Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 32A (39th Legislature, 1st Session)

39-1-32a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LIX No. 32A – 10 a.m., Tuesday, November 6, 2007

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P.

DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P.

SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

1943 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, November 6, 2007 The House met at 10 a.m. PRAYER ORDERS OF THE DAY PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS SECOND READINGS–PUBLIC BILLS Bill 209–The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I take great pleasure in introducing this bill. I move, seconded by the Member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), that Bill 209, The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr.

Hawranik: This bill is an important bill, an important private member's bill, which, of course, hopefully, is going to be moved to a committee before the end of the week. It's important in the sense that it recognizes the historical significance of Provincial Trunk Highway 44 as it exists today, and it also recognizes the heritage of the area and the district within which Highway 44 travels. Mr. Speaker, Canadians have always been a nation of trails and trail builders, and Aboriginal people used waterways and woodland trails for their trade and travel as they came from eastern Canada.

Our nation was forged by a railway linking the frontier west coast with the seaports of eastern Canada, and that's what makes Canada what it is. The trails, the roads, the highways, that is what link our great nation together. I'm proud to say, Mr. Speaker, that Highway 44, as it exists today, the historic Trans-Canada Highway, in fact, was the first trail from the east, from Ontario, as it progressed to the west and linked our country together right from the east coast to the west coast.

Highway 44 really formed part of the first national highway system in Canada and provided that transportation corridor well before the present-day Trans-Canada Highway was completed. That present-day Trans-Canada Highway was completed, of course, to the south through the Hadashville area, Richer and so on, and on to Winnipeg. But before that, Mr.

Speaker, Highway 44 that was known as the No. 1 Highway was part of that route and became a significant part of the heritage of our community because it meant that people, as they travelled west to settle parts west in Manitoba or to Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, they passed, in fact, through that particular route and through the region, of course most of it through the constituency of Lac du Bonnet. It formed a key link in the movement of people and goods across Canada and was the only gateway initially to the west from eastern Canada.

It enabled Manitobans or other Canadian citizens to establish connections from coast to coast and formed a part of our national identity. So we have to take note of the significance of Highway 44 as it is today and the role that it played and the communities it went through to determine the heritage and the significance that it played within our area. Mr.

Speaker, it's important to recognize Provincial Trunk Highway 44 as having historical significance because what it does is it will encourage tourists and other individuals who come through the area whether they're travelli ng as tourists or whether they're moving goods from eastern Canada through to western Canada, it encourages travellers to venture off the existing Provincial Trunk Highway No. 1, the Trans-Canada Highway as it exists today, and into our communities.

Not only are communities along that route, such as Beausejour, Rennie, Whitemouth, Seddons Corner, Siegs Corner, certa inly into the Lockport areas, but also it forms a vital link, I think, into La Vérendrye Trail which really starts near the community of Rennie and proceeds through the Whiteshell Provincial Park and then onward down Provincial Trunk Highway No. 11 and through the communities of Lac du Bonnet, Powerview, Pine Falls and through Sagkeeng and through the beaches area.

So it's an important link to bring people off of the existing Trans-Canada Highway and into our particular area which will help in terms of the tourism opportunities and business opportunities all along the way. Our visitors, Mr. Speaker, deserve to know about the history that surro unds them whenever they travel through Manitoba, and this bill recognizes the

1944 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 historical significance, of course, of Provincial Trunk Highway 44 and certainly allows visitors to be able to see the historical significance of that particular highway. It also presents economic benefits to our area in terms of greater patronage to local restaurants, hotels and tourist attractions. We have to recognize this as an historic vital link of transportation that has been available from the time of Confederation. There's adequate reason for designating the existing Provincial Trunk Highway 44, giving it special significance, Mr. Speaker.

Whitemouth and Rennie and West Hawk Lake were really one of the first three communities that were connected to the outside, west to Beausejour in 1920 by a bush road. At that time, there was little more than a trail with sections of bog crossed by a moss-covered corduroy road at the time.

In the 1920s, because the road was so bad, and we certainly wanted to link eastern Canada to western Canada, road construction started, and by 1929, this particular roadway was called No. 1 Highway at the time and regarded widely by members of the constituency and through all those communities, regarded widely as the Trans-Canada Highway.

It reached Whitemouth from the Ontario border which is only about 40 to 50 miles, but it took almost nine years to reach Whitemouth from the Ontario border. * (10:10) During the Depression, reliefers were employed to complete the highway, so by 1936 it went through Whitemouth and it was surfaced with asphalt at the time. The rest of the Trans-Canada Highway was constructed using horse-drawn equipment and manpower. During one mosquito-infested summer in the 1930s, many of the horses that were used in the construction of the road came down with sleeping sickness.

There is even a grave in a bog found near Caddy Lake in the Whiteshell Provincial Park, a grave of an individual, in fact, who passed away and died during the construction of that particular roadway. In 1956 that particular

section of road, the new Trans-Canada Highway, was completed to the south of 44, At that time, the old highway became Provincial Trunk Highway No. 4 at that point, and it was renumbered in 1968 as Provincial Trunk Highway 44. It served as part of Canada's link to the east, from eastern Canada to western Canada from 1929 to 1956, a total of 27 years. It was commonly known, Mr. Speaker, as the Trans-Canada Highway until the new Trans-Canada Highway was located to the south of the existing Provincial Trunk Highway 44.

From 1929, it should be noted, to 1936, a total of seven years, it was merely a gravel-surface roadway. I've provided much evid ence to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transpor tation (Mr. Lemieux), and, to his credit, he always looked at that information that I provided to him in terms of trying to link Provincial Trunk Highway 44 to the historical significance of the area. To his credit, I'm very pleased that the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation–and the Member for Selkirk is seconding this motion, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to hearing from, perhaps, community members at committee.

