or federal Minis ter of Finance, Paul Martin, and others, will take their full measure of credit for it.

But we are enjoying an unprecedented period of reasonably good times in our economy and that is being reflected in all of our economic figures. For the first time in many years, indiv idual provinces' financial affairs are in order. If you believe what we hear from Ottawa, in fact what we see coming out of Ottawa is that we are for the first time in many years accruing very significant, substantial billio ns of dollars of surpluses in the federal Treasury. What is needed therefore now is a JOint effort from all of us. This is what this resolution really calls for. My colleague the Member for Emerson (Mr.

Jack Penner) states it so elo quently, there has to be, at this time, and taking into consideration the situation of agriculture, a commitment made by all of us to come to support agriculture somewhere closer to how agriculture is being supported by our major competitors, the Europeans and the Americans. Agricult ure is and continues to be not the only source of our country's wealth but a very signi ficant one. More importantly, particularly in provinces like Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, agriculture is more than just bushels of wheat or barley or hectares or pounds of beef and pork or eggs.

It is a social thing. It is a sustenance of rural life as we know it. It means much more than just dollars and cents. There are enough members opposite who understand that. So we should look at, as the Europeans had made long ago, a commitment. I can understand the European commitment. That European commitment was made shortly after 19 45, when rich, wealthy countries like France, like Britain, like Germany suf fered through famine as a result of the devastation of their war and their economy. They said to themselves, regardless of political parties, we will not be lilungry again.

So they made a commitment that they will support agriculture at a level which is surp rising. A West German or a French farmer gets $12 a bushel for his wheat, no matter whether the world price is $3 or $4. The Ameri can governments have not been far behind the Europeans. Just recently again we hear of massive, massive support payments to Americ an agriculture. Mr. Speaker, we can argue about the merits of the different programs. We can argue about who is taking credit for doing what. We can argue about past mistakes.

But what is needed now is for this minister, for this government, they happen to be the government of the day, along with their counterparts in Saskatchewan, along with Alberta, we should not be storming out of agric ultural ministers' meetings in a huff. We should be using all our influence to collectively put the political will into our provincial and federal governments to come to agriculture's aid at this time. That is what is required. That is what this resolution addresses.

Surely we ought to be able to understand that is extremely impor tant to the ongoing welfare, not just of the reside nts here in the city of Winnipeg or in Brandon or in Portage, our urban res idents, but to all of us, urban and rural . That is what we should be striving for, because there is a particular time right now when I honestly believe it is doable. It was not that easy half a dozen or a dozen years ago when all govern ments were running serious defiicits, both federal and provincial, but it is, in my opinion, easier now. Mr.

Speaker, I am going to make a further suggestion to the honourable members opposite. They ought to consider knocking on the door of one Stockwell Day, the new leader of the Canadian Alliance Party, because I will go on the record: in eight months he will be our Pr ime Min ister, and he will be appointing who will be the Min ister of Agriculture. We should be making that as part of his platform. Honourable members, it does not matter, who are we fighting for? We are fighting for the welfare of our farmers. We are fighting for the

July 19, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4247 welfare of our farmers and the welfare of the agricul tural industry here in Manitoba. So let us grasp at all opportunities. But I see that big freedom train is starting to gain momentum, rolling now from the Okanagan Valley, Coquitlam in B.C., through Alber ta, through Saskatchewan, on to Manitoba, right into Ottawa, being the next government, and we should be lobbying with that future Prime Minis ter right now to get a fair shake for our farmers. * (16:00) Mr.

Stan Struthers (Dauphin-Roblin): I can not help but notice that the freedom train got stuck in Ottawa and did not go to Quebec or the Maritimes that the Member across was talking. Mr. Speaker, I want to rise today in support of the amendment put forward by the Minis ter of Hig hways and Government Services (Mr. Ashton). I think it provides this House an excellent opportunity to once and for all send a message to Ottawa that we are united and that we are together, and that all of us in this House can rise above the small petty politics that sometimes bog us down in this building.

