Manitoba Hansard — 16 August 2000 (Sitting 79, 37th Legislature, 1st Session)

37-1-79

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. 79 - 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, August 16, 2000

Member AGLUGUB, Cris ALLAN, Nancy ASHTON, Steve, Hon. ASPER, Linda BARRETT, Becky, Hon. CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. CUMMINGS, Glen DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER. Gary, Hon. DRIEDGER, Myrna uYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. GILLESHAMMER, Harold HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LA THUN, Oscar, Hon. LAURENDEAU, Marcel LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. LOEWEN, John MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. MAGUIRE, Larry MALOWAY, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn, Hon.

MITCHELSON, Bonnie NEV AKSHONOFF, Tom PENNER, Jack PENNER, Jim PITURA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. ROCAN, Denis RONDEAU, Jim SALE, Tim, Hon. SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry SCHULER, Ron SELINGER, Greg, Hon. SMITH, Joy SMITH, Scott STEFANSON, Eric STRUTHERS, Stan TWEED, Mervin WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Constituency The Maples St. Vital Thompson Riel Inkster Brandon East Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Russell Selkirk Concordia Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Wolseley River Heights Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon St. James The Pas St. Norbert La Verendrye Fort Whyte St. Johns Arthur-Virden Elmwood Burrows Lord Roberts Minto River East Interlake Emerson Steinbach Morris Lac du Bonnet Transcona South dale Rupertsland Carman Assiniboia Fort Rouge Wellington Rossmere Springfield St. Boniface Fort Garry Brandon West Kirkfield Park Dauphin-Rob lin Turtle Mountain Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C.

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

51 11 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA VVednesday,August 16,2000 The House met at 1: 30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Bill 12-The Public Schools Amendment Act Mr. David Faurschou (Portage Ia Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Colleen Alder, Lillian Hiebert, Helen McCormick and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Caldwell) withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mrs.

Joy Smith (Fort Garry): I beg to present the petition of Dan Stasiuk, Elsie Stasiuk, Joan Franks and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I beg to present the petition of Yvonne Martin, H. Barber, M. Barber and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr.

Peter Dyck (Pembina): I beg to present the petition of Herman Bueckert, Helena Elias, Marge Elias and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I beg to present the petition of Marilyn Panchuk, Anne Faykes, Elizabeth Peters and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr.

Harry Enns (Lakeside): I beg to present the petition of Lois Isaacs, Lee Isaacs, Lynda Froese and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. John Loewen (Fort VVhyte): I beg to present the petition of Roman Burron, Grace Wiebe, Viola Wilson and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr.

Jack Reimer (Southdale): I beg to present the petition of Adolph Judt, Helga Judt, Andrew Schoubye and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Denis Rocan (Carman): I beg to present the petition of Linda Wilton, Doug Wilton, Leonard Bergsma and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Tmining withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Bill 12- The Public School Amendment Act Mr.

Speaker: The Honout:able Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [Agreed] Would the Clerk please read. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): To the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and

51 12 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the family; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of facilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-school families; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents; and THAT Bill 12 fails to provide a mechanism of appeal for home-school families other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. * (1 3: 35) Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Southdale (Mr. Reimer), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [Agreed] Will the Clerk please read.

Madam Clerk: To the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the family; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of facilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-school families; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents; and THAT Bill 12 fails to provide a mechanism of appeal for home-school families other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Morris (Mr. Pitura), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [Agreed] The Clerk please read.

Madam Clerk: To the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the family; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of facilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-school families; and

August 16 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 511 3 THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the free doms of home-school parents; and THAT Bill 12 fails to provide a mechanism of appeal for home-school families other than the courts. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12 , The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the fa mily; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supporte d; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of fa cilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-school fa milies ; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrus ive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents ; and THAT Bill 12 fa ils to provide a mechanism of appeal fo r home-school fa milies other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assem bly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersi gned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the fa mily; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not reco gnized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of fa cilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-school fa milies; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrus ive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents; and THAT Bill 12 fa ils to provide a mechanism of appeal fo r home-school fa milies other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assem bly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education

51 14 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. * (13 :40) Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): I would ask the Assembly for leave to present a petition on behalf of the Member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer). [Agreed] Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the pro vince of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could advers ely affect the rights of the fa mily; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of fa cilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-school fa milies ; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school paren ts; and THAT Bill 12 fa ils to pro vide a mechanism of appeal fo r home-school fa milies other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assem bly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could advers ely affect the rights of thef amily; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of fa cilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-schoolf amilies; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intru sive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school paren ts; and THAT Bill 12 fa ils to pro vide a mechanism of appeal fo r home-school fa milies other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assem bly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense.

August 16 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5115 Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the unders igned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could advers ely affect the rights of the fa mily; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of fa cilitating the freedom and effoctiveness of home-school fa milies ; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrus ive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school pare nts; and THAT Bill 12 fa ils to provide a mechanism of appeal fo r home-school fa milies other than the courts .

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assem bly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersign ed citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could advers ely affect the rights of the fa mily; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of fa cilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-schoolf amilies; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents; and THAT Bill 12 fa ils to provide a mechanism of appeal fo r home-school fa milies other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [Agreed] Will the Clerk please read.

Madam Clerk: To the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT home education is a viable alternative to public education; and THAT Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the family; and THAT the convictions of parents/guardians are not recognized and openly supported; and

511 6 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 THAT the home-school organizations have not been consulted regarding the best method of facilitating the freedom and ef fectiveness of home-school families; and THAT new policies and regulations have already come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bill 12 being passed, which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in nature and which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents; and THAT Bill 12 fails to provide a mechanism of appeal for home-school families other than the courts.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education and Training withdraw Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the 1999-2000 Annual Report of Civil Legal Services. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the gallery where we have with us today a group representing the home schoolers of Manitoba.

This group is a guest of the Honourable Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Labour Relations Act Amendments-Comm ittee Process Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, this Premier and his ministers seem to have all the answers on what is good for business in Manitoba, but they have not been able to find one business that agrees with them.

The only people who seem to agree with this Premier and his ministers are the union bosses that obviously helped him develop this government's hidden agenda behind closed doors, the union bosses that have never taken a risk, never created a job or never had to meet a payroll. The Premier has made- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier has said many, many times that he just wanted this bill to move to committee so that he would have the opportunity to listen and to hear what all Manitobans had to say.

But last night we saw the Minister and the Committee gag Manitobans by moving closure- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, we saw at committee last night the members of the Committee and the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) shut down presentations on Bill 44, move closure. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. *( 13:45) Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My very direct question to the Premier is: Did he direct his ministers and the Committee to shut down debate and shut down Manitobans? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, one can wonder why members opposite would suggest, when they still have the right to ask questions and discuss the Bill before the Legislature, why they say that we are shutting down debate. I think members opposite are perfectly capable of debating this bill, and so are members on this side. As I understand it, over 60 presentations were made. There were some briefs in favour of the proposals, and there were some briefs

August 16, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 511 7 opposed to it. Certainly, as the Member has suggested in part of her

preamble to the question, we are listening to Manitobans, and the Minister is certainly very cognizant of the suggestions.

I would point out that in the debate last night-and it almost mirrored in an opposite way the debate on Bill 26 a few years ago-but there was one independent, there were a couple of independent people at the Committee that were presenting views, and I would quote from the presentation of the Manitoba Oblate Justice and Peace Committee: To many observers it seems quite amazing that a few relatively minor changes in the labour code could stir up such passionate and vociferous debate on both sides of the question.

They go on to conclude: the minimal amendments to The Labour Relations Act as proposed in Bill 44 appear to us to be no more than a very small step in achieving the Christian vision of an economy where the dignity of the least powerful participants is given the highest priority. That is a very excellent presentation. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I would agree with the Premier (Mr.

Doer) that some presenters that were heard were in support of the legislation and some presenters that were heard were opposed to the legislation, but the key point here is that some presenters were never heard as a result of this government's action. Labour Legislation Government Agenda Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, it is quite clear and quite evident that the only election promise that this Premier has fulfilled is one that he did not tell the public about, and that was the one where he made the secret deals behind closed doors with the union bosses with the introduction of Bill 44.

Today, in the Fr ee Press, this is what is said about the Premier's labour law changes: "They suddenly appeared on the public agenda in July through a backdoor procedure, out of public view." And I go on to quote : "The exercise seems to show that this government is controlled by unseen forces and that there is no knowing what they will do next." We know what the unseen forces are. They are the union bosses who are driving this government's agenda and telling this government what should become law, especially with labour law.

My question to the Premier is: What is he going to spring on the people of Manitoba next? What is the next plank in his hidden agenda going to be? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Members opposite will know that it is not in the "backrooms of Manitoba" but in this Legislature where we voted against Bill 26 in 1996, Mr. Speaker, right out in the open, and if people were not following those decisions, that is regrettable. Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the members opposite that we will continue to keep our five commitments in terms of improving health care. Our Minister of Health (Mr.

Chomiak) has done more to improve the health care system in 11 months than the members opposite did in 11 years, and I hope to have hundreds and hundreds of new student nurses in place shortly, consistent with our promise. Instead of firing nurses, we are going to train new young people for our hospitals and for our communities. * (13 :50) We are going to lower tuition fees as we promised and provide young people more hope to go to universities, Mr. Speaker. That is a promise made and that will be a promise kept.