Thank you. Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this bill, and I want to thank the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) for bringi ng forward this act and allowing me to second it. He talked about the significance of this legislation, but this is also, I think, a significant day in this Chamber. I want to remind all MLAs of the history of private members' hour.

It wasn't that long ago that private members' hour consis ted of only two hours, and it was our government, our leader, that recognized that we're underutilizing the talents of private members in this Chamber and we doubled it. I sat on the Rules Committee. I know the Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach) was on there and our House leader was on that committee, and it was decided that it's an opportunity for members to bring forward legislation. As opposition members, they have done so. In the Order Paper, we see they have brought forward 20 or so bills and important resolutions, and, as I said , this Premier (Mr.

Doer) has supported that change and has been unfairly criticized, I might add, as being anti-democratic, anti-opposition, by certain members in this Chamber. I reference a member that sits behind me, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), who takes every opportunity he can to stand up in this Chamber to criticize our Premier and our government as being unfair, but, as I mentioned, we've doubled private members' hour, and we're passing today not one, but two bills. Two bills.

One bill, I might add, this particular bill will pass, and The Apology Act, which is a Liberal bill, will be passed later on in this hour. I want to remind members in the opposition that there was a time when the NDP was in opposition,

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1945 and I sat on the opposition benches for nine years, Mr. Speaker, nine years, and I can't recall them passing a single bill. They did not pass a single bill in nine years and here we are passing two opposition bills in one day. So, Mr. Speaker– [interjection] One member said we're too nice, but, you know, we see the benefit of well-thought-out legislation, worthy legislation like this and we are prepared to support it. I better be careful. I'm going to talk my colleagues out of supporting this bill. I do want to commend the member.

As he said, it's always important that we, as a government, take time to recognize important historical things in our province, Mr. Speaker. This, of course, is an important highway. As the member mentioned in his comments, and I thank him for giving his historical perspective on this road, it does, as he said, run all the way from Ontario into Lockport. It goes through St. Clements, which is in my constituency. The highway ends at Highway No. 9, which is in the Member for Gimli's (Mr. Bjornson) constituency, which, I might add, was recently paved.

So I do appreciate the Member for Gimli and his hard work of paving Highway 44. I might also add just last week our government opened the bridge on Highway 59 over 44, which we rebuilt, Mr. Speaker. I want to applaud the highways minister, this one and his predecessors, for realizing that a bridge needed to be repaired and we've done so. Mr. Speaker, as I said, it's important that we recognize this road and other roads. Recently, our government renamed Highway No. 8 Veterans Memorial Highway.

This being, of course, Remembrance week, it's important that we recognize the contributions of our veterans, and that was an action taken by our government to do so. The member has mentioned that he has received support from all the different R.M.s that this road goes through all the way from Ontario and to Lockport. I know he says he has support from Brokenhead and St. Clements, as he's mentioned. I guess there's one issue, of course, actually, regrettably, we can't name it historical Trans-Canada Highway. It has to be renamed, I think, the Historical Route No. 1. So, Mr.

Speaker, we look forward to the member making those amendments when we do go to committee. He's also mentioned that renaming it as such will, in some way, I would think, help some of the communities along the way which will hopefully receive extra traffic because of the new designation as the Historical Route No. 1. So, Mr. Speaker, with those comments, I look forward to unanimous passage of this legislation and this bill moving into committee stage. Thank you very much. Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): It is a pleasure today to speak on this particular bill.

What I would like to add to this is just that I would like to second, primarily, what the MLA for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) stated and also the MLA for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik). This stretch of highway is important for tourism and for trade in the Whiteshell and on the eastern side of the province. The naming of this particular route is important because now it will show the significance that it will have for the region. What I really wanted to state is just to follow up on what the MLA for Selkirk stated. Often people see political parties in this Chamber going at it very aggressively no matter what the issue is.

I think it's important to remember that the people that have elected us to this Chamber elected us to represent them but also to have a degree of decorum when we're doing it, to show respect to one another and to those citizens that elected the individuals to this Chamber. There are occasions where we work together on some bills, and this is a perfect example of one. As the member for Selkirk stated, there is another bill that we are working on as a government, a private member's bill to pass as well.

I think it's important just to highlight and put an exclamation point on this, that we do work together, and it's important also for citizens of the province of Manitoba to know this.

So I just wanted to second what the MLA for Selkirk had stated with this particular issue and with regard to the fact that we do work together and there ar e occasions where we can come together on many bills that we see as a real benefit, either for the region or for the citizens of the province. * (10:20) As was stated, as well, initially this bill came in as an historic Trans-Canada Highway, which, through research and help from the MLA for Lac du Bonnet–and I want to acknowledge that he heard from his citizens and from the local governments in his area how important it was to rename this stretch of highway.

I want to give him full credit, as well as

1946 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 the MLA for Selkirk, for bringing this to my attention and wanting to pursue this. I want to thank him personally for that. The citizens of Lac du Bonnet should know that both he–and also the citizens of the constituency of Selkirk know that the MLA for Selkirk also contributed to this. So it's a case where different political parties, yes, but MLAs are working for the benefit of their citizens, and I'm sure that we will soon see increased traffic by virtue of the renaming of this highway.

Once the legislation's passed and once the naming committee, which all these new highway names go through, once that's done, we'll be able to have a design of a highway sign that we'll be able to put a number of signs along this stretch of highway and, hopefully, hopefully, this will increase the traffic, tourism traffic and other traffic.

People will want to take a turn to the north and will be able to explore the beautiful communities that are along this route and eventually get back on to the Trans-Canada, if they wish, but certainly take this route and be able to see those beautiful communities that are in the Whiteshell in this particular region. I have to tell you that Highway 1, we've repaved this year. Also, as was mentioned by the MLA for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), millions of dollars have been spent to redo the overpass over Highway 59 on No. 44. So the government, not only is it important to rename this particular

section of highway, but also the dollars that we've already put into fixing up that particular stretch of highway and also other arteries that lead off of this particular road. So, Mr. Speaker, I certainly don't want to belabour my comments too much, but I just want to say again, thank you, to the MLA for Selkirk and the MLA for Lac du Bonnet for bringing this to my attention. Once this bill is renamed, then we'll proceed with the naming committee, and that's the process, and the naming committee will look at it.

