Manitoba Hansard — 25 May 2000 (Sitting 34B, 37th Legislature, 1st Session)

37-1-34b

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. 34B - 1:30 p.m., Thursday, May 25, 2000 ISSN 0542-5492

Member AGLUGUB, Cris ALLAN, Nancy ASHTON, Steve, Hon. ASPER, Linda BARRETI, Becky, Hon. CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. CUMMINGS, Glen DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary, Hon. DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. GILLESHAMMER, Harold HELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LATHLIN, 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 NEVAKSHONOFF, 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 Charles wood 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 Southdale 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.

15 07 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, May 25, 2000 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Speaker's Statement Mr. Speaker: I have an announcement for the House. I would like to advise the House that I have received a letter from the PC caucus chairperson, the Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), advising me that the Member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshammer) has been appointed as the Acting Leader of the PC caucus until such time as the PC caucus elects an interim leader. On this basis I will be recognizing the Member for Minnedosa as the Acting Leader of the Official Opposition.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Committee of Supply Mr. Conrad Santos (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has considered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), that the report of the Committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the 2000-200 1 Departmental Expenditure Estimates for the Department of Labour. Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I would like to table two reports, the first, Fidelity Bonds on Deposit prepared pursuant to

Section 20 of The Public Officers Act and also the 2000- 200 1 Supplementary Information for Legislative Review which provides information on employee pensions and other costs. Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training): That leave be given to introduce Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act, and that same be now received and read- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. We are not on bills yet. We will be coming to that. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill12- The Public Schools Amendment Act Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training: That leave be given to introduce Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ecoles publiques ), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Mr. Speaker: Who was the seconder? Mr. Caldwell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Seconded by the Minister of Highways (Mr. Ashton). Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the Honourable Minister of Education and Training, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Highways (Mr. Ashton), that leave be given to introduce Bill 12, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Mr. Caldwell: The purpose of this bill is twofold. It requires parents or guardians who home-school their children to register with the Minister and provide information about the home school as well as periodic progress reports on each child who is being home-schooled to ensure that they are receiving an adequate quality of education. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, this bill eliminates the current requirements in sections 196 and 197 of The Public Schools Act for cabinet to specifically approve certain grants to organizations and to school divisions in districts to permit an expedited payment process. Thank you.

1508 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 Motion agreed to. Bill 29-The Health Sciences Centre Repeal and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger), that leave be given to introduce Bill 29, The Health Sciences Centre Repeal and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi abrogeant Ia

Loi sur le Centre des sciences de Ia sante et modifications correlatives), and that the same be now received and read a first time. I would like to inform the House that I have a message from the Lieutenant Governor to table. Motion presented. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this Bill is an administrative procedure regarding the movement of the Health Sciences Centre from that of a corporate entity into that of the WRHA and is the continuation of a process that was previously put in place. Motion agreed to. Bill 30-The Social Services Administration Amendment Act Hon.

Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, I move. seconded by the Honourable Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that leave be given to introduce Bill 30, The Social Services Administration Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les services sociaux), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. * (1 3:35) Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, this is an administrative bill which strengthens the licensing procedures covering group living facilities that are under the Department of Family Services and Housing and provides certain rights to those inspectors in terms of emergency situations where licensing issues are very important for the maintenance of public safety. Motion agreed to. Bill 28-The Northern Affairs Amendment and Planning Amendment Act Hon.

Eric Robinson (Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I would like to move, seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Lemieux), that leave be given to introduce Bill 28, The Northern Affairs Amendment and Planning Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les Affaires du Nord et Ia

Loi sur l'amenagement du terri to ire), and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been informed, recommends the Bill to the House, the message of which I will table. Motion agreed to. 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 29 Grade 5 students from Beaumont School under the direction of Miss Kim Burnett. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger).

Also, we have from Crystal City Elementary School 7 Grade 6 students under the direction of Mr. Larry Hamilton. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed). Also, we have from Morden Collegiate 36 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. John Loewen and Ms. Erica Stecheson. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck). Also, from Laureate Academy 14 Grades 7 to 12 students under the direction of Mr. Bill Rambo and Mr. Don Scott. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for St.

James (Ms. Korzeniowski).

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 15 09 On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Youth News Network Government Position Mr. Leonard Derkacb (Russell): Mr. Speaker, concern is mounting across Manitoba school divisions about this government's wrong-headed approach to YNN. The Acting Minister of Education said yesterday in this House that her government would pull the plug on YNN because, and I quote, advertisements for Froot Loops were inappropriate for Manitoba schools.

Today Athena Educational Partners announced that YNN will be replacing all commercials with public service announcements, including the teenage pregnancy ad sponsored by this government. I am pleased to table the news release that was put out by Athena Educational Partners today. My question is to the Deputy Premier or the Minister of Education.

Will this government reverse its wrong-headed decision to pull the plug on YNN in schools and allow students to have access to $200,000 worth of technological resources and valuable news, current affairs programs and public service messages provided through YNN? * (1 3:40) Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training): I was very pleased earlier today to be advised of the fact that YNN would no longer have the commercials as part of their broadcasts in those schools where they exist.

I think that is a victory, in fact, for educators and for the people of Manitoba and for the children of the province of Manitoba. As for the current contracts, the Govern ment's position stands. Mr. Derkacb: I simply do not understand that statement. What is the Minister telling parents, teachers and students?

Is it that this government does not support more technological resources for students and also the public service messages as well as the news and current affairs programs that are being run in schools today in addition to the messages such as the teenage pregnancy ads and the bullying in the schoolyard ads? Mr. Caldwell: Well, the Government of Manitoba is highly supportive of the public school system. We announced in February the largest single-year increase in over a decade.

But most importantly, this government is committed to classroom integrity, and that does not include the commercialization of our classrooms or the force- feeding of commercial messages to the young people of Manitoba. In that light, I was very happy again to be advised of YNN's decision to not have commercial advertising as part of their program. I think that is a responsible decision, and it proves that educators were right on this issue. Mr. Derkacb: The reality is that this government pulled $10 million out of the education program budget.

How does this minister justify his heavy-handed directives about YNN when in fact YNN is now being shown commercial-free during non-curriculum time, the very basis of his party's opposition to this programming? Mr. Caldwell: One of the members stated it was an election issue and a commitment, and we believe in fulfilling our commitments. More than that, the commitment was based upon classroom integrity and having a curriculum that was free of commercial messaging. That was our position; it remains our position.

The existing contracts that have been signed with the eight schools in the province of Manitoba reflect that, and therefore those contracts again will be terminated at the end of their six-month provision. Mr. Derkacb: With a new question, Mr. Speaker. In February of this year, this government accepted the contributions from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation of $1 million to enhance computer access in libraries in Manitoba. YNN is prepared to invest significant dollars in our schools across our province. Why is this government denying students in Manitoba

1510 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 access to national news, current affairs programs and public service messages while accepting support from another private-sector company? Mr. Caldwell: Well, Mr. Speaker, obviously, the difference here is the fact of curriculum commitment. There are no strings attached, as one of the members suggested, to the Gates' contribution, which is very laudable. In fact. there are many corporations and businesses in the province of Manitoba that go a great distance to support public education in this province. We support that.

In fact, we welcome that sort of involvement in our public sector and in our post-secondary level. We are not tolerant, however, and will not accept contributions that come with the directives to alter curriculum or put in place force-feeding of commercial messages. Now, the information that we have today is that YNN has determined to stop that practice, which is very, very responsible, and in fact, as I said, represents a real victory for this government's policy and the educators in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Derkach: Mr.

Speaker, for the benefit of the students who are here with us today in the gallery, I ask this minister: Will he, for the sake of the students of this province. reverse the wrong-headed decision to scrap YNN programming in our schools which provides national news items, current affairs programs and public service messages that his government supported? Would he reverse that decision and allow students in Manitoba access to these very valuable programs? Mr. Ca ldwell: Mr. Speaker, the Government of Manitoba is more committed to the public school system than a government has been in over a decade in this province.

We are committed to providing growing resources to the public school system in this province of Manitoba, this year alone the largest such increase in over a decade. Mr. Speaker, we believe in classroom integrity, and we are not going to provide a monopoly opportunity for any corporation in the classrooms of the province of Manitoba. Youth News Network Government Position Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr.

Speaker, to the same mi nister, in the same particular area, we have heard the Minister say clearly that the premise on which the Government made its decision with respect to YNN was the use of commercials as part of that time. That has clearly changed. * (13 :45) So we are again asking the Minister, given this new information that has been provided, will he not at least agree to reconsider his original decision, given that the premise on which it was made has now been changed? Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, the contracts that are existing do not reflect any change.

I have had, and the Department has had, ongoing discussions with YNN over the course of our mandate. It has been a moving target, as most of the public knows and certainly the members opposite know. New information on any issue is addressed very seriously by this government and will continue to be so. We believe in a consultative approach m the Department of Education very strongly. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, in stark contrast to the members opposite, we believe in having integrity in the classroom, and that does not include granting monopoly positions for corporations to sell products. Mr. Praznik: Mr.

Speaker, the Minister certainly did not consult with any of the divisions that had signed or entered into contracts with YNN. I would ask the Minister today: Given that we all know that in many Manitoba households there is not interest in watching the news or current event programs, and this may, in fact, be the only way that many Manitoba young people are exposed to current events, would he not commit today, if the criteria around commercial free time during curriculum were met, that he will allow YNN into Manitoba schools?

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 151 1 Mr. Caldwell: Mr. Speaker, the instruction of current events, as the members opposite well know, is part of the curriculum in the province of Manitoba. It certainly does not require the granting of a monopoly to the corporation to use curriculum time to transmit current events, so the position of the Government of Manitoba is very consistent in this matter. We are not going to sell the students of Manitoba to the highest bidder. We are not going to create a monopoly situation for any corporation to use curriculum contact time in the classrooms of Manitoba. Mr.

Praznik: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is to the Minister of Family Services. Given that many of the families in this province do not encourage their children to watch the news, do not encourage their children to keep up on current events, would he not agree, as Minister of Family Services, that ensuring that young people, as part of the school, have access to regular news broadcasts is a good thing in building an intelligent, educated community in our province? Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): I would, first of all, say, Mr.

Speaker, I have a higher opinion of the families of Manitoba than the Member opposite. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I would remind the Member opposite that most of our schools, if not every one of our schools, has the ability to pull off channels a wide array of news resources, including the all-news programs and very, very many channels, and that through their current affairs programming, through their critical listening programming, they teach people how to think, how to work selectively. I believe we do not need to give a monopoly to any one channel to have a particular time of the day.