We are proceeding to double the number of community college spots so that well-trained, educated people can take the new skilled jobs of the new economy. That is another promise we made in the election campaign. Mr. Speaker, we have just now received the property tax reductions through the property tax credits, another promise we made. We balanced the budget, and we went beyond that by introducing income tax reductions for families. That is another promise we made and we are keeping. We have just made a new partnership with the day-care operators of Manitoba; and on behalf of families and kids, Mr. Speaker, we

5118 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 have new investments in child care and day care in Manitoba, something that has been applauded by the Child Care Association. Eleven years of neglect, 11 months of .Progress with child cares in Manitoba. I am pleased that an independent- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, in terms of, again, the Oblate Justice and Peace Committee, I would ask members opposite to reflect that: This Bill 44 appears to us to be no more than a small step in achieving the Christian vision of an economy where the dignity of the least powerful partici pants is given the highest priority. Reflect on those words. Labour Relations Act Amendments-Comm ittee Process Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the OtTJCial Opposition): Mr. Speaker. but with all that rhetoric, all Manitobans have seen in the last 10 months is this government in the back pockets of the union bosses.

Again, today, we saw in the news media a story that covered the closure that this government placed on Manitobans last night at committee. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) tried to justify what she did, invoking closure, by saying that it is very uncommon for legislative committees to sit more than three times.

Obviously, the Minister of Labour was not telling the truth when she made those comments. *( 1 3: 55) I ask the Premier now whether he would call his minister to task and ask her to apologize to Manitobans for putting untruthful, unfactual information on the record? Mr. Speaker: Order. I would just like to remind the Honourable Interim Leader of the Official Opposition, "not telling the truth" is out of order when making reference directly to a member. I would ask the Honourable Member to please withdraw those words. Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

If I said anything that was unparlia mentary, I would like to unequivocally withdraw it. But I would like to ask the question on why the Minister of Labour-maybe I should ask directly to the Minister of Labour: Why in fact did she put wrong information on the record to try to justify her attempt and her success in moving closure on the legislative process at committee last evening? Mr. Speaker: Order. I thank the Honourable Interim Leader of the Official Opposition for withdrawing the comments. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, there is no question that the Committee had three separate hearings, that peopie were notified well in advance of the Committee hearings of the opportunity to present. As I understand it, even last evening members on the list were being called again by the Clerk's office. Well over 60 of the presenters presented. A number of others presented in writing to the Committee. As I recall, even in places like the Meech Lake Constitutional Task Force report, that is a very high number of people that sign up and present either verbally or in writing to the Committee. Mr.

Speaker, the members opposite are using and misusing the term "invoke closure." The members opposite know that there is a parliamentary term for invoking closure that was not utilized by this side of the House. It is one thing to say that the Committee meetings went late and early into the morning, which is fair criticism, but it is another thing to invent terms that do not exist. In terms of the honesty of the issue, I think it is important, when the members' staff phone the media at night and say we are

August 16 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 511 9 invoking closure when we are not. I think members opposite should apologize. Mr. Speaker, in dealing with the Bill, again from a professor of industrial relations, Mr. Godard from the school of business at the University of Manitoba, he very eloquently articulates the argument that these are "very minor changes to The Labour Relations Act." He also says that Manitoba, in his view, would be well served by the attempts to amend the Act as proposed in Bill 44, and he is a person who has studied this issue on behalf of the Faculty of Management.

He goes on to look at some of the hysteria that has been utilized by members opposite, and one would note that in six provinces, or if a federal jurisdiction, there is the issue of certification in the areas of other jurisdictions. Notably British labour, the New Labour has brought in similar proposals in the U.K. at 50 percent plus 1. We believe the economy is improving; it has been improving. But we also believe, we fundamentally believe, to quote the former term of John F. Kennedy, that a rising tide should raise all ships.

We believe that the economy has enough room for employers to invest and make profits and for working people and their families to have hope, opportunity and increased dis posable income so their children can stay in Manitoba and in turn raise families in our great province. That is what we believe in. Labour Relations Act Amendments-Committee Process Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, in less than two months we have seen the NDP create a rift between labour and business.

Bill 44 deliberately provokes business against labour and labour against business, and invoking closure was certainly not the solution. What kind of a climate was expected with the introduction of Bill 44? The Minister knew the three most controversial issues split the LMRC, and she must have known that they would also divide Manitobans, or was that her ultimate goal? * (14: 00) Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I am responding, as House Leader, to the horribly misleading statements by members opposite. Mr. Speaker: Order.

Is the Honourable Government House Leader up on a point of order? An Honourable Member: I am responding to the question, Mr. Speaker. In the question- Mr. Speaker: Order. For my clarification, is the Honourable Government House Leader, Attor ney General, up on a point of order or is the Honourable Minister up to answer the question? An Honourable Member: Answer the question. Mr. Speaker: To answer the question. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, in answer to the question, and as House Leader, I just have to express my profound regret at the horribly misleading statements by the Interim Leader of the Opposition and the Member who just rose, and there may be some opposite who have a tongue in cheek when they said there is an invocation of closure. There may be some others that are not familiar with the rules, and perhaps the Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler) is one of them. But what is- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Oppo sition House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr.

Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, Beauchesne's 417 : "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." The Honourable House Leader knows very well that, when the Member was posing the question to the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett), it was in accordance with what was happening last night. Now the Minister might not call that closure, but the motion was moved that no one else would be heard after last night's committee hearings. In our books, that is closure. I do not care where he looks.

512 0 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order. Mr. Mackintosh: There was no point of order, Mr. Speaker. That was simply a debate on the facts, and that is what this is all about in Question Period, if you would allow me to answer the question now. Mr. Speaker: The point of order raised by the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader, I would have to say he does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Attorney General to conclude his remarks. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, what happened last night was the opposite of closure. There are members opposite who know full well what- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Mackintosh: Here is some gagging, Mr. Speaker, from the members opposite. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I refer members opposite, if they want to know about closure, they know full well Rule 46 which shuts down debate at 2 a.m. in this Legislature.

What happened last night was the enabling and facilitation of every single speaker who came from the public last night to speak, to complete their remarks, not in 10 minutes as the Opposition did when they were in government, but in 15 minutes. Every person who showed up was enabled to speak, and we did not send them home at twelve o'clock with them waiting five and a half hours. Last night was the essence of democracy, sitting till 5:20 a.m. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, the Government could have called the Committee again for this morning. Labour Legislation Impact on Labour Relations Mr.

Ron Schuler (Springfield): My question to the Minister of Labour or whoever is willing to answer: Is the reason the NDP did not campaign on any of these changes and did not present them to the economic summit was because they knew it would destroy relations between business and labour? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, as we have said since discussion on Bill 44 began, we expect Bill 44 to provide for a better labour relations climate in the province of Manitoba, to provide for a fairer, more balanced approach- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Ms. Barrett: Thank you. Mr.

Speaker. We expect Bill 44 to lead to a more balanced, progressive Labour Relations Act in the province of Manitoba and will provide avenues for fair. open negotiations, fair and open ability of workers to determine whether they wish to join a union or not, fair or open access to the ability to arbitrate, to have grievances dealt with in an expeditious, fair manner. We expect that Bill 44, as it is finally brought forward in the Legislature and finally passed in the Legislature, will enhance the labour relations climate in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Schuler: Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister of Labour tell Manitobans what is next? Can we expect her to introduce final offer selection, anti scab legislation, and completely destroy any relationship between business and labour in Manitoba, which was also clearly her goal? Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote from Professor John Godard, Professor of Industrial Relations at the I. H. Asper School of Business at the University of Manitoba, who made a presentation last night, actually early this morning, to the Committee on Bill 44.

He states: The negative reaction to these two proposals and by these "two proposals" he means the return of automatic certification with 65 percent, a card signed and the alternate dispute resolution

August 16 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5121 mechanism. He states: The negative reaction to these proposals is not surprising. In the current labour relations climate, many in business have come to view unions as anathema to their competitiveness and survival. Much of their concern may be misplaced and counter productive. Here is a weB-respected professor at the business school at the University of Manitoba who says, in effect, that the implementation of BiB 44 will lead to a better labour relations climate in the province of Manitoba. Business does not have anything to fear from this legislation.

Labour Relations Act Amendments-Com mittee Process Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) knows that Mr. Godard asked her last night to puB the Bill back and possibly look at having a royal commission to do it right. She knows that is what he said last night. She is just not referring to that in the House. * (14 :10 ) Last November, it was reported that this new provincial administration had arrived in office in time to harvest the fruits of 12 years of Conservative administration. Taxes were lowered 72 times; budgets were balanced; record numbers of people were employed.

Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Industry (Ms. Mihychuk) voted to tell the business community that they had the option of presenting between 12 and 5:30, or not presenting at all. I would like to ask this minister: Why is this minister, instead of harvesting the 12 years of effort, aBowing it to rot and fall to the ground? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, the Member, in his

preamble, is selective in his references to the harvest of the last 12 years in the province of Manitoba. I would refer specificaBy to the largest deficit in the history of the province of Manitoba, three quarters of a billion doBars in 19 93 and '94. I would reference the fact that the Government ran in 19 95 on a promise not to seB the telephone system. They immediately, after the election, sold the telephone system, which gave huge profits to a very smaB number of people, which enabled them to appear to have a balanced budget, and the Provincial Auditor has had words to say on that. Mr.