If I might just add and digress slightly, is that also this government was the one who brought forward the Veterans Memorial Highway, as well, and renamed a number of other highways to respect our veterans that lost their lives and many who fought for us, of course, in the First World War and Second World War. We're indeed proud of that, as well as being very, very proud of the fact that we're going to be renaming this particular stretch of highway. So, with that, Mr.

Speaker, I just want to say that I certainly add my name to one who supports this particular bill with regard to renaming this stretch of highway and I look forward to it passing unanimously. Thank you very much. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I do want to just put a few wo rds on the record prior to this bill passing and would acknowledge the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) and give him credit for bringing forward this particular initiative. I know, for years now, the Liberal Party has talked about the whole significance of that historic site.

In fact, I could go b ack to the days of Sharon Carstairs and being out in that Beausejour area when I first found out that there was some history to No. 44 that went far beyond a highway and where Winnipeg was initially supposed to be built, or the capital, the impact that CP had, and so forth. So, you know, it's nice to see that the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) has taken the initiative to bring it to the next step. I think that there's a lot to be learned by doing this renaming and, in general, just stand up to acknowledge our support of a good bill that's worthy of passage. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading, Bill 209, The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 214, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Property Development), are we dealing with that this morning? An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: No. Okay. Bill 216, The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act, are we dealing with that? Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, I think if you canvass the House, there would be leave to move to The Apology Act at this juncture, and I believe there would also be agreement to replace the MLA for Inkster (Mr. Lamour eux) as seconder with the MLA for Seine River (Ms. Oswald).

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1947 DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS– PUBLIC BILLS Bill 202–The Apology Act Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement in the House to move to Bill 202, The Apology Act, and to change the seconder to the honourable Minister for Healthy Living? An Honourable Member: Health. Mr. Speaker: I mean for Health. Sorry about that. One of those flashbacks again. But, anyway, to change it from Inkster to the honourable Minister of Health.

Is that agreed? [Agreed] And to deal with it now? [Agreed] S o i t w i l l r e a d t h a t B i l l 2 0 2 w a s m o v e d b y t h e honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard), seconded by the honourable Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald), and Bill 202, The Apology Act, now standing in the name of the honourable Member for Minto (Mr. Swan). [interjection] No, okay. The honourable Mi nister of Health. Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for– Mr. Speaker: Order. For the honourable Member for Minto, is it standing in his name or you wish not to speak?

An Honourable Member: Not to speak. Mr. Speaker: Okay. So, it's not standing in the name of the honourable Member for Minto, so we'll move on to the Minister of Health. Ms. Oswald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for dealing with those procedural matters and allowing us to speak to the private member's Bill 202 today. We certainly have always indicated to members opposite and to the House that we agree with the principle enshrined in this act, and that we are certainly prepared for some further discussion on this bill and seeing items go forward.

We may want to have a very close look at, you know, the final words in the act concerning its proclamation time. I think that that's something that we do need to have further discussion on, but I can say that we know that this particular act will fit quite appropriately within a complex series of actions that have been taken when it comes to improving accountability and improving communications with families in our health-care system.

We know that about this time last year, in November of '06, we proclaimed the RHA amendment act, and in that act, we found the enshrining in law the practice of reporting and investigating critical incidents. Under that new law, health workers would be protected from any liability for participating in communicating of such issues. We know that these kinds of issues came to the fore, of course, in discussions with patients and in discussions with practitioners and with their families about really wanting to get to the heart of situations where something has gone wrong, either in a minor way or terribly wrong.

We know that, historically, particularly prior to the Sinclair report into the pediatric cardiac program in the '90s, we know that it was practice for medical errors to be swept u nder the carpet and, consequently, for real learning and real improvement not to be able to occur. The new way of dealing with patient safety, not just here in Manitoba but nationally and internationally, is to work to get everything put out on the table so that we can learn from errors that occur, and that we can go forward to build an even better health-care system.

We also know that in research that has been done on the issue of reporting of critical incidents and in dealing particularly with families who have struggled through arguably the most difficult time in their lives, it's not necessarily compensation that families are looking for at the foremost. It's not necessarily punishment of individuals that they're seeking, but it's acknowledgement, and in many cases it's an apology that would give a family the most comfort in the aftermath of a critical incident. * (10:30) So we certainly did take some time to review the legislation.

We looked closely at what the Uniform Law Conference recommendations would be concerning this particular bill and we've paid close attention to discussions at the very recent Canadian Patient Safety Conference where apology acts were discussed. In light of all of that information, we are certainly prepared with perhaps a very minor discussion about the appropriateness of a proclamation time that would provide a system the opportunity to prepare for a new way of doing business.

With some minor discussion about that, we would certainly be prepared to be in support of The Apology Act of Bill 202, which is one piece in a very complex puzzle that we need to continue to put

1948 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 together to move forward to ensure that doctors and nurses and practitioners are protected in our province, and most importantly, that patients and their families are as safe as they possibly can be. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I just want to quickly rise to acknowledge the Minister of Health's comments and express appreciation.

This is a bill which the Leader of the Liberal Party has long advocated for, and we appreciate the sensitivity of the minister even in question-and-answer response where she had indicated general support for the idea. We just want to acknowledge that and express our appreciation. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 202, The Apology Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] SECOND READINGS–PUBLIC BILLS Bill 216–The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act Mr.