I have a very high opinion of Manitoba's families' concerns about this issue, and we listen to those concerns. Wildlife Amendment Act Public Consultations Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I direct this question to the Minister of Conservation. I speak on behalf of the bison growers of Manitoba and others who are expressing increasing concern, indeed alarm about his Bill 5. I simply ask him to reconsider that really indefensible position that he is asking this House to pass a bill first and then consult. Will he not tum that around and consult before bringing that bill forward? * (13: 50) Hon.

Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conservation): thank the Member for the question. I think the Member, having been here for a lot longer than I have been, knows very well that there will be an opportunity for public input into this legislation when we get into the third reading. We have a committee looking at the legislation. There will also be an opportunity for public input during the course of the development of the regulation. Mr. Enns: Mr.

Speaker, I direct my next question to the Minister of Agriculture and remind her, because she was there, that several years ago this Chamber passed one of the most progressive animal care acts in the country, acknowledged by peers around the different provinces of this country. We had people like Ms. Vicki Bums sitting in an advisory capacity consulting the then minister in the development of that act. She knows and she is in possession of the legal documents- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): The question, Mr.

Speaker, violates Beauchesne's Citation 410(8), supplementary questions require no

preamble. W auld you please direct the Member to put his question. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Lakeside, on the same point of order. Mr. Enns: I thought I made it clear. I was asking a different question to a different minister.

1512 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, I will have to get some clarification, because I was under the same impression, that the Honourable Member was ra1smg a supplementary question to his initial question. Were you raising a new question? Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. Yes, the Honourable Member was listed for another question, a separate question. Mr. Speaker: I will recognize the Honourable Member on a new question.

On the point of order, I cannot say whether the Honourable Member has a point of order on the first question to a new question, but on any further supplementary questions, Beauchesne's is very clear that a

preamble is not required on a supplementary question. But the Honourable Member was up on a new question, and I recognize the Honourable Member for Lakeside on a new question. * * * Mr. Enos: Mr. Speaker, we have heard from all kinds of members opposite with respect to the intent of this bill to stop penned hunting. I ask this question to the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) who is in possession of a legal opinion that says that the current framework of The Animal Care Act may be used to prevent penned hunting.

If that is the intent of the Government, stated not only by the Minister but by any number of speakers that spoke on Bill 5, to stop penned hunting, why does the Minister of Agriculture not use the powers that she has vested in her under The Animal Care Act? Hon. Rosano Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture and Food): The Member raises the issue of Bill 5, The Wildlife Amendment Act. The Member is well aware that this bill will go to committee soon and people will have the opportunity to raise their concerns with it. When they raise those concerns and we have those discussions, we will hear the views of the public.

If there are changes that are required in other pieces of legislation, we will certainly make those changes. But we first of all want to hear the public, and the public will know when that bill is going to go to committee, and we will listen to those views at that time, but we have met with the group to listen to them. Mr. Enos: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture is in possession of a letter from the president of the Manitoba Bison Association who says that the mere presence of Bill 5 is now hurting industry. She is the Minister of Agriculture. She is there to protect this $70- million industry.

Will she stand up for the bison growers of Manitoba? * (1 3:55) Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I always have and I always will stand up for the agriculture producers of this province. We have met with people from the Bison Association, and we have told them that we have no intentions of shutting down this industry. The intention of this legislation is to stop penned hunting, which the previous government could have done. They know that that was a concern when they introduced elk ranching in this province. There is a concern with it. We are addressing the concern that Manitobans have with penned hunting of elk.

Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Report Recommendations-Implementation Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation. Three people have been fired and six more brought before the Board of the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation. The Chair of the Board, Beverley Suek, has been quoted in media reports as saying that the firings are part of a plan to get the Crown agency back on track.

Since the Chair of the Lotteries Corporation has indicated that there is indeed a plan in place, I ask the Minister to give us details of the plan and the time frame for implementing it. Hon. Diane McGifford (Minister cha rged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): Again, I thank the Member for River Heights for his interest in the question and note that there is not much interest from other members of the House in this

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1513 particular matter. I have outlined for this member and the Premier has outlined for this member several of the steps that this government is taking towards turning the page in Lotteries. I have made the point, and I just want to make it one more time, that right now it is extremely important for those of us in government to recognize the fine workers at Lotteries and the dedication of many workers. It is time to tum the page and get on with it. Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary.

With the importance of this issue, with the time to get on with it, it is important to set a time frame. Can you give us the deadline by which you will have implemented all the recommendations of the Human Resources and the Singleton reports? Ms. McGifford: Mr. Speaker, the Human Resources report to the Board was presented on Tuesday. It was discussed on Tuesday night As soon as I am in a position to provide the Member opposite with a time line, I will.

Right now, the important thing is for the Board to analyze the recommendations, to make decisions and to get on with healing the problems at the Lotteries commission, those that we have inherited. Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary to the Minister. Will the Minister, at the very least, commit to full implementation of all the recommen dations before there is any further expansion of casinos in Manitoba? Ms. McGifford: No. Ogopogo Movie Project Manitoba Shooting Mr. Scott Smith (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism.

There have been questions raised by members of the film industry regarding the potential opportunity of shooting the film Ogopogo as this opportunity would represent the largest economical impact on a single film in Manitoba. * (14:00) My question is: Can the Minister confirm whether or not this film will be done in Manitoba and what economic impacts it would have? Hon. Diane McGifford (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for the question. The good news, of course, is that Ogopogo is back in Manitoba where it belongs.

Furthermore, the economic benefits to our province are considerable. This is a $25-million budget. The film will use Manitoba crews. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Carole Vivier on the work that she has done and also Kim Todd, who I think handled this whole difficult situation with a lot of intelligence, a lot of sensitivity, common sense, and a lot of integrity. Thank you. Flooding Minister's Visit Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Acting Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture was recently in Brandon attending the Western Premiers' Conference.

This is only a short distance from the communities and the people who suffered greatly due to the flood and excess moisture conditions last year. Could the Minister of Agriculture tell the House if, during her visit to Brandon, she took the time to visit communities such as Melita and Souris and some of the farm families in that area? Hon. Rosano Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Mr.

Speaker, while I was in Brandon, I was attending the Western Premiers' Conference where we had discussed very important issues such as health care, finances, and we also took a lot of time to discuss some very important agriculture issues. My time was taken up at the Western Premiers' meeting, and I did not go to the southwest part of the province yesterday. Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, could the Minister of Agriculture explain, as reported by The Brandon Sun, why the only way flooded farmers could have an audience with the

1514 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 Minister and her cabinet colleagues during the western Manitoba swing was to pay $7 to sip wine and nibble cheese at the NDP Riding Association Fundraiser in Neepawa? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, since I have become Minister of Agriculture and Food, my door has always been open. I have met with people from the southwest part of the province, and I am prepared to meet with them, In fact. had I not been doing Estimates today, I would have been meeting with some of those people. But that

schedule has had to be changed, and I will be meeting with them. I am quite prepared to meet with them to discuss the fact that the federal government, despite our many efforts to get them to recognize that this was a disaster. refused to put any money into the situation. Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious to see what the Minister's priorities are. There are people out there who are suff ering greatly from the flood conditions of last year. Instead, she chooses to have people pay to see her and meet with her.

I wonder if she would commit to donating that money to the flood relief in the western pan of the province. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, if the Member would like to know the phone number to my office, I am sure he can find it. There is a toll free number to the office where people can call. The Member is quite wrong to say that I have not met with producers. I am quite prepared to meet with them to discuss this very serious matter.

The Member would be a lot more effective as Leader ofthe Opposition if he would start to recognize that it is the federal government that has refused to recognize that this is a disaster. Despite the fact that we have put forward different proposals, the federal government has refused to recognize that they should be funding this disaster as they did the flood of eastern Canada and the ice storms of eastern Canada. The Member should know that. They should be letting us pass our resolution, an all-party-member resolution on this issue. Point of Order Mr.

Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Beauchesne's 41 7: "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." The Minister said she was too busy at the ministers' conference, but it did not stop her from sipping white wine. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all ministers that according to Beauchesne's Citation 417 : Answers to questions should be brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and to not provoke debate. *** Mr.

Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Minister to please conclude her comments. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I wish that the Leader of the Opposition would recognize the seriousness of this issue and pass the resolution that we have put forward to show all-party support for southwestern Manitoba with regard to this disaster. Flooding Agricultural Disaster Assistance Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, it is becoming very obvious that the people in southwest Manitoba do not have the money to pay $7 for a ticket to meet with the Minister.

I think it is abundantly clear that this government has spent absolutely nothing in support of that agricultural community, and the people in southwest Manitoba are losing faith. On the 20th page of her budget it states: "We have negotiated a new disaster aid program with the federal government to replace the AIDA program." Could the Minister of Agriculture please explain when this government negotiated a new disaster program, what are the program's parameters and now table the document that explains the new agreement? Will that help southwest Manitoba?

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 1515 Hon. Rosano Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Mr. Speaker, the Member is well aware that there are federal provincial agriculture negotiations on the safety net program. We came to an agreement-not the agreement that we wanted-and part of that agreement was that we would have a saf ety net program that would be similar to AIDA. The details of that program are not defined yet. Our staff is working on the final details of it, and when that program is finalized, I will be very happy to share with him details of the program. Mr. Jack Penner: Mr.

Speaker, this morning the Minister had stated clearly that they had signed another three-year agreement with the federal government. Does that mean that the AIDA program will now be in place for the next three years, or is the Cabinet document explaining the Budget correct, that there is no AIDA program going to continue, that we have a new program and a new deal signed with the federal government? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr.

Speaker, this morning in Estimates I told the Member that we had negotiated another agreement, but the Member is well aware that, when ministers come to an agreement on a program, it takes a lot of work on the part of staff to work out the final details of the program. The final details of the next safety net program are not worked out. In fact, producers are putting forward different proposals, and those are being considered. When it is finalized, I will share that information with him. Mr. Jack Penner: Mr.

Speaker, will the Minister then acknowledge that the flood victims of 1999 need some support and that the Finance Minister has indicated that the special Fiscal Stabilization Fund will be used as a disaster fund? Will she now indicate to this House that they are willing to put their hand in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and support the flood victims of 1999? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, my colleague the Minister of Highways and Government Services (Mr.