Speaker, I will only refer yet again to the Interlake in 19 95, the Interlake in 19 99, and the Monnin inquiry who said he had never seen a bigger bunch of liars. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to point out to the Minister that she did forget to point out that in the Monnin inquiry report there was only one elected official that was named, that was the Minister of Family Services. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order. May I remind aB honourable members that a point of order is a very serious matter and should be heard in silence. The Honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On the same point of order. Clearly, that was not a point of order, Mr. Speaker. That reaBy was an abuse of the right of individual members to stand up, draw attention to departures from the rules of proceedings. That was simply an argument. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader, he does not have a point of order.

It is a dispute over the facts. Amendments-I mpact on Business Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, when is this Minister of Industry and Trade going to represent business? She remained silent

512 2 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 when Manitoba became the highest tax haven in all of Canada. She remained silent when her government secretly planned to change the labour laws to hurt business. She remained silent when 18 5 000 businesses condemned Bill 44. She remained silent when business after business spoke of suspending expansions, and she remained silent last night when business advised her of the damage that Bill 44 will do the provincial economy. When is this minister going to stand up and represent business in Manitoba? Hon.

MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines): Mr. Speaker, it was really my pleasure to sit in committee last night and hear from presenters, both from the business community, from the union community and from the private sector, from private citizens as well as other organizations, as the First Minister mentioned, the Oblates and academics who study business labour relations across the world. You know, it is an opportunity to hear both sides and to understand some of the things that have been happening in terms of labour relations in Manitoba over the last decade.

I do not think anyone in our committee could not feel for the workers that were fired because they tried to organize a workplace, the unbelievable situa tions that we heard. It is true that abuses occur both by the employer side and the employee side, and it is important and a responsibility of government to try and make the process fairer. Mr. Speaker, I was proud to be involved in a process that had over 80 people, individuals and organizations, who had registered to come and be heard. A fairly small number, approximately a dozen, did not present. That is a common occurrence at a lot of committees.

But our committee stayed to hear every single presenter last night, something we can be proud of. Amendment�ommittee Process Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, I would ask this minister if she is proud of the fact that last night she told people and she voted with her side of the House to tell people that if they could not stay past twelve o'clock, they would not be heard. Is she proud of that? Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I think that it is important to remember that there is a negotiation process that occurs between House Leaders.

I understand that that occurred in this process. The NDP caucus presented four days, and the Tories were negotiating for two. In fact, the compromise was three sittings. * (1 4:20) Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): 'This might be a dispute over the facts in your books, Mr. Speaker, but I would ask you if you could check with the Minister and have her check with the House Leader and make sure she is using the right information. Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Min ister of Industry, Trade and Mines, on the same point of order. Ms. Mihychuk: I want to apologize.

I was misinformed about the negotiations, and I do not want the record to reflect any inaccuracies. I apologize for that. I would like to answer the question. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised by the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader- An Honourable Member: On the same point of order. Mr. Speaker: I will recognize the Honourable Member for Fort Whyte if he has new information on the same point of order. Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, I believe I do have new information on the same point of order. The new information is that last night in committee none of this negotiation took place.

What happened was that members opposite presented a motion to put into effect the fact that they would not be willing to close the Committee at twelve o'clock. In fact, people would have to stay till five in the morning to be heard-

August 16 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 512 3 Mr. Speaker: Order. Points of order should not tum into debates. Points of order are to point out the breaking of rules. The Honourable Government House Leader with new information? The Honourable Govern ment House Leader on the same point of order. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I think it is wen known to members that the procedures in committee last night are long-standing-mind you, an eccentric part of democracy in Manitoba.

As late as a couple of weeks ago in Bill 42 and Bill 26 where The Labour Relations Act amendments were put forward by the Opposition, indeed, they went right through way past midnight, and there were some 50 presentations lined up. Mr. Speaker: Order. This point of order is turning into debate. I am going to make a ruling on the point of order raised. The Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines has apologized, and I think that should take care of the matter. *** Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines to conclude her answer. Ms. Mihychuk: Thank you.

I would like to discuss a little bit about the process last night. I understand that individuals on the list were called three separate times by the office of the Clerk, individually on Monday, Tuesday morning and Tuesday evening, and the fact is that the Committee was given two days' notice. In fact, another unusual activity occurred where we included every single written presentation in full in Hansard, something that is unprecedented, so that everyone's presentation would be recorded in the important debate that Manitobans are in. We have had 19 hours of hearings- Mr. Speaker: Order.

The Honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Laurendeau: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Let me guarantee this min ister, I have spent many more hours than she has on committee in this House, and that is a guarantee. You can check the record. I have been chairing committees for I 0 years, and we have tabled a lot more of the statements than she is putting on the record today. We have never refused at committee to take any presentation that has been written at any committee in our time in office.

So for this minister to stand up and say that she set a precedent is foolish. Mr. Speaker: Order. I would just like to remind all honourable members, the purpose of points of order. A point of order is to be used to draw to the Speaker's attention any departure from the rules or practices of the House. On the point of order raised, I would have to rule that the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader does not have a point of order. Labour Relations Act Amendments-Comm ittee Process Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, it is very clear to everyone, I think, in this province that the Premier (Mr.

Doer) of this province says one thing and does another. In this House in Question Period and in interviews in the media, this Premier has stated that he wanted to get Bill 44 into committee to allow Manitobans to have their voices heard, and he wanted to hear Manitobans. When we got into committee, the Premier shut them down and invoked closure.

In today's edition of the Winnipeg Fr ee Press, the newspaper indicates that the Minister of Labour said: "It is uncommon for any legislative standing committee to sit more than three times." I would like to ask the Minister of Labour if she stands by the comments that "it is uncommon for any legislative standing com mittee to sit more than three times"?

512 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, what I stated to the Fr ee Press was that it was uncommon, and my recollection is that there were two other bills where this happened. When you begin the process, a negotiated process where you have more than one sitting day put in place at the beginning of the process, that was what was uncommon in my comments, not uncommon in my comments, that is what I meant by the statement.

I believe the statement that I made to the Fr ee Press that there were three, instead of one, committee hearings being established-then you move on after you have completed one day, but no one knows ahead of time if there will be or when a second hearing will take place or a third. In this instance, there was agreement by the House Leaders that we would have three established sitting days. The announcement, when it was made by the Government House Leader, said three specific times, and that was what I was stating in the Fr ee Press was unusual.

So people knew ahead of time that there were three specific times for hearings to be held on this bill. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, the Minister is not answering the question that I asked. I quoted what she had said in the paper, and I will do it again. She said: "It is uncommon for any legislative standing committee to sit more than three times." Does the Minister stand by her comments? Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Speaker, in my first answer to the Member for Russell, I stated what I had said to the Fr ee Pre ss, which was that it was uncommon to have established ahead of time members know that not always what is reported is what was said. What I said- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Speaker, the comments that I made-because I have sat in committees for 10 years in this House, and I understand that many times we start, most of the time in committees we start with an announcement that has been agreed upon by the House Leaders to have one sitting announced, and the Clerk's office then calls- Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Derkach: Unfortunately, this mm1ster squirms and tries to twist what she said in the paper. I want to ask her one more time, Mr.

Speaker, because this is a quote in the paper, and I do not know whether it is the paper that is not quoting her correctly, and if it is, I want her to state that. In the paper it is very clear that she made a quotation, and I will repeat it to her again: "I t is uncommon for any legislative standing committee to sit more than three times." Does she agree with that, and are those her words? * (1 4:30) Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, what I said was that it was uncommon for there, in effect. to have been an agreement reached that there would be, in this case, three specifically stated times that the Committee would sit.

Those specifically stated times were called, people who had made presentations-and this is what I also said to the media. that each time, before each of the three presentation times that had been agreed upon by the House Leaders, the Clerk's office called everyone who had not made an appearance prior to that time in the Committee hearing. That is what I said, that it was uncommon for this agreement to have been made ahead of time for there to be three specific times, and three times those individuals who had not yet made presentations were called by the Clerk's office. I stand by that. Mr.

Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Days Inn-Steinbach Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, as many of the members in this Chamber know, Steinbach has long had the motto : "It's worth the trip." I am pleased to advise the House that more and more Steinbach is becoming known as a great place to stay, as well. This became even more so with the official opening of the new

August 16 , 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 512 5 Days Inn yesterday, which I was pleased to celebrate with over 200 area residents. This new facility offers guests 49 rooms, a pool and a waterslide and two well-appointed meeting rooms. Mr. Speaker, the need for adequate lodging in Steinbach has grown in the past years as the city has increasingly become the primary commercial centre for southeastern Manitoba.

Local residents have responded to this challenge, and I would like to especially commend Irma and Brian Esau and Bob and Dorthy Schinkel for putting their capital on the line to help grow our community and provide this valuable service. Their collective entre preneurial spirit has created excitement, created opportunities and created jobs in this community. It was mentioned yesterday that the opening of this facility has been spurred along by the strong growth of our region and the economic momentum that has been created over the past decade in our province.

I would encourage the Government of the day to recognize the importance of this economic climate and to work to enhance rather than inhibit it. With the opening of this new Days Inn, I believe it is the 75th in Canada, the city of Steinbach increases its ability to hold significant conferences and events. Mr. Speaker, I would encourage all members of this House to consider Steinbach when planning special events and activities. It's worth the trip and it's worth the stay. United Nations Year for the Culture of Peace Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr.