Speaker: We'll deal with se cond reading, Bill 216, The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), that Bill 216, The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act;

Loi sur la réduction du phosphore dans les réseaux municipaux d'alimentation en eau, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, the intent of this bill is to make another move to help the health of Lake Winnipeg and, in particular, to reduce the phosphorus which is a major cause of the severe algal blooms on Lake Winnipeg which have been plaguing the lake in the last number of years and which are a sign of increasing eutrophication and a sign of increasing and impending major problems for Lake Winnipeg.

This bill specifically would mandate that municipalities like Winnipeg and Portage la Prairie change from the present practice of adding phosphorus to the water supply in order to stabilize or prevent leaching from the pipes. Now there are now a number of other chemicals, agents that can be used and are being used elsewhere as replacements, so it's no longer essen tial or necessary that phosphorus be the agent. This was, indeed, a consideration that was brought forward by the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board.

I believe it was at least a year ago and maybe longer, but certainly taking it forward and taking this concept forward is an important one. Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Now, the amount of phosphorus that is being added by the city of Winnipeg, for example, to our water supply is considerable. It may even be close to 1 percent of the phosphorus going into Lake Winnipeg. Certainly, when we have the option of doing something about it and reducing that phosphorus, we should be doing so.

You know, though there may be some different perspectives on this, any reduction like this can be nothing but beneficial, improve the health of the lake, improve the loading of phosphorus. It, by itself, will not do the job, but, as we all know, it will take a considerable reduction in phosphorus in order to achieve what is needed. Madam Deputy Speaker, there is, at the moment, a conference going on in Winnipeg looking at the quality of water, looking at–I think it's called We All Live Upstream–the basin of Lake Winnipeg. There are people there from the United States.

There are people there from Saskatchewan and Alberta, all having a look at how we can improve water quality and what we can do. Certainly, Lake Winnipeg is a particular focus of this and the Lake Winnipeg Foundation, among various other groups, is well represented. So it is timely that we are bringing forward this bill at Second Reading today in association with the holding of this conference in Winnipeg.

It, I suggest, would be an important signal to people at the conference if we can get agreement around the table to move this on and have it considered at committee along with the other two bills that we passed earlier today. I think that the government MLAs and the opposition MLAs should consider supporting this because it would be a nice timely move and a nice gesture for the health of Lake Winnipeg. I have had a conversation with Mike Stainton, who is one of the people who's done a lot of work on

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1949 water phosphorus, and he talks about the fact that this is phosphorus which is added in a soluble way. It is not a sediment-associated phosphorus. There is some scientific basis for believing that this water soluble, and not the sediment-associated phosphorus, may actually be more important in terms of stimulating algal blooms. That is the reason for eliminating phosphorus in automatic dishwashing detergents. It is a reason for reducing this type of phosphorus because it may, in fact, be more active biologically and more potent.

All the more reason to reduce it. There are numerous reasons to act on this. I believe that there is concurrence around the Legislature of the importance of acting to improve the health of Lake Winnipeg. I hope we will see that willingness today manifest in support for this measure. Certainly it would send a good message to Manitobans if we had that support around the table. As I say, this is a measure about which people have known for some time.

We have talked about this earlier on, and our Liberal Party talked about this during the election as one of the sensible measures that can be taken that will have an effect to reduce the phosphorus load in Lake Winnipeg and to help reduce the algal blooms. I would just like to spend a moment talking about my conversation last night at the water conference with Robert Kristjanson, an individual who's very knowledgeable on Lake Winnipeg. [interjection] Robert T. Kristjanson. Even the MLA for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) knows who he is. Robert T.

Kristjanson has been concerned about algal blooms on Lake Winnipeg for many years. He has raised this consistently and persistently with just about everybody that he talks to. It's time that we listen to people like Robert T. Kristjanson and pass this legislation.

Robert Kristjansson was talking to me, in fact, about recently coming down from Grindstone, where he's got his camp, to Gimli, where he lives, and as he took his boat in the areas where the water was clearer down south to the southern part of Hecla Island, the water was just loaded with algal blooms and certainly very, very different from say, 20 or 30 years ago. It is a very serious concern. It is a very serious and problematic situation for the lake because we know that at some point, the algal blooms will increase to an extent that they will have devastating effects on the lake.

Certainly, it is time to act now. We have an opportunity to act now and I certainly hope that the government will support this measure. I have had a number of meetings recently with people about the Hecla Island causeway and other concerns on Lake Winnipeg. So, what is clear is that there's a large number of people who want action on Lake Winnipeg, that there may be a variety of things that we can do, but this is one step which is feasible, which is doable, which recommended by the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board and which we should move on. Thank you. * (10:40) Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister of Inter- governmental Affairs): Madam Deputy Speaker, I first of all want to indicate that I am always pleased to be able to speak on any issue related to water conditions in this province. Obviously, having been the Minister of Water Stewardship, I've had the opportunity to be involved with many of the issues, part of that as Minister of Conservation, but my interest in water, and I'm sure the interest of most Manitobans, is not based on what position I have held or currently held. It's based on the fact it's a critical part of who we are and what we are.

It's a critical challenge ahead for us. I think it's important to start in that context. I a l s o w a n t t o a d d that, while I certainly welcome the contribution of the Member for River Heights on a number of the issues in debates here, I think it's important to put in context this bill. Our government's initiatives in terms of water, and perhaps where the Member for River Heights has been, or, many cases, not been, in terms of some of these discussions.

I want to start with Lake Winnipeg because it's ironic that the member is talking about the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board because that is board that we put in place as part of our Lake Winnipeg Action Plan. I had the honour to announce that as Minister of Conservation. We put in place not only the action plan–and the Stewardship Board is a key part of that–but specific targets, the targets being to return our water conditions, our water quality back to 1970 levels, beginning with at least a 10 percent reduction in terms of nutrients in Lake Winnipeg.