Ashton) and I went to Ottawa just recently and we tried to convince the federal government that there is a disaster in the southwest part of the province and they should be funding it. We put forward various options. The federal government said no, no, there is no money from the federal government on this. We are not prepared to let the federal government off their responsibility of disasters, which is a federal responsibility. Water Supply Protection-E. coli Bacteria Mrs.

Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): The safety of all of our province's water sources are important, especially following the fatal E. coli outbreak in Walkerton, Ontario, this week. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Conservation: Can he confirm or can he explain to the House what precautions are taken throughout Manitoba to ensure we do not face an E. coli outbreak similar to that in Ontario? * (14: 10) Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conservation): thank the Member for the question.

I would like to advise the Member that Manitoba Conservation administers, I am sure she realizes, a number of regulations on behalf of the Department of Health. Included in these are the regulations respecting drinking-water supplies. I wanted also to point out that, although we can regulate waters that are public, the conventional way of treating public water is through chlorination. However, I am also advised that private wells serving private residents are a different matter.

Those wells serving businesses, hospitals, institutions do not fall under the monitoring regime of that particular act with respect to chlorination, but I want to assure the Member that we are following the developments in Ontario. We are very concerned that the same thing does not happen in Manitoba, and we are monitoring on a day-to day basis. Lindane Levels-East St. Paul Water Contamination Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, after months of intense pressure by the members

151 6 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 of the Progressive Conservative opposition, the final clean-up of the cancer-causing chemicals in East St. Paul has begun, and I might add it started after yesterday's Question Period. In light of the disaster in Ontario where E. coli made it through the wells into their aquifer, has the Minister, as a precaution, had the wells tested in East St. Paul to assure that the drinking water is safe? Hon.

Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conser vation): Yes, I can indicate to the Member that the results of testing that I have received in my office have resulted in the water not being contaminated. Also, in yesterday's Question Period the Member indica ted to the House that he had received information. He did not say whether it was in report form. I would ask, if he has any additional information that I am not aware of, that he table that information in the House today so that I can use that as additional information in our investigation. Mr. Schuler: Can the Minister tell this House how many wells were tested?

Will he table the results? Mr. Speaker, what is his plan of testing wells in East St. Paul, not just the wells on Knowles A venue but the wells in East St. PauL so that the same disaster that happened in Ontario does not repeat itself in East St. Paul? Will he table the results? Mr. Lathlin: I find it somewhat curious that the Member would be asking those kinds of questions now, because around I0:30 this morning, during Estimates, he came over to me and thanked me profusely for having taken action on the soil contamination situation in East St. Paul.

So now he is asking these types of questions again in the House. I find that somewhat curious. Mr. Schuler: I think it is wonderful; it is the second time a minister on that side has taken our advice. I would like to ask the Minister: How many wells were tested in total in East St. Paul, and will he table all of that information? Mr. Lathlin: Again, if the Member opposite has any information that I do not have, I would kindly request that he table that information today so that we can use that information as additional information in our investigation and continued monitoring of the situation in East St.

Paul. want to also, in conclusion, advise the Member that the clean-up work, the contaminated soil, has been completely removed. Also, by tomorrow, we will have distributed an information bulletin to those people living in that area. Business Subsidies Elimination Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): The Finance Minister and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines recently confirmed that this government has failed to achieve a fraction of the millions in savings promised by eliminating business subsidies. The Premier (Mr.

Doer), at the Western Premiers' Conference, continued to lobby the western premiers to reduce subsidies to government while doing just the opposite. My question is: How can the Minister justify the hypocrisy of this statement, given the continuation of almost all business subsidies and grants in the Budget? Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines): For II years the former government had massive handouts to business. I am pleased, during the Estimates process, to have that member put on the record that he agrees that business subsidies should be cut. I am also pleased- Mr.

Speaker: Order, order. Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Beauchesne's 4I7: "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." I do not believe this is the time for the Minister to be asking the Member questions. I do believe she will have that opportunity in the next four years.

May 25, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 151 7 Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not believe questions were directed to the other side, but it is important for the other side to understand that they cannot allege hypocrisy in their question and not listen to the evidence of hypocrisy in the answer. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised, there is not a point of order. The Minister was just getting into her answer, had only been briefly on her feet, and I would encourage the Honourable Minister to please continue with her answer. * * * Ms.

Mihychuk: Mr. Speaker, I will try and get straight to the point. The point is that we have made significant movement towards cutting business subsidies. As I had an opportunity to explain to the Member only yesterday, in the call centre initiative that the former government had, direct cash payments were given for jobs. Those subsidies amounted to $3 million. We took over 50 percent of those grants and reduced that budgetary allowance from $3 million to $1. 4 million. That is a significant effort in cutting business subsidies. Mr. Tweed: Mr.

Speaker, I would suggest that it is less than 2 percent of the amount, so it is not substantial. My question to the Minister: Would the Minister agree that a competitive low-tax regime would work far better in competing with western provinces than subsidies? * (14:20) Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to say that our Finance Minister has presented a budget that not only rebuilds our health care system, invests in young people and provides hope, but provides business tax cuts for small businesses as well as taxpayers in Manitoba. Mr. Tweed: Mr.

Speaker, will the Minister now admit that by making Manitoba the highest-taxed province in all of Canada, she is making the decision for business to come to Manitoba or leave Manitoba? Ms. Mihychuk: I want to thank the Member for the question. In fact, many, many independent institutions have indicated that Manitoba is very competitive in our tax regime. An example of Manitoba's competitiveness was the decision by Traders.com to create a brand-new call centre and amalgamate their national services right here in Manitoba without any business subsidies. Selkirk Mental Health Centre Nursing Shortage Mr.

Edward Helwer (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the Health Minister about the situation at the Crisis Stabilization Unit at the Selkirk Mental Health facility. Selkirk residents and staff at the facility are very concerned about what has become a very critical nursing shortage at the unit. In this week's Selkirk Journal, there is a story about how they are shut down. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Health provide the residents of Selkirk and district and the staff of the unit with a precise time line of when he will have the situation resolved? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I thank the Member for that very serious question because, as the Member knows, we cannot undo in several months what took 11 years to create as a ma jor problem. As the Member might know, we are involved in a process with them, but I want to assure residents that we put in place contingency plans to provide services to residents of that area.

I only wish that members opposite would have supported our nursing plan, and I only wish they would have supported initiatives in the Budget that would have brought more resources into this area, but they voted against it and they opposed our nursing plan, which is something that is unfortunate. As a matter of fact, as recently as this morning, I met with the RPNs specifically to deal with the short-term and the mid-term problem relating to places like Selkirk and other areas where we are facing acute shortages of nurses. I want to assure members and the members of the region that there are

1518 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 contingencies put in place for this serious situation. We managed to cope with it at Sara Riel, which was shutting down regularly when members were in government, and contingencies are in place. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Scouts Canada Volunteers Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Fiin Flon): It is with considerable pride that I rise in this Legislature today to pay tribute to the dedicated volunteers involved with the Flin Flon and Border District Council of Scouts Canada.

In particular, I would ask all members of this Legislature to join me in paying tribute to two very special volunteers of the Flin Flon and Border District Council, Jim and Jeanne Fell. Jeanne is better known as Jan Fell. Jim and Jan Fell have been involved with the Canadian scouting movement for over 50 years each. Over the years they each have held various positions, beginning as scout leaders and moving through several levels of involvement up to and including District Commissioner.

As well, Jim Fell has been honoured with some prestigious awards, to name two examples, honorary member of Scouts Canada, Manitoba Council, and also an honorary member of the Baden-Powell Guild. The 50-year commitment that Jan and Jim Fell have made to the scouting movement is truly a milestone in volunteerism. They were clearly motivated by the aim of Scouts Canada which is to motivate and help children, youth and adults develop their character as resourceful and responsible members of the community by providing opportunities and guidance for their mental, physical, social and spiritual development.

Thank you, Jan and Jim Fell, for your many years of dedi cated service and exemplary volunteerism. Rural Nursing Program Mr. David Faurschou (Portage Ia Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today and commend the Assiniboine Community College for offering its practical nursing program in Portage Ia Prairie this fall. This rotating rural nursing program will also be offered in Dauphin. By providing training for nurses where they are needed most, in rural Manitoba, ACC is helping to address the problem most rural Manitoba communities are experiencing, the recruiting and retaining of nurses.

By training our health care providers in communities that need them most, there is an increased chance for those men and women to take the course in Portage la Prairie and stay and work in Portage as well. This 14-month program is designed to prepare its graduates with critical thinking, the knowledge and skills of nursing and judgment skills that are required while providing nursing care in today's health care facilities. Students will receive extensive practical nursing experience in long-term and acute care settings.

I commend the Assiniboine Community College for continuing this fine program for the betterment of all rural Manitoba. I am proud to see that this government has found that this program introduced by the previous government is one that is worthwhile and valuable for all rural communities, and thank them for their continued support. Economic Growth Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): I rise today to recognize the dedication of this government to the well-being of both rural, urban and northern Manitobans and the effort it has made to ensure that all local communities continue to develop and prosper.

It is essential that government investments support the efforts of all Manitobans regardless of where they live. A strong rural Manitoba, strong urban centres and a strong inner city will help ensure a strong provincial economy. In the first budget, we allocated almost $18 million to the Urban Economic Development Initiative which will provide $2 million to the Department of Health to support improvements to ambulance services in Winnipeg. Additionally, the City of Winnipeg will benefit from $22 million in capital assistance and a

May 25, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1519 commitment to provide resources to complete improvements to the floodway. To rural Manitoba this government has committed to provide over $18 million of rural capital project funding through the Community Ring Dikes Program for communities in flood prone areas and will introduce a program to replace older ambulances in rural Manitoba.

Additionally, through the REDI program, $15 million is budgeted to provide support to local governments for youth programs, regional development corporations and community development programs like the Grow Bonds trade promotion and the Community Works Loan Program. I am also pleased that we have extended the Grow Bonds Program to the City of Winnipeg.

In addition, the City of Winnipeg's budget this year saw 3.7% increase of over three and a half million dollars to the individual operating grants to the City of Winnipeg for things like the transit service, Dutch elm disease control and policing. *(14:30) I could also explain a number of other initiatives like Neighbourhoods Alive!, the Winnipeg housing initiative and the support of Centre Venture which are further going to show this provincial government recognizes the value and importance of working together with the City of Winnipeg to build a strong Manitoba. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

International Missing Children's Day Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I want to take this opportunity to remind all members of the Legislature that today is International Missing Children's Day. Today all members were given green ribbons of hope to wear in support of International Missing Children's Day. These green ribbons symbolize the hope within our community and this province for the safe return of all missing children. I ask all members to please wear these ribbons and help spread the hope throughout their constituencies. All children have the right to be safe.