Speaker, it has not been talked about very much, but this year is the United Nations Year for the Culture of Peace. As we watch in horror news of a nuclear submarine on the bottom of the Arctic Ocean, I want to draw all of our attention to this important goal. I also want to recognize those involved with the coalition opposed to the arms trade and for the work in particular on Press fo r Conversion magazine which I would encourage all members of the House to subscribe to. It regularly outlines countries with military exports from Canada.

As well as that, it compares the Government in the country spending on health and education versus military spending and documents the number of doctors versus nurses and soldiers, as well as other developmental statistics like literacy rates and gender balance in employment and income distribution. For example, Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest weapons importer in the last eight years where statistics were available, had almost $1 .25 billion of imports and arms from Canada. They spend 36 percent of their revenue from government on military and only 6 percent on health and 14 percent on education.

Notably, this publication also lists military donations to the Liberal Party of Canada. Recently in this House we have recognized Peacekeepers Day, which happens to coincide with the anniversary of the August 9 bombing of Nagasaki, Japan. We have also had a lot of talk lately about sustainability. Mr. Speaker, I would submit the sustainability has to have at the top of its agenda a conversion of our economy away from being hooked on war and militarism. At the top of this list- Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Member's time has expired. Standing Committee Process Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to speak briefly about what took place last night in committee. It was an unbelievable experience to have in such important legislation as this all presentations brought to a halt by the members opposite, who used their majority on the Committee to indicate to individuals of all stripes who were speaking for and against the legislation that they would have to stay until 5:30 in the morning if they wished to be heard or that would be the end of it. The Premier (Mr. Doer) today quoted from John Godard, and he was there . He was there at four in the morning.

He laughed at us for being there, and quite rightly so, because there are better methods of handling this. It is unfortunate that the Premier has chosen to speak for Mr. Godard today, because he put some, I think, information on the record that Mr. Godard might not agree with.

512 6 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 In fact, Mr. Godard's point was that he thought everybody should take a step back, eliminate the rhetoric, the Premier should consider some form of commission or inquiry to come up with a proper piece of legislation that would not take us back or would not deal in small incremental Band-Aid solutions but would take Manitoba beyond the 21s t century . That was the point of his presentation. He also indicated that due to the way this legislation was introduced, he did not have time to even look at that presentation until the night before committee.

So what type of consultation is that? We also heard in a number of cases very, very good submissions, one from Grant Mitchell, who spoke earlier and with leave of the Committee because of a recent illness and was allowed to speak earlier than his allotted time. What did we hear from Mr. Mitchell? Some very innovative solutions into how the issue of labour relations could be addressed in Manitoba. But more importantly, we heard from Mr. Mitchell a direct refutation of a report from Colin Robinson. So it is important that Mr. Mitchell had the opportunity to speak for himself- Mr. Speaker: Order.

The Honourable Member's time has expired. McLeod Adult Learning Centre Mr. Harry Schellenberg (Rossmere): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on McLeod Adult Learning Centre located at 530 McLeod A venue in North Kildonan, which is part of the River East School Division's continuing education program. Interest in adult education has grown across Manitoba. Adults of all ages are returning to school to improve and upgrade their academic and job skills so they can be productive members for society and their family in the 21s t century.

McLeod Adult Learning Centre had its first graduating class this June with 15 students. This adult centre is quite flexible in accommodating students, because students are able to attend part time, full time, evening or day classes. As a result of this flexibility, students may work at a job to support themselves while they attend school. Phil McBurney, program co-ordinator for the student centre, has pointed out that many of these students have overcome disastrous experiences with schooling to get their Grade 12 diploma.

Graduation has given these students empowerment, confidence, and has made them feel better about themselves. This graduation diploma has opened doors to this graduating class. * (14: 40) The teaching staff must also be commended for creating an environment that encourages adult students to succeed. The adult classroom gives support, camaraderie, bonding and structure for these students who have seldom been successful in the regular classrooms. As a result of a dedicated teaching staff and the desire for students to upgrade, this centre has been a success story of the River East School Division.

Congratulations to the River East School Division for being progressive and supportive to adult education. With this kind of support this adult centre will continue to grow and be successf ul in the years to come. Conservative Party Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Today, I rise to pay tribute to the Honourable Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns). In recent days the Member has used his time in the Legislature to read from a history of the Conservative Party. There is considerable symbolism, Mr. Speaker, in the book that the member has been reading. It is called Ashes to Ashes.

Many honourable members on the right now hold membership cards in the Alliance Party to make clear where their allegiance or their alliance rests. Even from the central Conservative Party office, there was active phoning, campaigning and soliciting for Alliance memberships. Though a few hot embers still burn among Conservative Party ashes, during the last several elections all Manitobans have witnessed the shrinking size of the name Progressive Conservative Party on the election signs. Last fall the letters were so small that one almost needed a magnifying glass to see them.

It now appears they may even disappear. Those in my party, the Liberal Party, await developments with interest. What new alliances

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 27 will form? Will some or all of the members on my right return next session as the Manitoba Alliance Party? How many will endorse Stockwell Day and his dream to reduce the federal government to a department of defence and a department of foreign affairs? How many really want to remove all government grants to help promote and build communities, as the Alliance plans? How many really desire an Alliance federal government which will drastically reduce equalization transfers to provinces like Manitoba?

How many believe, as we saw recently, that those who live in have-not provinces are lazy? Mr. Speaker, while the future of the Conservative Party hangs in the balance, the future of the Liberal Party is strong. Recent polls show increased support for the provincial Liberal Party. Young people see the Liberal Party as dynamic, innovative and future thinking. The Liberal Party will be around for a long time. We will build and become stronger in this province. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Mr. Harry Enos (Lakeside): I was wondering, Mr.

Speaker, whether the House would indulge me for a response to the Honourable Member for River Heights. Mr. Speaker: Does the Honourable Member have leave? [Agreed] Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, one hears in the words of my honourable friend for River Heights his first opening moves in that soon-to-be-vacant seat of Winnipeg South Centre, namely that of the Member who has served Winnipeg and Manitoba well, one Honourable Lloyd Axworthy. He is going to now muscle aside the Reg Alcocks and the John Harvards and the Mr.

Duhamels to prepare that ground, and regrettably the last vestige of the Liberal Party in this Chamber will disappear. From ashes to ashes, dust to dust goes the Liberal Party . Now that is the true reality of the future of the Liberal Party. The discussions about my imminent departure are premature. I hope to be back and enjoy many more years in this Chamber. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable First Minister, on a point of order. Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): On the same point of order, I would concur with the Member for Lakeside that it did sound like the opening of a new campaign for the last Liberal member in this House. Mr. Speaker, for a member who has voted and sided with the Conservative Party on almost every vote in this Legislature, to condemn the members opposite to a destiny of absolute disappearance is shocking for a person who has disappeared with the Liberal Party and now votes with the disappearing Conservative Party. I am very shocked and surprised in this regard.

We have one last elected federal MP for the Conservative Party west of the Ottawa River. That person is indeed a person who should be defined in the existing endangered species legislation now being proposed by the federal government. And having watched the new Mr. Day step onto the national stage and slip on a banana peel in Atlantic Canada, and he still is falling into the ocean out there in Atlantic Canada, only the NDP will provide the sanity for the future. Committee Changes Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain (Mr.

Tweed), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be amended as follows: Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner) for Lakeside (Mr. Enns). Motion agreed to. Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Wellington (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be amended as follows: St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski) for Interlake (Mr. Nevakshonoff), La Verendrye (Mr. Lemieux) for

512 8 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16 , 2000 Fort Rouge (Mr. Sale), The Maples (Mr. Aglugub) for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau). Motion agreed to. ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Hon. Greg Selinger (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce that the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations will meet, by leave, at 3 p.m. this afternoon concurrently with the House, with the Committee to rise at its own discretion. The Committee will consider Bi ll 18 and Bi ll 44. Mr.

Speaker: It has been announced that the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations will meet by leave at 3 p.m. this afternoon concurrently with the House, with the Committee to rise at its own discretion. The Committee will consider Bill 18 and Bill 44. Is there leave? {Agre ed] Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek the consent of the House to waive the quorum requirement for today due to the sitting of the Industrial Relations Committee. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave to waive the quorum count for the day? [Agreed] Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, I would lik e to call the report stage on Bill l7 and Bill l2 .

Mr. Speaker: In that order? Mr. Selinger: In that order. REPORT STAGE Bill 17- The Elections Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Bill 17 , The Elections Amend ment Act (Loi modifiant Ia Loi el ectorate), the amendment standing in the name of the Honourable Interim Leader of the Opposition. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the Official Opposition): Yesterday we dealt with a couple of amendments to Bill 17 in

section 25. I know that right now we are speaking to an amendment that was introduced by the Premier (Mr. Doer). I am wondering whether we might have unanimous leave to deal with an amendment to the Premier's amendment? Mr. Speaker: Order. Is there leave for the Honourable Interim Leader of the Official Opposition to move an amendment to the subamendment? [Agreed] Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings), THAT the Bill be amended in

section 25 by adding the following after the proposed subsection 17 4.2(2): Right of candidate to enter communities 174.2 (3)No person shall prevent a candidate or a representative of a candidate who produces identification indicating that he or she is a candidate or representative from canvassing or distributing election campaign material in any community in the province. Motion presented. *( 14 :50) Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I just want to indicate that this is one instance we are certainly working together to try to ensure that the legislation is worded right and workab le.