The other reason I am pleased to rise today to speak on this amendment is to hopefully strai ghten out some of the misconceptions that members opposite seem to be labouring under. It was interesting to hear some of the comments about the political side of this whole agricul tural debate. It was very interesting to hear members opposite accuse this government of playing politics, of not being too worried about whether we support people in the southwest who are farming because we are not going to ever win those seats anyway. They are seats held by Conservative members in this Legis lature.

Well, there are a number of absolutely varying faults in that approach. First of all, it indicates to us, and I know the Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings) referenced this in his comments, it indi cates to me an old, outdated, stale approach to government. It may be the approach that members opposite took when they were in government the last eleven and a half long, long years. It may be that was the approach that they took when they were making decisions in this province. But they should have done it then and we are doing it now. They should have not worried about who was voting for who.

They should have made decisions when they were in government based on facts, based on the reality of the situation out there in rural Manitoba. Then maybe they would not be dealing with complaints that the North had been ignored over the past decade or so, or that certain areas of the Parkland were ignored over a certain number of years in the last 11 years. Maybe things would have been fair from the beginning if the previous government did not have that mindset to begin with. It is wrong to treat one part of this province differently than the other.

It is not a democratic way to approach the very important public decisio n-making authority of this House. It is just not fair to Manitobans for the previous government to approach decision making in that way. If we accepted the argument brought forward by members opposite that we would only govern for areas that are repre sented by New Democrat MLAs, can I then flip the coin over and say that members opposite would not give a darn about this issue if it was in ridings outside of their own, that they would be arguing about?

Is it just coincidence that Tory MLAs from across the way are going to bat because this is an issue that is predominantly in their area? It just happens to be that Gilbert Plains and Grandview get caught in that net, but that is not an argument that I think we should be making from this side of the House because it assumes that either their side or our side in government would not treat Manitobans fairly. I do not want that to happen.

The other thing that I want to make certain that all Manitobans understand and anybody who cares to read the Hansard on this debate, an important debate brought forward by the Member for Emer son, I want them to know that a lot of Manitoba taxpayers' dollars has gone into this situation already, $100 million to begin, also $70 million that has been put forward at a time when the Members opposite were in government, at a time when the opposition of the day said, great idea, go ahead, we are with you. Seventy million dollars of taxpayers money.

Did that even move the federal government one iota into coming up to the table with their money?

4248 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANIT OBA July 19, 2000 You see, the Opposition's premise in this whole argument is wrong. The Oppos ition's premise is that if we, today, were to put more money into the southwest part of the province, into the agricultural disaster that is legitimately there, the feds would then come forward and they would then put their money on the table. Members opposite are somehow trying to paint this government and this minister and this Premier as the big obstacle to this. But the facts do not bear out your argument. There is $70 million on the table already, Manitoba's taxpayers' money.

Has that produced anything from the feds? No. Why would it produce anything from the feds now? Our money is on the table. Your argument is nonsense. The argument that we see put forward by the Opposition does not make sense. It is not logical. It is not rational. It cannot be defended, but it is good politics for members who are representing those ridings in the southwest. Mr. Speaker, the Min ister has been having her reputation questioned in this House today by members opposite. Her integrity has been put under question by members opposite.

They have hidden behind the excuse that they cannot say what they really think because parlia mentary language stops them from doing that. Well, the $40 milli on CMAP money, $40 million, this minister has come through on. The members opposite can sneeze at that if they like, but that is real action for real producers in a real disaster. No matter how the Opposition laughs about it, criticizes it and says nasty things about a minister who is working hard, it is still money in farmers' pockets.

AIDA agricult ural enhance ments, I am going by memory here, but somewhere around the $23 mill ion mark, at least something over $20 million, somewhere like that has been provided for. That was this minister who played the lead role in making that happen. Mr. Speaker, I think what sums up the approach of the members opposite to this is the announcement that they were crowing about earlier today in this debate, in which they claim that crop insurance has always been there and we made the big announcement over a year ago.