Prevention of miss ing, abducted, exploited, runaway and throwaway children is closely associated with education and requires innovative approaches. A missing child is everyone's responsibility. The involvement of home, school and community is an essential element for successful programs. As well, organizations such as Child Find Manitoba work tirelessly to reunite missing children with their families. My colleague the Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger) is the former executive director and CEO of Child Find Manitoba.

I commend her for the significant contribution she has made to help find missing children and return them safely home. Child Find Manitoba, through the efforts of their many volunteers, offer awareness and education programs and hope to prevent children from running away from home or being abducted. They also offer search assistance for families who have had to experience the pain of having their child go missing. I commend these dedicated men and women who help protect children from danger, and I remind all Manitobans to please wear a green ribbon of hope today. Thank you. Skateboarding By-law Ms.

Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): This morning's Free Press carries an

article on an amendment passed by Winnipeg City Council to a traffic by-law. The amendment will allow skateboarding as a mode of transportation on city sidewalks. I would like to draw to the members' attention the story behind this amendment because the people involved deserve our commendation. The story starts in Golden Gate Middle School in my constituency of St. James. The school had a rule that students could not bring skateboards to school as that would condone the breaking of the by-law banning them from sidewalks. The principal, Ms.

Connie Newman, encouraged students to express their dis satisfaction with the by-law as the responsible citizens that they are. Accordingly, a group of students met with the Member for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau), Constable Gord Bryson of the Winnipeg Police Service and myself. They then decided to circulate a petition among both students and

15 20 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 adults. The petition asked that the by-law be repealed so that skateboards could be used as a means of transportation on city sidewalks. It also asked that the City look into organizing programs in St. James-Assiniboia for youth who are interested in skateboarding. The student driven petition garnered 303 signatures within just a few weeks. It was submitted to our mayor, Glen Murray, on May 23, and now you know the outcome. I would like to commend Ms. Newman warmly for her

part in this forceful lesson in democracy and citizenship, but, as Ms. Newman would agree, the bulk of the credit must go to the students who protested what they considered to be an unfair by-law and presented the petition to City Hall. I applaud their willi ngness to stand up for their rights. and their good judgment in deciding on a course of action. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DAY Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed, the House will resume consideration of the Committee of Supply. Mr. Deputy Speaker, please come and take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) FINANCE Mr.

Chairperson (Harry Schellenberg): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this

section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Finance. When the Committee last sat, it had been considering item 7.4 Taxation on page 82 of the Estimates book. I will read the Resolution 7.4. Resolution 7.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 5, 280, 000 for Finance, Taxation, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 200 1. Mr. Eric Stefanson (Kirkfield Park): Mr. Chairman, I was concentrating on something else. I apologize. Have you moved on to Federal- Provincial Relations and Research?

Is that where we are? Mr. Chairperson: No. We have not passed Taxation yet, the resolution. Mr. Stefanson: I thought we did that this morning. Let us proceed with Taxation. Mr.Cha irperson: Shall the resolution pass? Pass. Now we will move on to page 83, Resolution 7.5. Federal-Provincial Relations and Research (

a) Economic and Federal-Provincial Research

(1) Sala ries and Employee Benefits $1 .29 4,200. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, first of all, in terms of looking at the revenue numbers, I can take them one at a time or altogether. The numbers that we get from the federal government, the personal income tax, the corporate income tax. the equalization and the Canada Health and Social Transfer, do the numbers in the budget reflect those numbers as provided by the federal government, or have there been further and subsequent adjustments made as a result of additional information provided through the review process by the Department? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): The answer to the question have we just simply relied on federal information or have we made adjustments, there have been some adjustments made, for example, prior years adjustments to apply the trend line to the Manitoba surtax and flat tax to 1998 final data and credits. So there have been some adjustments made by our officials to reflect their assessment of what the position going forward is and what prior years adjustments might be accruing to us in the future. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, have those adjustments led to an increase or a decrease in projected revenue? Mr.

Selinger: An increase. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, is the Minister prepared to provide a reconcilia tion of the

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1521 numbers provided by the federal government and the numbers ultimately used in the budget? Mr. Selinger: We will take that question under advisement, consider an answer and get back to you. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I would hope the Minister would provide that reconcilia tion. As it relates to the Canada Health and Social Transfer, outside of the one-time adjustments that the federal government has now made for two years in a row, in terms of the funding for CHST it shows an increase of about $27 milli on.

I am imagining part of the announcement by the federal government in their budget. But what I am really interested in is the projection for this formula going forward. I am trying to recall. I know it works towards ultimately becoming or it was working towards ultimately becoming funding based on per capita. I would like the Minister to inform us what the current status of the CHST funding formula is and what changes, if any, will occur over the next few years. Mr. Selinger: That is under negotiation at the moment, the future formula.

At the Western Premiers Conference, the ministers of Fi nance from western Canada and the Territories presented a paper to the premiers of those respective jurisdictions. We called for restoration to the '94-95 levels, before the massive $6.2- billion cut was imposed upon the provinces and an escalator that would reflect the cost drivers in health care particularly. So that is by way of background. For the current year we have used the numbers as provided by the federal government. * (1 4:5 0) Mr. Stefanson: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I think one thing we can agree on is the need for the federal government to support their full funding for CHST, but the provincial ministers of Finance have taken various positions on federal funding over the years. Unfortunately, the federal government does not always listen, but my recollection is right now the formula is working its way towards ultimately a per capita. I guess, even though the provincial ministers of Finance can make submissions and recommendations, I just want to understand, as it sits right now, what is happening to the CHST funding to provinces? Mr.

Selinger: As I understand it, I think the question is really sort of two parts. Is there a sort of per capita amount being moved towards as opposed to an equalized amount with respect to the CHST? I think in general terms, that is correct. It is moving to a per capita amount without an equaliza tion factor put in there as it used to be under the older system, which obviously advantaged provinces like ours. I think you will understand that the major provinces, particularly Ontario, have been demanding that, but also Alberta as well.

So we have projected forward based on what the trend is there towards a per capita amount. Those are the numbers we have built into the projections for the CHST. Mr. Stefanson: Well, what I am trying to clarify is that that current arrangement from the federal government is unchanged, that they are still going down the path of going to a per capita.

My recollection in looking at the numbers is we were almost flat or we were very close to being flat under a per capita, and that is why we, along with the majority of provinces, were prepared to support changes to equal ization that went to the 1 0-province average on the basis of also being prepared to go to the CHST per-capita funding formula. If I recall correctly, I think mostly Newfoundland and Nova Scotia were the two provinces that opposed that to various degrees at the time.

So all I want to be clear of is two things, that that still is unchanged, that the federal government is still going down that path of going ultimately to a per capita, but I guess I am now curious what the position is of the current government relative to both the combination of the CHST funding and the equaliz ation in terms of what kind of a combined package this government feels is a reasonable approach to funding from those two sources. Mr. Selinger: That direction that existed during your tenure is continuing with respect to the federal government.

In terms of our total fiscal position in front of the federal government, we do agree that the equalization formula go to the 1 0-province average, which would obviously be

I522 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 advantageous to us. I think, as I recall, the number would advantage us on the order of $I3 5 million approximately. It varies, but in that order. We reiterated again at the western Premiers' meeting the necessity and the desire on the part of our provincial governments to lift the ceilin g on equalization, which has been placed there, which sort of nullifies the purpose of the transfer in the first place. That is part of our overall position with respect to negotiations on fiscal relationships with the federal government.

At the western Premiers' meeting, we emphasized the restoration to the '95 levels and we also emphasized with respect to the CHST the idea of an escalator or an indexing component to that.

We agreed that we wanted to do further work as a group of provinces and territories on what an appropriate escalator would be based on the cost drivers as they are further clarified in health care, because I am sure you will recall that the pressures in health care are growing faster than the economy and the GDP and that if you just indexed it to that it might not be sufficient to address the reality that is happening in health care. Pharmacare costs, et cetera, are going up at a pretty dramatic rate these days. Mr.

Stefanson: In terms of equalization, I am trying to recall, I think, the last time the equal ization was renewed it was for a five-year period. When does that come up for renewal again? Mr. Selinger: The renewal date for that is 2004, but in terms of our request to the federal government on the ceiling, we have asked them to address that immediately and not to sort of tie it into the renewal of the agreement. We think that that is a specific item that could be lifted without changing the basic formula. Mr.

Stefanson: Does the concept of equaliz ation, to the best of your knowledge, still have the support of all provinces and territories in Canada? Mr. Selinger: Yes, I believe that is the case. I sensed some nervousness on the part of some provinces about the I 0-province average, but I sensed strong support for lifting the ceiling. But the basic notion of equalization, as required by the Constitution, is still broadly supported by all the provinces. You can imagine the provinces that are more lukewarm than others towards that. Mr.

Stefanson: Has there been any discussion or attempt to revisit the issue of, I guess the best way to describe it is, packaging equaliz ation and CHST together to see if there can be support of all the provinces and territories? As I indicated I think we came very close to that at one stage with mostly Newfoundland and Nova Scotia initially to a lesser extent. Maybe they became a little more rigid as discussions continued, but we had the support of, if I recall correctly, every other province in terms of moving to the I 0- province average but at the same time moving to a per capita CHST.

There were other elements to the combined package at the time. Is that being revisited? Is there any attempt to revisit that, or is that a dead issue? Mr. Selinger: I do not think it is a dead issue. When I was at the federal-provincial Finance ministers' meeting in Ottawa before Christmas, I saw a shift in the position of Newfoundland, particularly on this one. It seemed that they had sort of supported a federal position.

Perhaps during the time of year there they seemed to be more in the provincial camp this time, at least at the last meeting, and moving away from feeling that they had to support the federal Liberals on this. They were taking a more provincial perspective on it. So that was the latest information I had. Nova Scotia: change of government, pretty difficult situation financially, looking for anything they could in terms of increased transfer payments from Ottawa. They have enormous pressures in health and education and some serious liabilities that have occurred over the years with respect to some of their Crowns.