This is one example where this certainly has worked. I think with just those few comments we are prepared to let the amended amendment pass and move on with passing Bill 17 . Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is that the motion to amend the Bill in

section 25 be amended by adding the following after the proposed subsection 17 4.2(3) Definition of Community

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 29 174.2(4) In subsection 3, community means any geographic territory- An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. THAT the Bill be amended in

section 25 by adding the fo llowing aft er the proposed subsection 174.2(2): Right of candidate to enter communities 174.2(3)No person shall prevent a candidate or a representative of a candidate who produces identification indicating that he or she is a candidate or repres entative from canvassing or distributing election campaign material in any community in the province. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. The amendment by the Honourable First Minister that the Bi ll be amended in

section 25 by adding the following after the proposed subsection 17 4.2( 4) as further amended by the subamendment. Dispense? Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is that the Bill be amended in

section 25 by adding the following after proposed subsection 174.2(2) as further amended by the subamendment- Dispense? An Honourable Member: Dispense. THAT the Bill be amended in

section 25 by adding the fo llowing aft er the proposed subsection 174.2(2): Right of candidate to enter communities 174.2(3)No person shall prevent a candidate or a re presentative of a candidate who produces identification indicating that he or she is a candidate or repres entative from canvassing or distributing election campaign material in any community in the province. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture and Food (Ms.

Wowchuk), that Bi ll 17, The Elections Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia Loi electorale, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections and subsequently amended, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 12-The Public Schools Amendment Act Hon. Greg Selinger (Acting Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services, that Bi ll 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques, reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments and subsequently amended, be concurred in. Motion presented. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. Formal Vote Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested. Call in the members. Order. The question before the House is Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act, as amended.

513 0 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 Division A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as fo llows: Yeas Aglugub, Al lan, Asper, Barrett, Caldwell. Cerilli, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Fr iesen, Jennissen, Korzeniowski, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Mart indale, McGiff ord, Mihychuk, Nevakshonoff, Reid, Robinson, Rondeau, Sale, Santos, Schellenberg, Selinger, Smith (Bran don West), Struthers, Wowchuk.

Nays Cummings, Dacquay, Derkach, Driedger, Dyck, Enns, Faur schou, Filmon, Gerrard, Gilleshamm er, Lauren deau, Loewen, Maguire, Mitchelson, Penner (Emerson), Penner (Steinbach), Pitura, Praznik, Reimer, Rocan, Schuler, Smith (Fort Garry ), Stef anson, Tweed. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 29, Nays 24. Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried. * (15:10 ) Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Would you canvass the House to determine if there is leave to proceed to third reading on Bi ll 12, Mr. Speaker? Mr.

Speaker: Is there agreement of the House to proceed with third reading of Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act, as amended? [Agr eed] THIRD READINGS Bill 12- The Public Schools Amendment Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mrs. Joy Smith (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, I have to say that today I am very disappointed with the vote that has taken place. I want to put on record there has not been enough collaboration. The home schoolers completely object to this bill being passed. I once again plead with the members opposite to listen very carefully. I plead with the members opposite to take this motion very, very seriously.

Having said that and having voiced our objection, members on this side of the House totally object and call for Bill 12 once again to be withdrawn. I move, seconded by the Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), THAT the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word "THAT" and substituting the following therefore: Bill (No. 12) - The Public Schools Amend ment Act!Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Jes ecoles publiques, be not now read a Third Time but that it be read a Third Time this day six months hence. Mr. Speaker: Order. The motion is in the proper format for a hoist motion and is in order according to Beauchesne's Citation 73 1: "When an Order of the Day for the third reading of a bill is called, the same type of amendments which are permissible at the second reading stage are permissible at the third reading stage with the restrictions that they cannot deal with any matter which is not contained in the bill." Hoist motions are allowed in second reading, so the motion is in order. Mrs.

Smith: I ask for leave to put some very brief comments on the record concerning this hoist motion. Mr. Speaker: Does the Member have leave? [Agr eed] Mrs. Smith: Mr. Speaker, today members from this side of the House presented a very unusual motion, a hoist motion. This motion allows the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell), if he so chooses, this gives the Minister of Education one

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5131 more chance. Today, this bill has gone into third reading. Today, we are trying to hold this bill for six months. Members from this side of the House have talked around the caucus table. We feel very strongly that we will do anything to prevent this bill from passing. It is now in the dying moments of the Bill. It is in the dying moments now of this bill being passed.

There is one last chance that the Minister of Education and members on the opposite side of the House can take, one more chance to take the Bill, accept this hoist motion, and six months down the road bring it back into third reading. Mr. Speaker, we have put a lot of thought into this. We have put a lot of work into this, because we believe for the democratic process to continue here in Manitoba that members opposite have to take this chance. Just with these last comments, I am putting the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of members opposite.

They now have the power in their hands with their membership to allow this hoist motion to go through. It is now August. We will not see this bill again till September, October, November, December, January, February. That is what the members on this side of the House are pleading with members opposite to accept. Thank you. * (15 :20) Mr. Harry Enos (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, just very briefly let me echo the comments made by my colleague for Fort Garry, and let me indicate to honourable members opposite that this is a most reasonable request.

We have heard from the Department of Education that they are prepared to enter into more discussions with the home schoolers in the province of Manitoba. What this provision provides them is the six months to do precisely that. I am a practising politician, and I know that there are some core issues that are very important to the Government of the day, like perhaps Bill 44, the labour bill, but this is surely not one of them. I look at some of the members, the Member for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg), the Member for Interlake (Mr.

Nevakshonoft), other members that could have no diff iculty in supporting this hoist motion. For the record, I know that-well, particularly members of the gallery, they see us kind of voting like robots. You know, Conservatives vote this way, NDPs vote that way. That is not what we are supposed to do. We are sent here by our constituents to vote as on our conscience. That, by the way, Mr. Speaker, is why I am an enthusiastic supporter of Mr.

Stockwe ll Day, who will be the next Prime Minister, because he is going to bring some parliamentary freedom to individual MLAs and MPs on issues like this, issues of conscience, to vote that way. I remind them, on an issue that was very near and dear to the New Democrats when they proposed to nationalize Centra Gas, I broke ranks with my party and supported the New Democrats on that vote because I happened to believe that if the taxpaying dollars of my constituents were going to be used to buy that facility and turn that into a public utility, then I wanted my constituents to be part of it and to enjoy it.

It did not gain me many friends in my party and my then-leader, the Honourable Mr. Filmon, was not too pleased with me, but it can happen and it can happen right now. It can happen right now. To the Member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers), the Member for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg), the Member for Interlake (Mr. Nevaks honoft): Come and join us on this vote and not defeat the bill, but give us six months to reconsider it. That is a reasonable request, reasonable people understand it, reasonable people expect that. Let us do it, gentlemen. Mr.

Speaker: Prior to recognizing the Member for Emerson, I would just like to read back the amendment. Moved by the Honourable Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith), seconded by the Honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), THAT the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word "THAT" and substituting the following therefore: Bill (No. 12) - The Public Schools Amend ment Act!Loi modif iant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques, be not now read a Third Time but that

513 2 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 it be read a Third Time this day six months hence. Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, just very briefly put a few comments on the record in regard to this bill and the reason why we should set it aside for at least six months to have proper debate in the public and proper consultations between the home schoolers and the Minister's department, and indeed the Minister.

I believe the Minister has a tremendous opportunity here to demonstrate that he is the kind of minister that will listen to the people and in fact enact legislation that the people would support, because the reason we are here, the reason we are elected, all of us, including the Minister, is surely to enact the kind of legislation that is only supported by the general public and for the good of the general public. That is why we are here. That is the only reason we are here.

That is the only reason we govern and we are entrusted to enact the kind of legislation that will be for the betterment, not of ourselves as legislators, not to give us power over others, but to indeed enact the kind of legislation that will be there for the benefit of our children. That is why I think it is so important that we recognize the home and the sanctity of the home and the right of parents to educate their children as they see fit.

Yes, we all agree that there need to be some assurances that proper education is given, and when one looks at the results, the provincial test results in all these areas, one must give a great deal of credit to the parents when they teach their own children because those records, those test results clearly demonstrate those home schoolers have done a marvellous job. Test after test has elevated their level of education to at least as high as our public sector has, and even higher, and that has happened time and time again. I say to you, Mr. Speaker, and I say to the Minister, give it six months.

Sit down, take time, take time to consult, take time to ask these people what their views are, what their needs are, address those needs in legislation, and Mr. Minister, I say to you, you will be their hero. Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to just put a few comments on the record for the hoist of Bill 12, and they come from a real concern after relating to the people that are affected the most. The people that are affected the most by this bill have been consulted the least. They are the ones who have not had a chance to have input. They need time. They need just a little bit of time.

Last night I was in my constituency at a grand opening, about 200 people there, and this was an item of concern. Mr. Speaker, the item of concern goes well beyond the home schoolers. The people who are sympathetic with the home schoolers are also those who are not home-schooling. I have spoken to friends and relatives in the last day or two who say why cannot this thing be consulted first? Why does it have to create fear? Why does it have to create distrust? It is almost that this is a symbol of dictatorship if we force this bill through without a little more consideration.

I think that it would be a sign of trust. It would be an understanding of the term democracy if we got all the members in this House to agree to allow this thing to continue for consultation for six months. Mr. Speaker, that is the hope that I have for this bill. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I, too, would like to thank the Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith) for bringing in this hoist motion. Again, it is in the heat of the battle that you need to sit back at times and analyze exactly where you are coming from. Mr.