We recognized right from day one when we came into office the fact that there was an impending crisis in Manitoba in terms of water, and we have followed through. When I say impending crisis, it's not something that was happening overnight; it's a gradual process. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, that kind of an increase in nutrients in Lake Winnipeg is

1950 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 of significance and the algal blooms certainly are one of those consequences. Now, it didn't just happen, either. There were numerous contributing factors, but what really struck me, by the way, is not only the degree to which this was not on the agenda in the 1990s, but the degree to where there were specific policy decisions made that made it worse in terms of water quality in the 1990s. Probably the most infamous was in regard to the licensing of the City of Winnipeg waste-water facilities.

I think it's important to note here that there should have been hearings leading to licensing in 1992. It wasn't until we came to office that we put in place the Clean Environment Commission hearings, accepted the report, and have now actually had the first licensing of waste-water facilities in the city of Winnipeg and including, in particular, a licensing requirement for the removal of nutrients. I want to put that in perspective, by the way, because we're now faced with obviously some increased costs in terms of what those facilities would cost with current construction.

But, you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, if it had been built in the 1990s–'92, '93, '94–there would have been much lower costs, and we would have also had significant improvements in the waste-water quality that would not have worsened the water condition. By the way, I want to stress, too, that the Clean Environment Commission licensing deals not only with nutrient removal but eventually with eliminating the current system in the older parts of the city of Winnipeg that combines sewer overflow which results in raw sewage ending up in the Red River, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I think it's important to note that that is part of the licensing requirements. Again, though, this could have happened in 1992, '93, '94. It is happening now and to put it in perspective in terms of nutrients, once the nutrient removal is in place–the city of Winnipeg, by the way, is the single largest point source for nutrients in Lake Winnipeg at 6 percent.

If you put it in perspective, even though it's a very significant investment that would be reduced from about 6 percent down to about a 2 percent source, and when you take the numbers, again, 10 percent overall reduction, 4 percent out of that 10 will now be achieved simply through the licensing of the city of Winnipeg waste-water facilities, a good example of what is happening under this government that could have happened in the 1990s but was ignored by the then-Conservative government.

We are moving ahead in many other areas as well, and I think it's important when we do it, to recognize why we put in place Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board, why we put in place the kind of recommendations that have already been accepted, and why we are not looking for simplistic solutions in terms of this. I want to look at, for example, in terms of phosphorus. The Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board report does deal with phosphorus-based strategies for lead control in water mains. That's why there is some use in a number of municipalities currently.

It's for public health reasons, controls the leaching of lead into our pipes. And I want to stress, by the way, that our strategy in terms of water has not only been in terms of the environmental side, but also in terms of drinking water protection. I would hope that the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) would read th e report, would look into some of the background and why, certainly, we should be looking at alternatives to phosphoric acid in our water supply systems, but why we should do that by constantly balancing the need to protect public health.

It's not put in the drinking water systems at random; it's put there to protect the public health. And that's why I'm disappointed in a way with the Member for River Heights' approach, and, by the way, I do know Robert T. Kristjanson. Robert T. is a legend in the Interlake. He knows Lake Winnipeg better, I think, than virtually anyone and I value his contribution, a very important part of the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board.

Under the guidance of Bill Barlow, I consider the report–it's just a–it is a model, not just for this province, but for any jurisdiction looking at a broad consensus-based approach to deal with the challenges we are faced with. But you know, Robert T. is the first one to be talking about the need for action, but he has also identified that we have been acting, and I know many people who are concerned about Lake Winnipeg recognize that.

Well, the important thing, I think, for the Member for River Heights to look at, too, by the way, is as he brings in this particular bill and looks at Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board, is also for the need for a clear position on some of the other defining issues that we're dealing with. * (10:50) I'm really proud of the fact we brought in The Water Protection Act, the water quality management zones, not something that is supported by all

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1951 members of this House. The members of the Conservative Party, the Leader of the Conservative Party campaigned against the water quality management zones. He said he would scrap them, told that to the Brandon Sun when he was running for leader. I shouldn't say I have much time for the members of the Conservative party on environmental issues. Now, a few years ago, they were opposed to the Kyoto Accord. I don't know what's more scary: the fact that they were opposed to it or if they claim to support it now.

I mean, George Bush has a climate change plan too, so I'd like to say there's nothing like a convert, but you know what? Somehow, when I see the Conservative knee-jerk reaction– An Honourable Member: Similar to the road to Damascus. Mr. Ashton: Conversion on the road to Damascus here, I don't think so. I suspect they've read the polls, they see the people, they talk to people. They want action on the environment, but even the election, they campaigned against water quality management zones. Can you imagine that? Protecting sensitive areas, having a real nutrient strategy on the ground and they opposed it.

Well, what did the Leader of the Liberal Party do? Like, the Leader of the Liberal Party, you know, I love the Liberal position, or should I say positions, on issues. They have one position, Madam Deputy Speaker, and if you don't like that, they have another. We're still waiting to find out which side of the fence the Liberal Leader is going to come down on.

He seems to be firmly impaled on the bipole issue, but when it came to water quality management zones, when the Leader of the Liberal Party was in rural Manitoba, he was talking about–he wouldn't say opposed to water quality management, but he didn't like the way they were being done, and that's the ultimate position that's not a position. I say to the Liberal Leader, if he's trying to establish some credibility on issues, as clear statements supporting the single-most significant initiative taken by the provincial government in the last eight years in terms of legislation, how about a yes, I support it.

It's not that hard to say it. I say to the members of the Conservative Party opposite, if they're rea lly concerned about the environment, here's their chance. This is about water. You know, there's a fairly loose description here in terms of the issue. I suppose it's a bit more specific than that, but they could get up. I would like to hear any of the members opposite say they were wrong on the water quality management zones and that they were the right thing to do and they're committed to them. Madam Deputy Speaker, I don't think that's going to happen.