As you might know, they have gone to a volume three presentation which sort of exacerbates that problem in terms of a deficit. Mr. Stefanson: I just want to go back to the provision of the numbers from the federal government. Could the Minis ter indicate to us when it comes to personal income tax how much personal income tax was increased in this budget

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1523 year as a result of the additional calcul ations made by himself and department officials? Mr. Selinger: I think on this one I said we would endeavour to pull that information together for you and take that as advice. My officials seem to be circumspect about spitting out specific numbers at this point. I am sure that is a tendency you might have noticed yourself when you were here. I am hoping that is consistent behaviour. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I am looking at some historical information, and I know the officials do a great deal of work in this area.

It is comprehensive and, I am sure, accurate. I am assuming that this information already exists or it can certainly be pulled together fairly readily. I think it is really going to come down to the Minister's will ingness to provide it. We are asking for and I cannot recall-I would have to go back in Hansard-that I was necessarily asked for this information by my critic. If we did make adjustments, sometimes we made adjustments, sometimes we did not make adjustments.

All I am looking for is to see what those adjustments are and to be able to assess as the Official Opposition, on behalf of Manitobans, if we feel you have made reasonable adjustments to the federal numbers. I am sure it can be readily pulled together, and I would just ask that you undertake to do that. *( 15:00) Mr. Selinger: As I said, we will take it as notice, discuss it, and see what the impl ications are. Mr.

Stefanson: Just to clarify then, I will not bother asking each one individually but that applies to the personal income tax, corporate income tax, equaliz ation and CHST, really the four numbers provided by the federal government. I am sure we could go back to the federal budget. We could probably contact federal officials and be provided with certain amounts of information that are public. But it is much simpler for all of us if the Minister just provides it to us. I look forward to receiving that information. I think we are going to conclude. I am not there yet.

We are going to conclude with a lot of tax questions, so I think I will deal with some of the other issues until we get there. First of all, could the Minister provide the number of positions within this area, within Fed eral Provincial Relations, that have been filled since October 4, 1999, and the names of people that have filled those positions? Mr.

Selinger: Earlier I said I would try to provide that information with respect to the entire department, but my ADM of Federal Provincial Relations indicates to me that the only permanent position that has been filled is in the Taxation area, by a gentleman named Gordon Friesen. Mr. Stefanson: Have there been any departures from these positions since October 4 of last year, and could you tell me who those people were, if any? Mr. Selinger: There are no departures, but there is one secondment to Executive Council. Mr. Stefanson: Could the Minis ter indicate who that is? Mr. Selinger: Dia ne Gray. Mr.

Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, who printed the Budget documents this year? Who are the printers that did the work? Mr. Selinger: Premier Printing was the printer of the Budget documents. Mr. Stefanson: Could the Mini ster outline- this might not be the appropriate

section and if not we can deal with it later under Minister's Sal ary for us the cost of the advertising that has been done relative to the year 2000 budget through print and other means? How much has been budgeted and/or how much has been spent to date? Mr. Selinger: That information is being compiled and will be made available once it is finalized. Mr. Stefanson: When does the Minister expect that to be available?

1524 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 Mr. Selinger: My officials inform me they think that will be available in a matter of weeks. Mr. Stefanson: Is it correct that that amount is actually budgeted in this area in, I guess, potentially the Communications line of this section? Mr. Selinger: The expenditures for the Budget are being co-ordi nated by this branch, but they are being handled, as they have in the past, in terms of their allocation throughout the Department. Mr. Stefanson: Can the Minister indicate how much was budgeted for budget advertising?

I know we will wait a couple of weeks for the actual, but how much was budgeted for budget advertising? Mr. Selinger: I have just been made aware that there is a FIPPA request on this from the PC caucus, which we are working on complying with, on advertising expenses so we will be providing it through that mechanism. Mr. Stefanson: I am assuming that request might refer to both the Budget and the actual. It is probably mostly concerned about the actual. What I am just asking about now is within this Budget document that the Government just passed, how much was budgeted for Budget advertising? Mr.

Selinger: My officials ask me to take that as notice, and we will pull that together. It has been handled the way it has in the past, and they want time to compile the specifics on that. Mr. Stefanson: Could the Minis ter outline how the advertising that was done this year compared to the advertising that was done last year? Mr. Selinger: They will work on that as well. Mr. Stefanson: So I am assuming, then, what the officials will compile is the budgeting costs for advertising, the nature of the advertising, and then the actual costs, and compare that as well to 1999-2000. Mr. Selinger: That sounds reasonable.

Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I am glad to see that the Minister carried on with doing budget consultations around the Province. Could he outline for us roughly how many people participated in those consultations, and how many communities he was able to attend at? Mr. Selinger: We visited Brandon, Flin Flon, Dauphin, Ste. Anne. Two events were held in Winnipeg. Poplarfield, Manitoba. We had planned to go to Churchill, but, because the phone lines were down, they requested us not to come at that time. Those are the publicly advertised ones. They were open meetings.

A cross-section of the community was invited to those meetings. The attendants seemed to be around 50 and up, I would think would be fair. Particularly in Flin Flon it was a very cold night and, even there, I think there were at least 30- plus people in the room. So apparently it was well attended in historical perspective. We attempted to visit every region of the Province in the process. * (1 5: 10) Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I believe that the Minister and the Department did some polling prior to the Budget.

If that is accurate, I can understand the reasons and sensitivity for not releasing that information in advance of the Budget, but can the Minister confirm that he did do polling? If so, when will it be released? What is the cost of that polling? And can you give us some indication of the findings of that polling? Mr. Selinger: There was polling done by the Government in the pre-Budget process. That will be released as per the policy enunciated by the former government in the latter part, I believe, of the last fiscal year. The administrative policy suggests within 90 days of receipt of the polling information.

We will certainly comply with that and probably get it out earlier than that. In terms of the poll results, I do not have an analysis specifically in front of me, but there is nothing in there that I recall being untoward in terms of what we were planning to do in a budget. Mr. Stefanson: Could the Minister outline, beyond the public consultations, what groups he met with in the lead-up to the Budget? I know

May25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1525 over the many years there were a number of different types of groups we would meet with. They would come and make representations in various ways. Some would give us prepared submissions, some verbal submissions and so on. We certainly always made an effort to listen to a good cross-section and try to accommodate as many groups as we could. So could the Minister outline the groups that he met with that provided him advice on the year 2000 Budget. Mr.

Selinger: Yes, several groups made representations: Manitoba Chamber of Commerce, Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, Manitoba Taxpayers Association, Canadian Federation of Independent Business, poverty groups, Manitoba Federation of Labour, Social Planning Council, the accounting organizations, the CGAs, the CAs. We had representation from the banks as well, the Bankers' Associa tion. I think those are the main ones. As you realize. there were probably, there were many other informal representations as well, but those would be the main ones that I met with. Mr.

Stefanson: Were there any groups that made requests that the Minister was not able to accommodate? Mr. Selinger: The Manitoba Home Bui lders Associa tion attended one of our public meetings, and the advertising in the Free Press was incorrect, so they attended at the wrong time. I was not able to meet with them one on one before the Budget. That was the one that I was very aware of that we had not had a chance to get back to. Mr. Stefanson: Did the Minister meet with a group called Choices?

I know in the past that is one group that has prepared a written alternative budget for many years that we reviewed and I responded to on many occasions. I know that this year they did not prepare a written submission, so I am curious as to whether or not the Minister met with any representatives from Choices and received a verbal submission on the Budget. Mr. Selinger: They as a group did not make representations to me. As I recall, this year they held a public conference or kind of a think tank around issues of taxation. Media reports came back to us on that.

I might have received some of the information that came out of that meeting, but I did not have a delegation come to me directly from that group. Actually I think that conference was sponsored by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, not Choices, but there were some members there from that group. Mr. Stef anson: Well, I am glad the Member refers to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Mr. Selinger: That might have been one group that asked for a meeting that I did not meet with. Now that I have thought of that, I remember they asked for a meeting, and I do not think I actually met with them .

For whatever reason, we were not able to get a meeting together. But very early in my coming into of fice, they asked for a meeting. I think they asked several ministers for a meeting. They met with some other ministers, but they did not meet with me. Mr. Stefanson: I am not going to go through all the Members of those organizations, but one individu al who has participated in one or both of them I think is a Mr. John Loxley. Has the Minister received any input from Mr. Loxley on any financial issues? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Loxley is an economist, and I have consulted him from time to time on economic matters. Mr.

Stefanson: Is that done on an informal volunteer basis? There is no financial arrange ment with Mr. Loxley. Mr. Selinger: All of the advice I have received from Mr. Loxley to date is on an informal basis. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I want to move on. I will probably come back to this issue, but I will as a general question at this stage. In terms of The Balanced Budget Debt Repayment and Taxpayer Protection legislation, do any of the initiatives in the Budget lead to a requirement to introduce any changes or amendments to that legisla tion in this session? Mr.

Selinger: One thing that I did indicate in the Budget is that we would be making a contribution for the pension liabilities. I am informed that that would require changes in the

1526 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 balanced budget debt repayment

section of the legisla tion to provide for that. So that is a strong possibility. Mr. Stefanson: Just so I can clarify then. So the Minis ter is considering introducing an amend ment to that legisla tion as it relates to the item he just outlined, the addition of the pension liabilities to the accumulated debt and the debt repayment in this upcoming or in this legisla tive session that we are in right now. Mr. Selinger: That is being considered. Mr. Stefanson: When does the Minister anticipate being able to make a final decision on that issue? Mr.

Selinger: That will be an outcome of discussions I have with my officials. There has been no timetable arranged at this stage, but we are reviewing the Auditor's recommendations with respect to transparency in the financial reporting. We are looking at the debt repayment issue. As we engage in those discussions, it will get clearer what is possible and timing will become clear as well. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I will return to this issue I think a little later as it relates not only to this but to some of the tax changes.

I should really ask at this point, on the issue that we just discussed in terms of the pension liabilities: Is the Mini ster indicating he is seeking input as to whether or not he has to amend the legislation. whether it is optional? I am just trying to get clear-e ither the legisla tion has to be amended or it does not have to be amended by law. Is the Minister at the point that he does not know the answer to that question? Mr. Selinger: I am still seeking advice from my officials on what is required to bring forward our policy on pension liabilities. Mr.