Speaker, we have parents in the gallery today, have had for the past week, parents who have taken their responsibility of teaching and training their children very seriously. I believe that this bill is something that contradicts that. It is saying, and I have said it numerous times in this House, that the democratic right of families is to do what they feel is best for their children. This is something that they need. This is something that they want to retain and we want to honour that.

This hoist motion simply asks the Minister and the Government of the day to sit back, take another look at it and to see maybe in fact it needs to withdrawn. That is what the people, the

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 513 3 home schoolers in the province of Manitoba are asking for. Mr. Speaker, the comments have been made about having a good education and I concur with that, but again, I think statistics,! say I think, I know statistics prove the fact that those who are home-schooling are doing an excellent job, and the results show that. I would ask the Minister to very seriously look at this. Take another look. Take time to reflect.

Again, the parents in the province of Manitoba who are home-schooling, it is also their mandate, it is their responsibility, it is their wish to do the very best for their children, as they see it. I would hate to see as we go through this process, and we have seen a number of bills come into this House in the last few weeks, of the bills that take away the democratic rights of Manitobans to make decisions for themselves. That is why people came here hundreds of years ago, fifty years ago, in the last few decades. They wanted the freedom that Manitoba and Canada gave them.

So I would ask the Minister to reconsider, to look at this seriously, to put a hoist on this motion, withdraw it for six months. Then I guess if he feels bring it back, so be it, but that we can deal with it at that time again. With those few comments, Mr .Speaker, I just want to support the Honourable Member for Fort Garry and the comments that were made by our Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), the fact that this is an important bill for the people, the families of the province of Manitoba, and would ask them to rethink and withdraw this bill. Thank you very much. Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr.

Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to add a few comments to the record on the motion moved by the Member for Fort Garry.

I just would lik e to note for the purposes of the record that we have a very full gallery here today of people who are from the home-school community. * (15: 30) In my 12 years in this Legislature, I am hard pressed to remember when so many people who normally are not involved in the political process, they are not the activists employed by various unions, as we have seen on Bi ll 44, or people who are the paid representatives of various lobby groups and things, or the people who are here to look after issues involving their own paycheques who have from time to time filled our gallery to make a point.

This is one of those rare occasions in my 12 years in this House when I have seen so many Manitobans who are not here asking government for something. They are not here asking for the state, the Province, to be providing them with money. They are not here to feather their own wallets in any way. They are here because they believe in what they are doing. They believe that they can provide a better education to their children at home, and they want the right to do it. They are here because they care.

That speaks volumes of a group that in the life of the province is a very, very small group of people, but it is a group of people who feel very strongly about what they believe. They have come here today and they have been here day after day to make their point to members of the New Democratic Party how strongly they feel about this issue. I want to commend them for coming, because, I will tell you, as a legislator, as a member of this Assembly, to know that people care about what they believe in means a great deal to us.

It means that you are prepared, that these individuals are prepared, to stand for their issues. It means that they should be taken very seriously. Now, what is regrettable here, Mr. Speaker, is the attitude of this minister and of this government. They are in their first year. They are our new government; the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) is a new minister. He was just elected last year. And you know, I just want to offer some advice to him, advice that was offered to me as a new minister and as a new MLA a decade-plus ago by the Member for Thompson (Mr.

Ashton), the current Minister of Highways, a member that I think if the Government would listen to more within their

513 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 own ranks would find that they would be in less trouble with the public. I really do believe that, because that minister always advised me, and it is advice that the Minister of Education has yet to learn himself, because the very first day he arrived in this Chamber as a new cabinet minister and he was asked a question about his department, did he display one bit of the humility that comes from holding public office?

Did he display one bit of the humility that comes from having the responsibility of of fice granted, the privilege of office granted to you by the electors of this province? No. His answer was a very simple one. He said: We won the election, you lost. And that became his motto, his creed. We won, you lost. We can do what we like. It demonstrated a cabinet minister who had forgotten what the Member for Thompson always reminded our side of the House of very wisely and what some of us had to learn the hard way. Being here is a privilege. We are not here to be dictating.

We are here because we have been given the privilege of representing our constituents, to make laws and govern on their behalf and in their best interests. The Minister of Education showed no respect for the other members of this Assembly. He showed no respect to those who were asking him legitimate questions. He just arrogantly said: I won the election, I can do what I like, in other words, for the next four years. He displayed that with the home-school community. He displayed it with them. Then when he kind of got caught, well, I am going to listen, I am going to listen.

But when it came time to listening, to show that he not only listened but heard and put it into action, he and his col leagues voted against the amendments that would have made this bill acceptable to the home-school community. He may have listened, but he did not hear. And there are none so blind as those who will not see or those so deaf as will not hear. This Minister of Education will not hear and he will not see. That has been his record to the people of Manitoba. On the stairs of this Legislature that arrogant minister stood and said to the community he would listen. Why did he say it?

Because he was in a tough pickle. Because they were there in front of him. He had to look the people in the eye, the people of Manitoba. He had to look them in the eye. He had to take their criticisms. And instead of being an adult and saying: We disagree, and I have a different position, and we will argue, he said: I will listen to you. But the moment he got back in this Chamber, in the safety of these walls, away from the very people that he represents, the very people he is supposed to have a responsibility to, he had forgotten.

He was safe now among his New Democratic Party colleagues, and he could do what he liked. You know it was very shameful. When he was very shameful was when we moved-my colleague the Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith), who has fought this battle so passionately on behalf of the home school community, and I am so proud of our new member taking on this battle-when amendments were moved in this House and the Minister, after saying he would listen.

Remember he said that after he and his colleagues voted against the same amendments at committee, not our amendments, amendments proposed by the home-school community as making the Bill tolerable, acceptable. He came back into this House. We moved the same amendments. Did he say: Well, I have changed my mind? No, they on that side would not be adult enough to vote those amendments down in front of the people of Manitoba. They adjourned the debate so that they could vote it down when our visitors in the gallery were not here. They wanted to do it when it could not be seen.

Now, I tell you I grew up believing, if you are an adult and you have a difference of opinion, at least have the courage to stand by your convictions and do it in front of the people who oppose you, but not this minister. He and his colleagues could not move fast enough to adjourn debate on resolutions they just a few hours or days before had voted down. Did we end up seeing those again? No, they are all voted down because this Minister again, he may have pretended to listen, but he certainly did not hear.

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 35 I want to leave members of this House and those who listen to this debate with just one other thought about context. What bills, what legislation has this new minister and this new government brought in, in the education field? Have they brought in any bills to enhance the quality of what our children will learn? Have they brought in any legislation before this House to raise the standards of what our children learned in the schools to face the new century? No. Do you know what they brought in?

They brought in a bill to stomp on the home-school community, and they brought in a bill so that for teachers in this province, when their salaries go to arbitration, the arbitrator cannot consider the ability of the taxpayer to pay. That is what this government and this minister has made their contribution to education in its first year of office: two bills, one to stomp on home schoolers and the other to take away what common sense-and you know, just think about that.

When an arbitrator is arbitrating the salaries of teachers, if this bill becomes law, this minister's proposal is that the arbitrator can no longer think about whether or not the taxpayer can afford the bill. Imagine. That is the agenda of the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell). You know what I would suggest? That there is one underlying theme behind that agenda, and it is the agenda of one particular union in the province of Manitoba and its leadership. That is simply to do what is most important for the leadership of the Manitoba Teachers' Society. Do you know what?

There is a deal, because who was out there at committee dealing with the labour relations bill that does not affect their members? The president of the Manitoba Teachers' Society, who by the way, without polling one teacher in this province, said she speaks for everyone and knows it to be true. * (15: 40) Well, I remember debates in this House, Mr. Speaker, when the Manitoba Teachers' Society came and lobbied us all. They were very clear that they did not like the home-schooling community, and for a very good reason.

Every one of their children who stays out of a public school is-what?- $4,000 or $5,000 less to that school. It is about money. That is what the battle is. Less students mean less jobs for teachers and less money in those schools. Does this Minister of Education raise that in the discussion? No, because he does not have the courage to tell the truth about this matter, about what motivates the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell).

If his concern was making sure every home school family was properly accounted for and that they were achieving the goals they had set for themselves that were in the public interest, he could have easily done that with some negotiation and discussion, but that is not his agenda.

His agenda, the agenda of the New Democratic Party is to eventually end home schooling in the province of Manitoba, not for any logical reason other than their friends in the Manitoba Teachers' Society, and by the way, an organization that spent a great deal of money and effort to make sure that the New Democrats had a majority in the last election. That is their payoff. So, make no bones about it, if you are a supporter of the home-school movement you have no friends in the New Democratic Party, because if you did, if any of those MLAs, and I look to the Member for Rossmere (Mr.

Schellenberg) who has many home schoolers in his riding and whose margin of votes was just I 00 or so. Those home schoolers could have defeated him and put another pro-home schooler on this side of the House. Will he have the courage to stand for this motion today? Will he have the courage to stand up for the people of Rossmere who home school? No. The Member for Interlake (Mr. Nevakshonoff), many home schoolers in his constituency. I bet you back home he will tell you how he cares for this, but will he stand for this motion to give six months of sanity to work out a deal? No, he will not.