Even when we tried to tighten up The Planning Act to deal with a loophole that could lead to significant problems with intensive livestock– Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired. Is the House ready for the–oh, sorry. The honourable Minister of Education. The honourable Minister of Water Stewardship. Hon. Christine Melnic k (Minister of Water Stewardship): Well, that was a quick 10 minutes, Madam Deputy Speaker. The issue that we're dealing with today is a very serious one.

It's The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act brought forward by the Leader of the Liberal Party. I think it's another example of the Leader of the Liberal Party introducing private members' bills on areas that we have already publicly committed action to. It's also kind of a quick and knee-jerk reaction to a very serious issue. This matter really, really requires some very serious and careful consid eration.

The leaching of lead from drinking water lines presents very real human health risks, and we have to make sure that we'll move forward in a significant way and a way that considers all the prime factors around the issue. Currently, phosphoric acid is the most effective way to protect humans from the health hazards of lead leaching from water pipes into our water supply, and we cannot risk the health of Manitobans by banning the use of phosphorus-based substances in municipal water treatment facilities.

The member previous referred to the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board final report, and I would say it's a very good and comprehensive report and it's a report that talks about a new way of dealing with water here in the province of Manitoba. I think that we need to look at this report in its entirety, not in a piecemeal sense, and that's why I was very pleased to receive the report in a very coherent way, in a very cohesive way and to receive the report in its entirety.

There is, in fact, a reco mmendation in this report that deals with the is sue of the leaching of phosphoric acid, and it reads: 26.0 Phosphoric Acid

1952 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 Use and Water Supplies: The Province should initiate a project to identify the number of communities in Manitoba in addition to Winnipeg and Portage la Prairie that are using phosphorus-based strategies for lead control in water mains and, in collaboration with each community, determine the amount of phosphorus lost to receiving water. This evaluation should consider phosphorus removal plans being implemented for these waste- water treatment facilities. So, again, this is something that we're already on top of, Madam Deputy Speaker.

It's something that we're moving forward on. But we're moving forward in a way that is respectful of communities; we're moving forward in a way that shows that we are looking at the individual situations in each city, rural township, et cetera. We did talk about the need to work with the City of Winnipeg and we have, in fact, moved forward on that. We will continue to do so with other communities around the province of Manitoba.

But I'll just use the city of Winnipeg as an example: by 2014, 64 percent of the phosphorus that was going into Lake Winnipeg will be removed before it's released, and some 47 percent of the nitrogen as well. So, we have a long-term plan and we're working with communities, rather than imposing in a very irresponsible way, as the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) would like us to do. You know, when we look at our record on cleaning up the lake, I think it's important to recognize–and I want to read two quotes.

One is from Bill Barlow who has, I'm grateful to say, agreed to continue to be chair at the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board: "The recommendations in this report are far-reaching, crossing every sector of society, and present a plan for action. Now is the time for all of us to accept our collective responsibility and to support the province's commitment to action for the benefit of Lake Winnipeg." That was Bill Barlow, Madam Deputy Speaker, and that was on February 6, 2007. I have a quote from another Barlow, Madam Deputy Speaker, in fact Maude Barlow , who I had the pleasure of sharing dinner with on Friday.

Her response to Manitoba's plan on water is this–this is taken from a CBC interview Friday at about 4:30 p.m.: Well, first of all to the government– meaning the government of Manitoba– congratulations for having a water minister and having a water ministry. It's the first in the country and it's certainly something we're recommending for all provinces and we'd like to see it at a federal government level as well.

So I think these are folks who have real interest in water and not just sort of a passing interest, as the Member for River Heights has, kind of jumping around like a bit of a rabbit on Prozac from issue to issue. In fact it's been almost a year, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's been almost a year since he's even asked a question on Lake Winnipeg in this House. The last time he asked was on November 21, 2006, almost one full year ago. Now, I also have the Member for River Heights' record when he sat on the federal Cabinet.

In a 1995 review, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development recommended that Canada regulate the phosphorus content of cleaning agents other than laundry detergent. The Government of Canada responded with a science assessment entitled Nutrients and their Impact on the Canadian Environment , but did not proceed with an amendment. So, as the member sat as a Cabinet minister in the federal government in 1995, they took the action of a science assessment but took no actual action on changing the laws in Canada to restrict phosphorus.

So that's the member's record. The Member for River Heights promised more money for water monitoring in 2003 election, but when he was in the federal Cabinet the Department of Environment was cut by 1,400 staff, some $229 million between '95 and '97. Now, according to the Member for River Heights, his quote on the cuts was: these budget decisions were tough, but fair. So how is that fair on the working people of Canada? How is that fair on the environment? Mr. Speaker in the Chair I would be very happy to provide this wording to the Member for River Heights, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder how long it would be until we see his own record appear on his blog. Now, when I received the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship final report– Mr. Speaker: Order. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member will have three minutes remaining. * (11:00)

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1953 RESOLUTION Res. 11–Canadian Internment Camps Mr. Speaker: The hour being 11 a.m., we will now move on to resolutions and we'll deal with Canadian Internment Camps. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux),

WHEREAS many Manitobans are unaware of the plight of the Ukrainian Canadians who were interned during World War I; and

WHEREAS between 1914 and 1920 Canada witnessed its first internment operation under the War Measures Act, where nearly 9,000 Canadians of Ukrainian origin were systematically arrested and interned in 24 camps throughout the country simply because of their ethnic background; and

WHEREAS some 80,000 Canadian citizens, of which the vast majority were Ukrainian, were forced to register as enemy aliens; and

WHEREAS the internees also suffered significant economic losses which included the confiscation of any wealth they had and the lost earnings as a result of their internment; and

WHEREAS these Canadian citizens suffered from state-sanctioned restrictions on their freedom of speech, movement and association resulting in them being disenfranchised or facing deportation; and