Stefanson: I am surprised to hear that, that the Minister would not be aware as to whether or not a legis lative change is required as a result of the changes. I guess I would certainly indicate that that makes those of us in Opposition more than a little anxious in terms of the opening up of this legisla tion and what other issues or agenda items the Government might have. I think the sooner that the Minis ter can inform us, inform Manitobans and clear the air on whether or not he has to amend the legisla tion, I think it would be a prudent thing to do.

We will probably return to that at a little greater length after we go through a few other issues. I want to ask the Minister about the del inking from the federal system. I am sure he has had an opportunity to read some previous budgets in his spare time. In doing so, he will have noticed in the 1998 budget a

section talking about that initiative, an initiative that goes back several years that I believe was led extensively by two provinces, basically the Province of Al berta and the Province of Manitoba that led the charge, so to speak, in going to the tax-on income approach that was done for a number of reasons, a number of reasons that the Minister himself has touched on over the last several weeks in terms of accountability and transparency and a number of those kinds of issues.

If he has not had the chance, he should read the 1998 budget, taxation adjustment section, pages 13, 14, 15, which first introduced the topic in a very formal way in a budget document but, having said that, that was subsequent to receiving approval in principle from the federal government I believe in 1997, if I recall correctly. That was outlined in the '98 budget. In this document it indicates that Manitoba would not move to a tax-on-income system before 200 I. This time frame allows interested individuals and organizations time to famil iarize themselves with the proposal and provide meaningful input.

More detail on the tax-on income proposal would be released later this year. If I recall again correctly, there was a discussion paper prepared by the Department of Finance that was made available to interested individuals, organizations, accounting organi zations and so on with the view to solic iting that meaningful input. I am curious in the light of all of that what led the Minister to accelerate the delinking and to do it in the year 2000 instead of the year 2001. *( 1 5:20) Mr. Selinger: My officials who carried on these discussions with the federal government say that

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1527 originally the federal government was not amenable to an earlier delin king. They thought there would be too many technical difficulties to be overcome but, as the discussions proceeded, they came to the conclusion that an earlier delinking was possible. As a result, five provinces elected to do that. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I understand all of that, but I am looking for the reason or the motivation that the Government of Manitoba decided to do it one year earlier. What led to that?

Why was it done one year earlier when there was already a plan in place to do it in 2001? Mr. Selinger: My officials inform me that it had been a desire of provinces to move at the earliest possible time and it was the federal government that was resisting on that point. Their views on that changed subsequent to this budget being brought down. The provinces that opted or elected to go with it this year, the five provinces were doing it basically for reasons of having more control over their tax system at an earlier date. That was the general motivation for everybody moving on it. Mr.

Stefanson: I guess I am curious. Is the definition of more control of their tax system basically the intent certainly of Manitoba to preserve revenues and not allow the full effects of the federal budget to flow through to Manitoba taxpayers. Was that the objective and motivation in delinking a year early? Mr. Selinger: My officials indicate that the desire was to move at the earliest possible date to have the flexibility involved in a tax-on-tax taxable income system.

The announcement was made prior to the federal budget, and it allowed the Government of Manitoba to offer the tax reductions that were made available in the Budget. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, my under standing is most of the provinces, if not all of the other provinces that delinked this year still reflected at least the equivalent of what the reductions to their citizens would have been under the old tax system where it was tied directly to the federal system. We did not do that in Manitoba, and I ask the Minister: Why did we not do that in Manitoba? Mr.

Selinger: The move was made to allow the flexibility and control that all provinces wanted, and that was the original motivation for the tax on-tax taxable income system and the delinking. The new government wanted to offer the tax relief that they had promised in the election through the property tax reli ef. As well, they passed on the $10 million in base rate changes that were part of the federal budget. In addition, they wanted to follow through on the spring budget of '99-2000 and offer the tax relief that was promised there in terms of personal income taxes and small business tax reductions. Mr.

Stefanson: I guess what I am bewildered by is when I look at the

summary on the tax-on income proposal and I listen to the Minister, all of the benefits that he talks about in terms of transparency and accountabili ty and so on are the same issues that were outlined in 1997 and 1998, and I think part of the arguments and reasons why the federal government supported the change and the public, to a large extent, supported the change. At that particular point in time. with the agreement of the federal government in principle to move forward, it was laid out very clearly to the citizens of the Province that this would take effect in 2001.

A discussion paper was put in place that was made available to Manitobans. In terms of all of those benefits, I have not heard anything different, and I am just trying to get at, quite simply, what was the motivation to delink one year early. The only thing that I see that is different is the fact that the provincial government did not flow through the full effect of the federal tax reductions. I am just looking for, I guess, a simple answer. If that was the motivation and that was the objective to preserve revenues, then tell us that. Tell members of this House and tell Manitobans that that was the objective.

Beyond that I have not heard of any other changes or any other reason to be accelerating the introduction of the changes. Mr. Selinger: I believe the motivation was exactly consistent with the motivation under the previous government, which was to provide all of those points raised in terms of transparency

1528 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 and greater simplici ty and greater provincial control over their own system. I think all the provinces shared that. The federal government had been the barrier to moving earlier on that. When they relented in that regard, five provinces decided to move more quickly. Quebec has always been there in terms of having their own control over their own tax system. This allowed us to accelerate benefits of the new system to Manitobans and, in addition, to pass on the tax promises we made during the election with respect to the property tax credit.

We have to be careful here. All the federal tax reductions have been made available to Manitobans and will continue to be made available to Manitobans. Mr. Stefanson: The Member talks about accelerating benefits but quite the opposite occurred. We will certainly run through the numbers in some detail from calculation that had been done by reputable accounting firms and by comparisons to the 1999 Budget. It is not hard to determine that the full benefit of this last federal budget, if we were under the old system, were not passed through to Manitobans.

The Minister suggested these accelerated benefits by doing it one year early. Quite the opposite happened, that Manitobans did not benefit from the full impact of personal income tax reductions. * (15:30) In terms of the timing issue, if my mem ory serves me correctly, the federal government did offer to at least some provinces to pilot a year early. We made the decision not to accept that offer here in the Province of Manitoba to pilot a year early to this chain, so that was being offered to provinces, not to all provinces.

They put forward the proposal that they might be interested in starting it with a province or two, and we decided that we did not want to do that. We wanted to do it where we gave a lot of time for input. It is a very significant change, in terms of the impact on Manitobans, and therefore targeted doing it in 200 I. Having said that, that was the time frame that most provinces were targeting. So I am really concerned about a suggestion that benefits were accelerated when quite the opposite occurred. If it is being tied to other provinces, that was offered to the Province of Manitoba to do it a year early.

We, under our tenure, decided not to accept that. Mr. Selinger: With respect to the notion of pil ot projects, apparently that had been a discussion point under the previous government with the federal government, but at the time the federal government was not particularly supportive of going ahead with pilot projects and identified a number of technical difficulties with that.

Later on in this year, after we became the Government, their attitude changed in their discussions with provincial officials and they decided that they could make available delinking earlier to any province that wanted it, not just as a pilot project. I think that mostly related to their technical capacity to do that for the year 2000, so they did change that. It might have had something to do with the fact that they were setting up the revenue coll ection agency and they wanted to get people to sign on to that and be part of that as early as possible.

So there seemed to be some change in attitude on the part of the federal government that resulted in them making available delinking for the year 2000 as opposed to the year 200 I. For all the reasons that we discussed earlier, half the provinces thought that was a good idea. Mr. Stefanson: Then I would just ask the simple question: Was one of the objectives of de linking a year earlier in the year 2000 rather than as originally planned in the year 2001 to preserve revenues for the Province of Manitoba? Mr.

Selinger: I think the way the question has been put does not represent accurately what Finance was trying to achieve here. They were trying to achieve the benefits of greater transparency and simplici ty as well as more control over their tax system and to pass on to Manitobans the benefits that the incoming government had promised in terms of tax reductions while at the same time not having the federal government impose upon them additional revenue considerations without consultation or dialogue, a unilateral sort of reduction of provincial revenues without consultation or dialogue.

So the federal tax cuts will flow through to Manitobans. In addition, the provincial tax reductions committed to by the

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1529 provincial government will also be made available to them. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, the benefits that were outlined back in 1997 and 1998, while they are important to Manitobans, I would think if you asked many Manitobans what they meant, that they felt the offset was that they were not going to get a personal income tax reduction as a result of that change that they normally would have received under the existing system, I think many Manitobans, in fact the majority of Manitobans would have told this government to wait another year.

I, like many Manitobans, believe that one of the motivations if not the single most important motivation for this mi nister and this government was to preserve revenues. In fact, the Minister has pointed to some of the commentaries from the investment community. Certainly one of them says very clearly in their document that Ottawa's middle bracket rate reduction is not immediately being passed on. When we run samples of different tax returns-! know at least one accounting firm has tried to work with Finance officials to ensure the accuracy of these numbers-you can look at income levels almost across the board.

You can look at the one example used in the Budget document, a family of four, one earner, $60,000, and their taxes under the existing system in the year 2000, if we had not de linked, would have been $6,229. Under the system after delinking this year, their taxes go up to $6,394.

So all I am asking this minister to confirm are two things, that he took the steps that he did and his government took the steps that they did to preserve revenues, and secondly, that by taking those steps, on May 10, Manitobans were paying more personal income taxes than they would have paid in the year 2000 under the combined personal income tax system. I can go through a range of numbers, and we probably will end up doing it, but we are more than prepared to do that. Mr. Selinger: There are two parts to that.

As the Member will know, the federal government reduced the health supplement by some $39 millio n this year. That was a major concern to this government. That was also a decision made unilaterally without consultation. In our moving forward on our tax package and budget this year, we did pass through the $10 million in base rate changes and impleme nted our property tax credit. The total amount of those benefits is in excess of what would have happened if we had not delinked and not offered the property tax credit.

We know there is a $7-million advantage to Manitobans in terms of the tax relief that they have received this year. It allowed us to live up to the promises we made in the election. So Manitobans are on the whole better off with respect to the levels of taxation they pay. The property tax credit is an important element in that. Mr. Stefanson: I just want to deal with the facts. That is what I would like to deal with. I would just like a simple answer to what I think is a fairly simple question.

Does the Minister of Fi nance agree that many Manitobans are paying higher personal income taxes in the year 2000 under the system that he introduced in this budget than they would have paid had we stayed on the old system for the year 2000? * (15: 40) Mr. Selinger: I can only reiterate that we have passed on to Manitobans all the federal tax cuts. We have followed through on the tax reductions we voted for in the spring budget. In addition we have passed on the property tax credit that we promised during the election.