But, you know, in a few minutes they are going to have a chance to show their true colour. I just want to make one other comment for those who listen to this debate, that this is not a confidence motion. If this motion is passed, if this bill were to be defeated, it would not mean this government has to resign. This is not a motion of confidence. This is one of policy. Mr. Doer as Premier, the Premier would not have to resign and go to an election if the members of the New Democrat Party-

51 36 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 Mr. Speaker: Order. I would just like to remind all honourable members that when addressing honourable members, by their constituency or ministers by their titles. Mr. Praznik: Thank you. I thought I had corrected that when I noticed the error. But the Premier would not have to resign. There would not have to be an election. If members of the New Democratic caucus in the Interlake constituency, in Rossmere con stituency, and any of the others, in St.

Vital who have home schoolers, if they are telling you that they support you and they believe you and want to help this, then they will have the courage today to stand and support this motion that allows six months for this Minister to do what he has not done in the ten months he has been a Minister; sit down and honestly negotiate a reasonable arrangement with the home-school community.

You know what, today they will have a chance, and they may stand with their colleagues because they do not have the courage to stand with their constituents, and that is what it will be, but I say to them that the people who are in this gallery today, who may have voted for them in the last election will never forget seeing them rise to defeat this motion, and they will remember the home schoolers when next they meet them at the ballot box. Mr.

David Faurschou (Portage Ia Prairie): It is a pleasure for me to rise and have the opportunity, and I most assuredly recognize the privilege that I have as a member of the Manitoba Legislative Assembly representing Portage Ia Prairie. This afternoon we have a motion before us presented by my honourable colleague from Fort Garry that would give opportunity for sobering, second thoughts in regard to Bill 12. What is Bill 12? Bi ll 12 is not long in length. In fact, it is only two pages; two pages, yet, it has been a focus of hours upon hours of debate.

I was one of the committee members that was present through the long deliberations and presentations. More than 20 hours were devoted to this bill and Bill 42 in committee, a very short time ago. Each and every day we have an opportunity to start our deliberations in this Chamber with prayer, and we ask that we may be guided and provide for the welfare and prosperity of all our people here in this province. The question must be asked by each one of us prior to our vote here in the Chamber, in fact, the way we vote true to this prayer that we take in earnest each and every day.

If members opposite were to ask themselves in regard to that on this Bi ll 12, I dare say that they would not be voting with the Executive Council and the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) for Bill 12. So this afternoon we have the opportunity, as my honourable colleague from Lac du Bonnet has just stated that this is not a non-confidence vote. Members on the Government side of the House will have opportunity to vote inde pendently, vote to represent their constituents, vote with clear conscience that they are not betraying the Government.

Insofar as this motion, all that it is, is providing for time to have those consultations that the Minister of Education has trumpeted so loudly, trumpeted from the stairs of this Legislative Assembly to the home schoolers of this province stating that he will listen and he understands what they were saying and will, in fact, be there to provide for those concerns in legislation. So, Mr. Speaker, we are at a crossroads, a crossroads for members who sit opposite as to whether they are going in fact to support this motion on the floor here today.

I do want though to emphasize the points that have been placed upon the record of this Chamber, brought forward before us in petition from the home schoolers association, and they provide some very important points that I believe all need time for second thought. In fact, from the petition, if I might read, that our home education is a viable alternative to public education. I do not believe that there is a single member of this Chamber that will doubt or dispute that statement, that Bill 12 gives undefined powers to the Minister of Education which could adversely affect the rights of the families. This is true.

The Bill is unclear in numerous areas, and when it is not clearly defined it provides for doubt and uncertainty, and, yes, fear of lost freedom.

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 37 Further to the petition, that convictions of parents and guardians are not recognized and openly supported, I have not heard one solitary comment from any members, regardless of party affiliation, that doubts the convictions, the dedication, and the commitment of the parents that are home schooling their children. This bill does not openly support that recognized conviction.

So again, pause for second sobering thought. * (15 :50) Further to the petition, that home-school associations have not been consulted regarding the best method of facilitating the freedom and effectiveness of home-schooling families. We heard from the Minister yesterday that he stated that he entered into consultation on May 9 with the home schoolers of Manitoba. We are all cognizant of the length of time it takes govern ment to design forms, to collate those forms, to print those forms, to mail those forms.

If in fact the Minister waited until November 9 to consult the home schoolers, the forms which those home schoolers received in their mailboxes a short time ago were, in fact, designed prior to May 9. Is this not an insult to everyone in this Chamber, and especially to the home schoolers of this province, to consult after the fact, where the forms that are in the possession of the home schoolers here in the province today have, in fact, been designed and formatted prior to entering into consultation.

I do not believe that the Minister wants to be known for being less than truthful with the home schoolers in light of the statement that he was open to consultation prior to decision making. Clearly that is not the truth at this point. Further to the petition, new policies and regulations have come into existence with the apparent antici pation of Bi ll 12 being passed which home educators find to be intrusive and intimidating in the nature which potentially reduces the freedoms of home-school parents. I believe I have touched upon this topic in my comments already. Lastly, Mr.

Speaker, Bi ll 12 fails to provide a mechanism of appeal for home-schooling families other than the courts. I believe this is not in keeping in the true spirit of legislation that offers a mechanism for appeal to correct and to address and to conciliate matters which are in disagreement. We have had a great deal of deliberation in regard to Bi ll 12. I believe this motion is one that needs to be passed for that time to have second sobering thoughts in which to address the shortcomings of the Bill which we discuss, Bill 12. Bill 12, as I stated at the outset, is very brief.

However, it has a great deal of ramifi cations upon the home-schooling families of this province. I truly feel that we as legislators must act responsibly. I appeal to the Member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), I appeal to the Member for Interlake (Mr. Nevakshonoff), I appeal to the Member for St. Vital (Ms. Allan) that this is not a non-confidence motion and that they could vote with a clear conscience with this side of the House in support of this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, I have been sitting in the House for the last 45 minutes or so listening to some of the remarks. I was raised in a Christian household, in a Christian family. I was taught to believe that hatred was not a family value. I was taught to believe that demagoguery was wrong. I am profoundly disappointed with the politicization of this issue, because all of us should be placing the [interjection} As I said, I was raised in a Christian household and taught to believe that hatred was not a family value.

I am disappointed in the politicization of this issue, profoundly so, because the value on children is what is driving every action in the Department of Education and Training. I was particularly disappointed with the vociferous and meanspirited remarks from the Member from-and I am not sure where he is from, Beausejour, Lac du Bonnet. Mr. Speaker, speaking to the gallery such as he did was very disappointing to me. I feel sad in my heart for some of the performances that have been raised in this particular matter and some of the fear mongering that has gone on.

This government made significant changes in registration, in registering at the urging of the home-school

51 38 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 associations in the province of Manitoba. We made a commitment to continue consulting with home schoolers. Mr. Speaker, I have sat through some considerable abuse here today, and I think that the public has been exposed to some tone in this House that I think is very unfortunate. I suppose we continue to sit through that with the heckling. But I am pleased that home schoolers, parents, their associations, feel strongly about the quality of education in the province of Manitoba.

I am very pleased with that because in that caring they share the values that I have and this government has for educational excellence in the province of Manitoba. In fact, I am pleased that the members opposite made this a cause celebre in their activities over the last few days. I know that those in the public school system, those in the post-secondary system, those in the independent school system, can only wish that the members opposite would care so much about broad educational issues in the province of Manitoba. So, Mr. Speaker, in closing this debate, I want to- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr.

Speaker: Order. Point of Order Mr. Praznik: I recognize fully that the Minister of Education is a new member and not fully aware of the rules of this House, because the act has not been committed, but I would ask the Speaker, given his remarks that he was standing, and his belief, it appears, that he is closing debate, that this is a motion by the Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith) who, if she is recognized a second time closes debate, but that other members are free to speak after him, that he is one of our members and does not have the ability to close debate on this particular motion.

He is not the mover of the motion. I think it only fair to the Minister of Education that he at least know that before he relinquishes his chair, as it may affect whatever comments he wants to make. Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Minister of Education and Training, on the same point of order. Mr. Caldwell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, I was cut off in mid-sentence. Indeed my intent was for me to close my remarks on this particular matter as I think there has been enough said on this matter. Mr. Speaker: Order.

On the point of order raised, this motion was moved by the Honourable Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith). If the Honourable Member for Fort Garry was rising a second time, any person that moves the motion and rises a second time would have to make that cl ear to the House in case there are other speakers. So the Honourable Minister of Education and Training would not be able to close debate because the motion is on behalf of the Honourable Member for Fort Garry. *** Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Minister of Education and Training, to conclude his comments. Mr. Caldwell: Of course, Mr.

Speaker, in closing the debate from this member of this House, the issue here is educational excellence. The issue here is providing the best quality of education in the province of Manitoba as it is on every issue that the Department of Education and Training undertakes. * (16: 00) I have the utmost respect, as do members of the Government side of the House, for home educators, for public school educators, for private school educators, for post-secondary educators in the province of Manitoba and those who share the values of educational excellence within all the realms of education in this province of Manitoba.

The debate on this particular matter has been very hurtful and very un-Christian, I might add, in some of the remarks that were made in this particular House. It disappoints me profoundly as a Manitoban that that has occurred. Mr. Speaker,

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 39 we will continue, I will continue as I did yesterday and will in the future, to work with all in the province of Manitoba who care about the quality of education for the children of Manitoba. My comments in this regard con sistently have been and the Government's perspective in this matter has consistently been to work with those in the field, as was reflected by the amendments, changing "register" and "registration" to "notify" and "notification." We have come a long way in this debate on this side of the House.