Oh, yes, for 11 years people in Manitoba and farmers got pretty used to h(:aring announce ments from this previous government. There was a lot of big talk. Not much action. Not much action at all. It was this minister through an election promise made by our party in the election, where we said that there will be excess moisture insurance, that provided this for farmers. If that had been in plact! at the outset of this disaster, there would be more money in farmers' pockets.

The "i f" de:pended on the previous government and they did not, they were more interested in making announcements than putting money into farmers' pockets. So there says it all about the previous government. Just to conclude, I am very interested to see how members opposite will vote on this amendment, an amendment that we have amended through the co-operation of our minister and their critic. It will be very interesting to see if, once and for all, finally, the members opposite get it.

Finally, will they vote for an amendment on a motion that will unite this legis lature with farm ers, with the farm groups. with municipal organizations, and finally be able to say to the federal government that we do indeed have a united, solid position in favour of farmers in Manitoba? It is up to you. * (16:10) Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): It is a pleasure to stand and put a few comments on the record.

It is a little ironic, I think, that we listen to the members opposite talk about the prev ious government and some of the dedsions that they made and suggest that they were based on a voter bloc of people, when within a short period of time of taking government we find out about deals that were made in the middle of the night to build five casinos in Manitoba, and deals that were made in the middle of the night to revoke labour legislation because a group of people and the union organizers at the Manitoba Teachers' Society got together and cut a deal to their voters.

The bills that come across from the opposite side are all dir ectly related to payoffs, to organizations that they cut deals with. As I say, the deals were cut in the middle of the night, in a dark room, and perhaps a small press release or a

July 19 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4249 release to at least their own membership comes across the plate, and then they suggest that it was a promise made in the election and that they have to honour those particular promises. It continually amazes me how the members of the government of the day can talk about dealing with specific groups and organizations, to assent to them and their wishes in order to secure their vote in the future. I also want to comment on the comments made by the Minis ter of transportation who talks of arrogance.

He talks of arro gance of the federal ministers of the Government of Canada. Well, I can tell him about the arrogance of the ministers of the Government of Manitoba when they talk about going out and visiting with the people that are most affected in these areas. They have yet to do that. We have to bring our deleg ations in to the Province, in to meet the ministers. Even then, it is only on a whim that they might get in to see-we have a Minis ter of Health that refuses to meet with the health boards that he has now partly appointed. He refuses to come out and talk to them and discuss the issues.

Yet we have a minister of transportation talk about arrogance. We have a Minis ter of Conservation (Mr. Lathlin) goes out and actually organizes meetings, calls them, rents the hall, pays for the ads, and then chooses at the last moment to cancel the meetings because there may be some di sagreement in the public with what he is trying to do. The Minis ter of transportation talks about arro gance of ministers in Ottawa. I suggest that the Minis ter should take a look at his own benches and see the arro gance that oozes out of there every day.

In fact, on this side of the House, we have come to call it "garroga nce" because it is prevalent throughout all the front benches. It is even leaching upwards to the back benches as we hear the arrogance of the members opposite every day. An Honourable Member: Anything for a cheap political shot. Mr. Tweed: It is interesting that they talk about cheap shots from the other side. It would not be far beyond the Mi nister of transportation to drag anybody's name into the forum in this legis lation if he could gain a politic al point on it.

I suggest that the Min ister of transportation take a look at his track record and the things that he said in the past, the way he has defamed people and individuals in this House, and he continues to talk about the arrogance of the ministers in Ottawa. It is a far cry, Mr. Speaker, that we should- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Minis ter of Hi ghways, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Ashton: There was a fairly spirited debate going on, and I do not question the Member's right to engage in that. Certainly I was responding from my seat.

But to make reference to me or anybody in this House having defamed people in this House is unacceptable. I would like to ask the Member to withdraw that. I have no difficulty with the tone of debate that is every member's right, but to suggest that I or anybody would have defamed anybody in this House, I think, is unacceptable. My only comments from my seat were in regard to Art Eggleton refusing to meet with us, which I take no

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-1-64
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 1st hansardpdf 64.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ce7af776b197e96f7a43ae6c91d0576791193e29

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