The net result of that is that Manitobans are paying $7 million less in overall taxation when you combine income taxes and personal tax credits together. So we believe that our package is more advantageous to Manitobans. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I will try to make this as simple as I can then. I will back up. I know the Department can do this and they have done this. Has the Minister seen examples of Manitoba taxpayers, what taxes they are going to pay in the year 2000 as a result of his budget?

Is he also seeing what taxes they would have paid in the year 2000 had we stayed a part of the existing combined system?

1530 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 Mr. Selinger: The decision to delink was made before the federal budget. The Manitoba Government then proceeded to redesign the tax system to of fer tax relief to Manitobans and foll owed through on all its election promises. It is our view that the overall burden of taxation that Manitobans are paying is less, that the property tax credit is a significant element in that and that we are on sound footing as we go forward in the future. Mr. Stefanson: Mr.

Chairman, with all due respect, a couple of things, first of all, I think it was the worst kept secret in Canada that the federal government was going to be reducing personal income taxes. If there is a Canadian who did not know that personal income taxes were being reduced this year by the federal government, they were under a rock somewhere. Like most of the federal budgets, we read about it and hear about it in its entirety before we ever see Paul Martin stand up in the House of Commons. I am just asking a simple question.

We are prepared, at some point, if he has not seen the numbers, to certainly share the numbers with him. But I know the capabili ties of the people he has sitting at this table. I know the work that the Department does. Hopefully, it is the same as it was in the past. When you are looking at tax changes, it is done on a very comprehensive basis. I just ask a very simple question. Does the Minister acknowledge and agree that many Manitobans are paying more taxes in the year 2000 after the introduction of his budget than they would have paid under the combined federal income tax system?

I know the answer to the question. I just want the Minister to indicate to us that he is aware what the answer to the question is and provide it. The answer is yes, and that is all I am looking for. I get the simple yes and we will move on to other questions. Mr. Selinger: I think there are a number of assumptions that are being made in the question about what the motivation and intent of the federal government was. The decision to delink was made by the Government before the federal budget. Various commentators and economists had predicted tax reductions. Others had predicted no tax reductions.

The decision was made based on all the reasons that the previous government had to go to tax-on-taxable income. The budget that we brought down provided personal income tax relief this year as well as property tax relief. The combined effect of that was to be more advantageous to Manitobans than if we would have stayed on the former system. We think that that was something that was consistent with what we did in terms of running for government and what we promised Manitobans. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I will back up again.

Has the Department of Finance provided the Minister of Fi nance with sample calcula tions of the impact on Manitobans, on their personal income tax after the budget and what it would have been li ke under the old system? Has he seen samples of those kinds of calculations, what the impact is at different income levels after his budget? If he has not seen that, he should be seeing that. He should have been looking at that kind of information before he made his decision, I would argue, and he certainly should be looking at it today. So, my first question is: Has he been provided?

Has he seen that kind of information? Mr. Selinger: The information that was provided to me in shifting to a tax-on-taxable income system was mostly focussed around ensuring that the shift from the federal system to the provincial system, from a taxed based on the federal tax rate to a tax based on taxable income. Most of the analytics around that were to ensure that nobody was worse off in terms of the distribution with the changes.

As well, the year over-year comparisons were made to ensure that Manitobans paid less taxes, but they included the full range of tax relief that we were proposing to offer, including the property tax credit. That analysis concluded that Manitobans were better off under the system we were proposing. That is why we proceeded with it. Mr. Stef anson: Again, Mr. Chairman, my question was not answered, whether or not the Minister was provided with those kinds of comparisons before he made his decision and before the Budget, which I would hope he was and expect that he would be. But, even if he has

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1531 not been, in light of the discussion and controversy about this issue since his budget, surely he has had an opportunity to look at the comparisons of what Manitobans are paying in the year 2000 for personal income taxes after his budget and what they would have paid if we had stayed linked and combined with the federal system. Surely, he has been provided with samples of that, and I am just asking a simple question: Has he been provided with examples of those kinds of calculations? Mr.

Selinger: Once again, the delinking decision was made by the Government prior to the federal budget. The notice requirements-I believe they were before Christmas that they had to make the decision to go to the tax-on-taxable income system well in advance of the delivery of the federal budget. I remember having to take it to Cabinet for approval in principle to delink. At the time, once the delinking decision was made by us and by the five other provinces, the focus then became how to design the system to have the least amount of negative impact possible on Manitobans.

So we worked over several different models to ensure that Manitobans got tax relief and that it was fairly distributed and alloca ted across all the taxpayers in Manitoba. At the same time, we improved the non-ref undable tax credits, 39 percent. We also designed it in such a way that families would get a benefit; that is why we went with the family tax reduction. In addition to that, we wanted to follow-up on the commitment we made on the property tax credit. So those are the dynamics that were at play when we were working this through.

We were not doing projections on what if scenarios in a federal budget that had not been brought down yet. What we were trying to do was come up with a system that was, as indicated in your 1998 budget, simpler, more transparent, allowed us to move away from the flat tax on incomes over $30,000, and allowed us to elimi nate the surtax. Those are the things we did. I personally think people worked very hard to bring all of that together and to come up with a good system for us to get started. Mr. Stefanson: Mr.

Chairman, I am prepared to discuss those at length, and I have a number of questions about all of the things the Mini ster just touched on. But I am trying to get some basic information, and I will ask my question again: Has the Mini ster been provided with the kinds of calculations I asked about? His department, I know, can do the work; I am assuming they have done the work.

I am just asking the Minis ter: Have you been provided with those calculations of what Manitobans are paying in personal income tax in the year 2000, after your budget, what they would have paid in personal income taxes if you had not delin ked in the year 2000? Have you been given sample income at different income levels, diff erent family arrangements, and so on? Have you seen some calculations as to what the amounts of taxes being paid at different income levels are going to be? * (15:50) That is my question, a pretty simple question. We will talk about all the other issues the Minister has raised.

In fact, we have a number of questions about some of those, and this issue about giving notification of delin king. As I say, it was the worst kept secret in Canada, the federal government was reducing taxes. On top of it, the Minister's budget came out on May 10. the last budget in all of Canada, when we had a chance to see what every other province had done. In fact, other provinces delinked, reduced personal income taxes, and eff ectively flowed through the federal reduction. But my question is just a simple one.

Has the Minister seen calculations on different income levels in different family arrangements that show the tax implic ations before his budget and after his budget under the two scenarios? It is a very simple question. Have you seen that kind of information? Mr.

Selinger: Once again, the delinking decision was made well in advance of the federal budget, and the focus of our analysis was designing a system that would allow us to remove the flat tax on incomes over $30,000, would allow us to move away from a surtax on the flat tax amount, and would also allow us to ensure that nobody was worse off under the new system. In terms of the distribution, all impacts of going to three rates and that is where the energy was put, was to design a new system that

1532 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 would be fair and more transparent to Manitobans. That is where we put our effort, and I think I indicated earlier there were some 185 models that were run on that and discussed actively between officials and myself. The bottom line was that we were trying to design a system in a fairly short period of time that would be advantageous to Manitobans in terms of fairness, transparency and less taxes. That is where we put our efforts. Mr. Stefanson: I have asked the question four or five times. I still do not have an answer to what is a very simple question, Mr.

Chairman. I will come at it another way. For a family of four with one earner earning $60,000. in the Budget document on page D14, it shows that that family's personal income taxes are going to be $6,394. The information I have is prepared by a reputable CA firm here in Manitoba that shows, had we stayed under the existing combined system, after the federal budget in the year 2000. that same family of four with those same earnings would pay $6,22 9. Does the Minister of Fi nance agree that $6,394 is more than $6.22 9? Mr.

Selinger: Once again, I think it is important to recognize that in the 1999 budget, that family of four, single-income earner at $60,000 was paying $6,625 in taxes. The budget passed in the spring of '99 provided $40 million of personal income tax relief, which resulted in a Manitoba family at that level, with a single-income earner having to pay taxes of$6,394, which was a relief of about $231. That was the change year-over year.

Our decision to go to the tax-on-taxable income system was made, in principle, before Christmas and then design work follo wed from that, to make sure that Manitobans were going to have a fair system. That is where we proceeded. Now, the federal budget came along and made some additional decisions, but at that point we were well into the del inking process and were designing our own system, and that is where we went. As it rolls out over the next few years, the $1 02 mill ion in additional tax relief will also provide benefits to a family in that category as well as other family units m Manitoba. Mr.

Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, does the Minister of Finance agree that $6,394 is more than $6,22 5? Mr. Selinger: The taxes paid by a family of four with one-income earner of $6,394 are less than they were the year before when they were $6,625, and with our new system they will be less next year and less the year after that. In addition, they will be getting the property tax credit and their overall taxation rate will be more advantageous going forward. Mr. Stefanson: We are more than prepared to discuss that and have a number of questions about all of those issues.

I am asking, what I think is a pretty simple question, and I will ask it one more time. Does the Minister of Finance agree that $6,394 is more than $6,229? Mr. Selinger: Once again, I think I have gone over this several times. The taxes for that family unit are less this year than they were last year. They will be less next year than they were this year, and they will be less the year after that than they are in the previous three years. So that family is going to be getting additional relief.

One of the things we did in our budget was bring in the family tax reduction to target relief specifically to people raising children, because we recognize that that is an area where there is additional responsibility. That is why we redesigned that system to target relief to middle income families in that regard. That was one of the advantages of going to a tax-on-taxable income system. We could take responsibil ity to do that directly for Manitobans rather than living at the whim of federal government changes. I repeat, it was not clear what the federal government was intending to do.

It depended on the commentators you lis tened to. Even in my meeting with the Minister of Fi nance before Christmastime, with the other provincial ministers, he gave absolutely no indication of what his tax measures were going to be and was completely opaque on that matter. Mr. Stefanson: Well, Mr. Chairman, this is more than a little bit frustrating because I think it

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1533 is a pretty straightforward question, and I do not know why the Minister is reluctant to just answer the question yes or no. I will ask it one more time. We have a sample calculation of a family of four, one earner earning $60,000 that shows that in the year 2000, confirmed in his budget, they will pay $6,394 in provincial income tax. That same CA firm has done the calculation what that exact same family of four, one earner at $60,000 would be paying in the year 2000 if we had stayed combined with the federal tax system, and that calcula tion shows $6,229.