WHEREAS in 2005 under the Liberal government of the Right Honourable Paul Martin, the federal government passed a bill recognizing and promising to rectify the injustice committed against Ukrainian Canadians who were interned from 1914 to 1920. THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba acknowledge that the internment, disenfranchisement and related repressive measures taken against Canadians of Ukrainian origin between 1914 and 1920 were unwarranted and unjust and contrary to the principles now adopted and reflected in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba aim to inform Manitobans about this tragic episode in our history and to consider undertaking various commemorative projects that will be complemented with research, cultural, and educational projects and programs; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the government of Manitoba consider supporting the Ukrainian Canadian community in developing forward-looking proposals that will help commemorate their historical experience and educate Canadians about their history in order to highlight and commemorate the contributions that the Ukrainian Canadian community has made to Canada; and to promote a cross-cultural understanding and shared sense of Canadian identity; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the provincial government consider similar initiatives in relation to other groups including Italian and German Canadians who were also interned during the First World War.

Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard), seconded by the honourable Memb er for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux),

WHEREAS many Manitobans–Dispense? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, this resolution is brought forward to address a historic injustice and to help Manitobans remember what had happened and be dedicated to ensuring that in the future this sort of thing doesn't happen. Certainly, as the centre for the future Canadian Museum for Human Rights, it is important that we in this Chamber address issues of human rights and do these appropriately and with dignity.

In the decades following Canada's Confederation, thousands of Ukrainians were encouraged to leave their native land and embark on a difficult journey that would bring them to Canada. These Ukrainian immigrants were faced with many challenges, from developing homesteads in areas which were at that time considered wilderness, cultivating undeveloped western land, surviving Canada's cold winter temperatures and many other countless experiences and challenges which I won't go on to mention in detail.

Nevertheless, Ukrainians understood that this was the road that many would have to follow in order to ensure that they could enjoy a life free of oppression and have a strong and hopeful future for their children and grandchildren. As these immigrants had come from regions in the Ukraine that were under the oppression of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, although it should be

1954 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 noted that in time some, and more and more, were Canadian-born, others were naturalized, they were all from these areas of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, tended to be categorized as Austrians.

As a result with the outbreak of World War I, in spite of the fact that these Ukrainians from the former Austro-Hungarian Empire were contributing to the betterment of Canada, in spite of the fact that they had fled to get out of the oppressive Austro-Hungarian Empire regime, they were caught up in 1914 with the implementation of the War Measures Act, and they were classified, totally inappropriately, as enemy aliens.

So between 1914 and 1920, what happened was the first internment operations under the War Measures Act and, sadly, under the War Measures Act, thousands of loyal Canadians were systematically arrested and interned in 24 camps throughout the country simply because of their national origin. Two of those camps were in Manitoba. One was in Brandon and one was in Winnipeg. Overall, throughout Canada, there were nearly 9,000 Canadians interned, and from what we can determine, the vast majority of these were of Ukrainian background.

The internees, in many cases including women and children, were not only disenfranchised but they were met, not long after some of them had arrived here, with the very sad prospect of being interned. One of the innocent people who was apprehended during Canada's first national internment operations wa s a six-year-old girl, Montreal-born, named Mary Manko. During this period, she'd be transported north by railway car to the Spirit Lake internment camp in Québec's Abitibi region along with the rest of her family.

While she was there, she would wa tch helplessly while her two-and-a-half-year-old sister, Nellie, died tragically. There is a book written entitled, Prisoners in the Promised Land: The Ukrainian Internment Diary of Anya Soloniuk, and this book is based upon the life of Mary Manko. It is based upon the story of Mary Manko and how she was interned after having come to Canada and been extraordinarily hopeful of her future, and all of a sudden, interned and put under such terrible circumstances and terrible circumstances which got even worse when her sister died.

Mary Manko was the last known survivor, surviving person, from the internment camps, and certainly her name in this context has been well published and her story now in book form has been well documented. It is in Mary Manko's memory and the memory of many others who were interned that I bring forward this resolution today and hope that we will have unanimous support in this Legislative Chamber to take this forward. There were, it should be noted, actions above and beyond the internments.

More than 88,000 Ukrainians, who were not imprisoned, had to report regularly to the police and to follow a certain number of directives, as you might happen or see in a police state. Certainly, this was not what they were expecting. * (11:10) Many of the internees suffered significant economic losses, including the confiscation of wealth, the loss of land, lost earnings, as a result of their internment. Some of the wealth apparently remains in the federal government's treasury to this day.

We hope at some point that there will be restitution, but certainly we in the Manitoba Legislature can take an important step today by all supporting this resolution. It is interesting that in 1915 the British Foreign Office twice instructed Ottawa to grant Ukrainians preferential treatment, argued that they were to be considered friendly aliens rather than enemy aliens, but unfortunately the requests were ignored.

The Ukrainian community is seeking today an official acknowledgement of what happened during a period of international and domestic crisis and hopeful to ensure that no other ethnic, religious or racial minority ever suffers as Ukrainians once did. On November 25, 2005, Royal Assent was given to Bill C-331. The Internment of Persons of Ukrainian Origin Recognition Act obliges the government of Canada to negotiate a settlement aimed at rectifying the wrongs done to the Ukrainian-Canadian community.

We hope that this will be acted upon and fully implemented in due course, and we would hope that the present government is moving forward on this. The Ukrainian-Canadian community has placed memorial plaques at many of the internment sights to remind Canadians of what happened at these locations, including one plaque at the Legislative Buildings in Manitoba. However, sadly, the one on

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1955 our legislative grounds has been defaced and perhaps should be replaced given the importance of this plaque. It's imperative that we inform and educate Manitobans about this tragic episode in Canada's history, asking today that we all come together and work with those from the Ukrainian community on commemorative initiatives that can be complemented with resources for cultural and educational programs. Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to recognize the work of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Ukrainian Canadian Foundation of Taras Shevchenko in their determination to make sure that there is a proper acknowledgement. Thank you. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable member, I would just like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us Avery Selby-Lyons, who is the daughter of the honourable Member for Southdale (Ms. Selby).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. * * * Mr. Doug Marti ndale (Burrows): I'm pleased to speak in this debate today because, well, for a number of reasons. Canadians of Ukrainian descent are the largest ethnic group after British in the Burrows constituency. Also my wife is a Canadian of Ukrainian descent, and she has a connection to the internment issue because one of her ancestors in the Sturby family was interred in an internment camp.