We have not stooped to demagoguery, we have not taken a position that seeks to inflame this matter, seeks to promote fear, seeks to promote indeed-! will say it again. I was raised in a Christian household and had values that did not reflect some of the comments, some of the very intemperate comments that have been made in this Chamber. Certainly demagoguery should have no place here. Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): I think this side of the House was quite prepared to begin the process of voting on the hoist motion, Mr.

Speaker, but when the Minister of Education got up in his place and put on the record some of the comments that he made, it could not pass without this side of the House responding. It seems that it is a habit of this government to continue to put remarks on the record that are, first of all, inflammatory. Secondly he talks about Christian values. Well, I think it is very un-Christian to say one thing and do another. We have people in this gallery today who represent the people who home school their children. Mr.

Speaker, I remember standing on the steps on the east side of the Legislature, not on the front steps. These people were asked to meet on the east side of the Legislature on that particular day because it happened to be the day that the premiers from across Canada were arriving in the city, and so the Minister decided to meet with these people on the east side of the Legislature, out of view of the public, and that is a precedent in itself. There has never been a case where we have asked rallyers to meet with us at some other location of the building to try to keep them out of view.

At that meeting, the Minister said he would consult with the home schoolers before he made any further adjustments and before this bill would pass. He also said, on the steps of the Legislature that day, that Bi ll 12 would not be voted on that day, when in fact the two House Leaders had made other arrangements, so without even consulting with them he had gone ahead and made his own proclamation about what he intended this House to do when he had no control over what this House was going to do that particular day. Besides that, Mr.

Speaker, when he brought in the amendment that he brought forward, it in no way reflected what the home schoolers were asking for. In no way did it reflect those amendments that were put forward by my colleague, the Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith), which reflected the thoughts and the wishes of the home schoolers. These were not amendments that were put forward by this side of the House alone. These amendments were put forward on behalf of the home schoolers of this province. So the Minister says well, we are going to stay the Bill for awhile and it is going to give me an opportunity to consult.

Well, did he consult? Well, I guess if you call consultation a call on the cellular phone. That is a new form of consultation, I suppose. But, Mr. Speaker, that is not the kind of consultation the home schoolers believed would happen. It is not the kind of consultation members on this side of the House believed would happen. The Minister then stands in his place today and admonishes this side of the House for the comments that we have put on the record. He says he is being abused by us. Well, that is unbelievable. If he finds the heat in the kitchen too hot, he knows what he can do.

I am sure there are members who are sitting in the upper benches who could fill that position very well, very adequately, and perhaps would even listen to the people of Manitoba much more so than this minister is at the present time. But Mr. Speaker, their premise is that they won the election and so they will do as they choose. Put the hammer down, do not listen to Manitobans, do not consult, because we know better. That is just not the way it is in this province. That is just not the way you build relationships.

That is just not the way you build rapport with interest groups, with people who have a stake in this

514 0 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 province, with people who are trying to raise their children in this province, to show some leadership, to have some values. That is not the way you do it. I want to know, and we do not know to this day what is broken with this legislation. What was wrong with the approach that was taken before? Now the Minister has said, oh, sometimes the forms were not filled out. Well, whose fault was that? Does he not have a department that is supposed to be controlling that?

He has about 2000 people in the Department, I believe, or 1800 people in the Department, and he should be able to tell his deputy minister that this is an issue that has to be addressed, instead of coming to the House with a bunch of gobbledegook legislation. Mr. Speaker, how does this legislation help home schoolers? Who does this legislation help? It does not help anyone. What hidden agenda does this Minister of Education have with regard to home schooling? He does not fund home schooling. He does not provide any funding to the home schoolers of Manitoba.

But he says, oh, this legislation now mirrors that of Alberta, and quite a different situation it is here than it is in Alberta. In Alberta, the province funds home schooling. It does not fund home schooling here in Manitoba. So I say to the Minister of Education, if he wants to start pouring massive amounts of money into home schooling and then put some regulations in so that those dollars can be accountable for, that is a different situation. But that is not the current situation in this province. So this debate can go on for a few more days, I suppose.

We will debate this issue because we feel strongly on behalf of the people who have a right, who have a democratic right to educate their children in the province of Manitoba and whose rights are being trampled on, trampled on by this proposed legislation that is before the House today. The Minister's amendments do nothing to assist in this situation whatsoever. So I am not going to plead with the Minister. I think we have taken this as far as we can as members of the Opposition. We have put amendments forward which were not acceptable and yet the party says, the Premier (Mr.

Doer) of the province says we will listen to Manitobans and then he goes ahead and he cuts Manitobans off in committee and puts a closure motion in place. * (16:10 ) Mr. Speaker, we saw that in Bill 42 when the trustees were presenting. What difference would it have made to allow those people another five minutes or whatever to complete their presentation. This was a group that represented massive numbers of people across the province of Manitoba. These were the people who have been entrusted with the responsibility to take care of the educational needs of Manitoba kids.

This government could not extend five or seven minutes to this group to allow them to finish their presentation. Now is that really wanting to listen to Manitobans? Is that really wanting to hear from Manitobans? Is that really consulting with Manitobans? Is that taking into account what Manitobans have to say? So what has come of all of that presentation material that was made on Bill 12 and on Bill 42? What changes came about as a result? None. None came forward because the Minister has decided that he knows best. He has closed his ears to Manitobans.

He has closed his ears to the comments that have been made with regard to how this is going to take away the democratic right of the people who home school their children. Mr. Speaker, I did not home school my children. My children went through public education. But that does not mean I should not have some regard for people who want to home school their children for religious beliefs or for whatever reason they feel that they should home school their children, provided that their children do receive an education.

As a government, there is a responsibility to ensure that every child in this province receives an education, and that is acceptable. Also in the regulations that are in the Department of Education, there is some accountability with regard to the children who are being home schooled. People who home school their children do report, do notify the

August 16, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5141 Department that they indeed are home schooling their children. What was the cause for bringing in this kind of draconian legislation? Why is it so necessary to press ahead with this now? Why cannot the Minister understand that by waiting six months, this in fact could become better legislation. It could mean that they would indeed have better legislation that would meet the needs of these people in a better way. Or is there a hidden agenda here?

Are we fulfilling a commitment to somebody that we made a commitment to during the election campaign that we are obliged to fulfill now? We did not see a promise on Bill 44 during the election campaign, nor did we see anything mentioned about labour legislation during the economic summit that the Premier (Mr. Doer) held in this province. That was not mentioned.

All of a sudden, in the summer months when everyone is out on holidays, they bring in a bill regarding the labour legislation in this province hoping that as people are away on holidays we are going to slide this legislation through without too much controversy, without too much notice. Is this the reason? Is there another hidden agenda with regard to Bill 12? Are we still going to find down the road that indeed this is another one of those issues where a commitment was made to somebody during the election and this is a payoff. It certainly was not made to the home schoolers.

It certainly was not an issue that was discussed with home schoolers prior to the election or during the election campaign. I wonder. I truly wonder what the agenda of this minister and this government really is when it comes to home schooling. Now the Minister says that we are politicizing this issue. Excuse me. Who is politicizing what? We have a responsibility as Her Ma jesty's Opposition to ensure that we hold the Minister accountable. That is what we were doing. He is not accountable. He is not accountable here. He is not accountable to the home schoolers. But yet, he says we are abusing him.

Then he says we are politicizing this whole issue, because we are asking him some questions, questions he cannot answer, questions he does not have answers for. Now that to me seems to be a little bit arrogant, does it not? When you cannot answer the questions, when you cannot supply the reasons why you are bringing in this legislation, you hold up your hands and say: This is politicization. They are abusing me. I say if the heat gets too much for you in the kitchen, it is time to get out. I know that there are other members in the upper benches who would replace this minister very quickly.

An Honourable Member: Or at least tum the oven down and let it cool down in six months. Mr. Derkach: Yes. That is exactly what we are asking, Mr. Speaker, is that perhaps we tum the oven down for six months and allow things to cool off a bit. The Minister will say: Well, why are we making such a big fuss about this legislation? They said the same thing about Bill 44. Why are you making such a fuss about such minor changes to the Bill? These are not minor changes. This is simply taking away the democratic rights and freedoms of people.

It is trampling on their rights and freedoms to educate their children as they believe. Once we get on that slope, we are on a very slippery slope, because it is easier then to bring legislation and regulation in that takes more and more of those freedoms away from those people. That is why these people are here, because they understand that this is not the end all. This is not where it is going to end. This is the beginning of getting on a slippery slope. We do not know what this minister is going to do through regulation. We do not know what he is going to do in the next session with regard to home schoolers.

We do not know that. The Minister brought in an amendment, and in his amendment he talks about parents registering their children through a prescribed form. Well, who has developed this prescribed form? Has it been developed in consultation with the home-schoolers association? Has it been developed in consultation with anyone? This form is a mystery. It is yet to be developed, but it will be prescribed by whom? By the Government, by big brother. Now home schoolers are going to be compelled to live with

5142 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA August 16, 2000 that prescribed form, with those regulations, with this legislation, whether they like it or not. Now the home schoolers have been here day after day, awaiting the passage or the removal, the withdrawal of this legislation. We have asked that this bill be withdrawn. The Minister would not withdraw it. So we said, alright, if you are not going to withdraw it, we will bring in some amendments. He would not accep

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-1-79
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 1st hansardpdf 79.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	cff05e6eff954f7ca5ff0e3ce8bc092edb9ffcc2

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