So I ask the Minister two questions: Does he agree that $6,394 is more than $6,229, and therefore, does he agree that Manitobans are paying more as a result of his budget in the year 2000 than they would have paid had we remained combined with the federal system? I do not think those are very difficult questions. We are talking to the Minister of Finance of the Province of Manitoba with some of the best financial officials in the country. I know the quality of work they can do. I know the calculations they do.

I saw it for 5 112 years first hand as Minister of Finance, let alone being on Treasury Board for 10 years. This information is readily available. I think it is already there. If it is not there, his officials can go back and have it ready for him in a couple of hours. So I am just asking those two simple questions: Does he agree that $6,394 is more than $6,229, and does he agree that Manitobans are paying more taxes under his budget in the year 2000 than they would have paid if we had stayed combined with the federal system? Mr.

Selinger: Once again, I am glad you have recognized the professional competence of these officials. They are the same ones that provided you with advice as they are providing me with advice. They are the same ones that have done the comparisons of taxes with other jurisdictions in the Manitoba Advantage Appendices to the Budget. So I am very glad that we can agree that these people handled themselves in a profes sional manner and give their best advice. The advice the new government got was that delin king was a desirable objective and should be moved on in concert with five other provinces in the year 2000.

That decision was taken by the new government before Christmas, in principle, and then design considerations were entered into on how that would pla y out in terms of the new brackets. There were options to go from one bracket to seven brackets, as I recall. This government focussed on a three-bracket model with a family tax reduction, and the taxes the year before were $6,625. This year they are $6,394. We designed the system going forward to offer more relief to famili es, and that is what will occur.

In between all of those decisions that were made by the new government, on the advice of the same officials you have, the federal government brought in a budget. That budget was not one wherein provincial governments were consulted. They reduced their transfer payments for the health supplement $31 mill ion. They brought in some tax reli ef. None of that information was made available to us prior to them bringing down the budget. We were moving independently, as were many other provinces, to design our own system well before that budget came down.

We followed through on that and delivered it on May 10. * (1 6:00) Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman. I do not think either one of us question the competency of the people in the Fi nance Department. I said at the outset and I have said in many different areas, I have the highest respect for virtually all of the people in Finance, and they do provide excellent advice. Having said that, as good as the advice is, you do not always take all of the advice for various reasons.

Secondly, probably more important than that, you sometimes provide direction in terms of issues that you want addressed or that you feel need to be addressed. Mr. Chairman, I still have not had an answer to what I think is a very simple question. I guess I am disturbed. I know there are occasions when you have to be evasive and you have to try to avoid answers, and I may have done that on occasion myself, although I cannot really recall when I may have, but I might have. But, having

1534 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 said that, I do not think this question falls in that category because it is a pretty straightforward calcula tion. You can go to one of a number of accountants across the Province. You can certainly go to the people in the Department of Finance and they can run the numbers, and it is really that simple. It is a matter of running the numbers under the tax system in Manitoba for the year 2000 as a result of the Budget. It is a matter of running the numbers for the tax system under the combined system.

Therefore, I feel compelled to ask this question one more time because it is such a simple question, but I have become increasingly disturbed at the Minis ter's inability to answer it. So does the Minister agree that $6,394 is more than $6,229? I think I can ask that question of a lot of people in Manitoba and get a yes or no answer. We will talk about the 50-50 plan at length before we are done here because certainly the numbers in this support the 50-50 plan.

The second part of the question is: Are taxes then higher after the Budget for personal income taxes in Manitoba than they were if we remained part of the federal system? Those are very, very, very simple questions. The numbers can be calculated, the numbers speak for themselves. I have also asked the Minister whether or not he has been provided those numbers and he has not even indicated that. Surely he knows if he has been provided the numbers, and I would expect that those are questions that the Minister should be answering. Mr. Selinger: The critic has asked whether direction was given to my officials.

The general message I gave to my officials was I wanted a new tax-on-taxable-income system that was more affordable for Manitobans, more transparent, more easily understood, and that provided relief. In particular, I wanted it to focus on relief for families in Manitoba, which is why we came up with the family tax reduction innovation. Those preparations were well underway in the period before the federal budget. We knew we had to take responsibili ty for our tax system.

We knew that that tax system should not depend on the whims of the federal government in terms of what results there would be, whether there were increases or decreases. We designed a system that we thought was to the advantage of all Manitobans and brought that forward in our first budget. That is what we got on May 10. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, I find this absolutely unbelievable, the inability to answer some very, very simple questions.

I guess I will ask the Minister: Does he have any intention of attempting to get the information in terms of comparing taxes in Manitoba after his budget or what taxes would have been if we had stayed linked for the year 2000? Mr. Selinger: What we want to do with our tax system in Manitoba is we want to use it to ensure that Manitobans have an affordable tax regime and those Manitobans that are raising children have fair and reasonable rates of taxation. We want to ensure that everybody gets the advantage of the Property Tax Credit that we promised in the election.

As we move forward, we recognize that it is a dynamic situation with respect to other jurisdictions. The comparison of annual personal costs and taxes, as indicated in most previous budgets as well as in our budget, we believe serves as a useful guide as to the affordabili ty of living in Manitoba compared to other juris dictions. We still think that we are a very advantageous place to live when you take a look at provincial levies, as well as other costs that Manitobans pay, some of which are directly generated by Manitoba organizations such as auto insurance and hydro.

So what we want to do is we want to make sure that Manitoba remains one of the most affordable pla ces to live in the country, with a good mix of services as required by the demographic realities of this province. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, we will get to all of those issu es that the Minister keeps coming back to. I thought we would be on to them by now, because the question I have asked for the last half hour is not a difficult question. We are just looking for a yes or no, and we continue to get absolutely no answer.

I can only indicate that I am flabbergasted by that, that the information that I am assuming the Minister has and is readily available, that he should have, that he could simply answer the question yes or no. I would encourage his officials to put the

May 25, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1535 information in front of him sooner rather than later. We have a number of other tax questions, which we will get to. My coll eague has some questions on this issue. I have one final question before he picks it up, because I do not want to lose my train of thought relative to the balanced budget legisla tion. We talked about the potential amendment that the Minister is looking at as it relates to the pension issue.

Does the Minister believe that any of the tax change issues addressed or introduced in his budget will require any amendments to the balanced budget legisla tion? Mr. Selinger: We do not believe so. Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Chairman, what I am going to do is, I think my coll eague for Fort Whyte is going to see if he can have any greater success getting some answers from the Minis ter. I am going to pass the torch for a while, and we will come back to the tax issues. I will have a chance later to ask some more tax questions. My colleague is going to ask some questions on taxes. Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr.

Chairman, I would like to start by just confirming a couple of statements that the Minister has made, just to make sure I got the information right as we will not have the chance to see Hansard for a day or so. I believe he made the statement that "all the federal tax reductions have been made available to Manitobans," and he believes that all of the reductions that were made by the federal government in their budget of February 28 have been passed through to Manitobans. Is that what he is saying? Mr. Selinger: Yes. Mr. Loewen: Okay.

He also made the statement, I believe, that after their analysis there is nobody worse off as a result of their budget of May 10. Would that be correct? Mr. Selinger: Yes, we designed our new tax system to ensure that Manitobans were better off, and we believe we have delivered on that. Mr. Loewen: So you are confirming that, in your opinion, nobody is worse off as a result of the budget on May 10. Mr. Selinger: No, it is our view that based on the analysis of our new tax-on-taxable-income system and the way we have designed it, that combined with the property tax credit virtually everybody is better off.

That is the analysis we did. We attempted to design it that way to avoid any negative consequences. Now, how many taxpayers, 500,000-[i nterjection]- about half a mil lion taxpayers. There is the potential for some anomalies there, but we paid pretty careful attention in our modelling to ensure that nobody would be worse off. * (16 :1 0) Mr. Loewen: Just for clarification. Is the Minister saying that there would be nobody worse off on May 11, nobody would be-not to split hairs-v irtually nobody would be worse of f on May 11 than they were on May 9? Mr.

Selinger: Once again, I have to reiterate to the Member for Fort Whyte that the delinking decision was made prior to the federal budget. The tax decisions that were brought down in the provincial budget were designed to offer relief to all Manitobans, and they were a mix of small business, personal income tax reductions, as well as a property tax credit. So, overall, people are better off. Mr. Loewen: Well, would the Minister then be agreeable to, if in fact in Hansard the statement does appear from his quote that nobody is worse off. would he be ready to retract that statement? Mr.

Selinger: I do not think there is any reason to do that. Once again, we brought in a package of tax relief and a balanced budget that was designed to be to the advantage of all Manitobans, and it is our view that they are better off. Mr. Loewen: Also for clarification on a couple of comments that were made by the Mini ster. In answering one question, I believe he said that they did not do a lot of "what if' scenarios, and in answer to a question following that he

I5 36 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2000 indicated that they had looked at over I8 5 models. I guess I would like to know some clarification between the difference between a "what if' scenario and I8 5 models. My

interpretation would be that would be I8 5 "what if' scenarios. Mr. Selinger: That is a fair question. The focus, as I indicated earlier, on designing the new tax on-taxable-income system was to desig n a system that allowed the Manitoba Government to put in place a tax regime that would be to the advantage of Manitobans, and the analytic process focussed on how to do that, how to design that in terms of the bracket structures. the non-refundable tax credit structures, the family tax reduction.

As well, it considered the additional benefits of the property tax credit. and that is where the focus was, and that was well underway before the federal budget came down. There was not a "what if' focus on what the federal budget mig ht or might not do. The focus was on how we could design our system to be to the advantage of Manitobans. Mr. Loewen: Mr.

Chairman, just for clarification, too, starting on page 2I in the Government's budget document, they talk about responsible tax relief and a note on that that they break it into two very-well, more than two. but certainly two very distinct sections, one talking about lower property taxes. I would like to focus on the area titled Income Tax Relief on page 22 in the 2000 budget.

In particular, the line that says "We are reducing taxes across the board by enhancing the non-refundable tax credits and adjusting tax brackets," as a taxpayer, and I would assume most Manitobans, too, I would read that to say that as a result of the Budget that was delivered on May 10 , that statement would apply, that taxes have been reduced across the board as a result of the May I 0 budget, and on May 11 , everybody's taxes across the boa

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-1-34b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 1st hansardpdf 34b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d4731ce21f2f98730f26c005c904665b6c82d848

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