In fact, it's an interesting story because he left Manitoba and was heading back to Ukraine, but before he could get on a ship at Halifax he was arrested and put in an internment camp and, in fact, as far as his family were concerned, he disappeared from the face of the earth because they had no contact or no news from him for a couple of years until after the internment camps were closed down and he was released. Because of my wife's connection with this issue through her family, she had the honour of being one of two people to unveil the plaque on the grounds of the Manitoba Legislature several years ago.

I'm also interested in civil liberties, and I'm a member of the Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties and, as we know, this was one of the worst violations of civil liberties in Canadian history among others which I will mention.

Now this issue has already been debated because in May of 2005 I introduced a resolution, Resolution 4, titled, Redress of Canadian Wartime and Immigration Measures and specifically one of the WHEREASes said, "WHEREAS Ukrainians, Italians and Germans were interned in camps during the First and Second World War as the result of the War Measures Act enacted in 1914." I spent most of my speech talking about the Ukrainian internees. And what happened to that resolution? Well, it was debated by a number of members. In fact, it was seconded by the Member for Russell (Mr.

Derkach), who has a great interest in this issue. The Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) took

part in the debate and said that his party supported it, so it passed unanimously in this Legislature. I'd like to read the WHEREASes, because we concluded the resolution by commending the federal government, at the time, a Liberal federal government, for allocating money to commemorate and educate the Canadian public on these tragic events. Specifically, what the THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED clauses said, I will read into the record again: "THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Manitoba Legislature commend the federal government for allocating $25 million over the next three years in the February 2005 budget for commemorative and educational initiatives meant to highlight the painful aspects of Canada's history; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manitoba Legislature urge the federal government to continue negotiations with the affected communities to resolve their individual grievances and enable these communities to properly commemorate those tragic events and to ensure they will be understood and remembered by all Canadians." So that sounds good.

The federal government committed $25 million in their budget, and they actually had a program. I believe the acronym was ACE, and I think it stands for action, commemoration, education. They were going to negotiate with a number of communities, the Ukrainian community and the Italian community and the German community, who were all affected by the War Measures Act during and after the First World War. However, it's interesting to note that nothing happened. Here we have a federal Liberal government who allocated $25 million in their budget and didn't spend the money. Now, we

1956 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 probably should not be surprised by that because that happened in a number of areas including a national daycare program where it never got off the ground. Then, before they could spend any money, the government changed, and what happened? Well, the new federal government, or Canada's new government, as they used to like to call themselves, scrapped the ACE program and brought in their own program, but it's a different program, and the communities involved have all rejected it.

They say it's just another funding program, and it won't reflect the communities' wishes, including the Ukrainian community. So the Italian, German and Ukrainian communities in Canada have rejected the new program. What does the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) do? Maybe because his federal Liberal cousins allocated money and did nothing, didn't spend it on the things that they were supposed to spend it on, he wants the Manitoba government to do what the federal Liberal government allocated money to but did nothing. So, I have a problem with that.

Now, we know that these issues are very important, and it's good that they can be debated in the Manitoba Legislature, but I think what we need is action. I guess we'll have to wait and see if the new federal Conservative government actually gives out grants and allocates money for commemorative plaques and education and other things, but don't hold your breath because the communities involved aren't very happy with the new program of the new government. I think the one area of hope here is the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. We know that it's going to be in Winnipeg.

We commend the federal government for allowing a national institution, a national museum, for the first time in Canadian history, to be located outside of Ottawa and in Winnipeg. I think this is going to be wonderful for Winnipeg and for Manitoba and for Canada. We have international museums, for example, the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., that many Canadians, including schoolchildren, go to visit.

One of the benefits of having a Canadian Museum for Human Rights in Winnipeg is that Canadians will no longer have to go to Washington, D.C., but can travel to Winnipeg and be educated about human rights issues right here. I commend Gail Asper and the foundation that is raising money, to which the federal government, the provincial government, and the City of Winnipeg have contributed substantial funds, and we hope that they are successful with their fundraising efforts. I've heard Gail Asper speak several times, including as a delegation to our caucus, and I commend her.

In fact, one time, when I heard her speak, she spoke for 20 minutes with no notes with conviction and passion. She really owns this cause.

It was her father's cause but now it's hers and we commend her for all her fundraising effo rts, and we look forward to the official opening of the museum. * (11:20) It won't be just the Holocaust that is commemorated but we hope and expect that in addition to the War Measures Act during the First World War that resulted in the internment of Ukrainians and Italians and Germans and others, there will be educational displays about human rights abuses toward Chinese immigrants who were subject to a poll tax and who were excluded for many, many years from immigrating to Canada, and also the continuous journey legislation of 1908 which was imposed on immigration from South Asia and India, and also the refusal to admit Jewish refugees during the Second World War to Canada, and also, importantly, the War Measures Act of 1942 that affected Japanese Canadians.

So we look forward to the museum portraying all of these human rights and civil liberties abuses and educating Canadians and people around the world about them so that they don't happen again. I think that's most important, that we can learn from the mistakes of history, that we can learn that violating people's rights and moving people from one part of the country to the other does not work and in many cases they were done for reasons that cannot be justified.

In fact, if you look at the record, and this was in my original speech on this topic, Ukrainian Canadians were interned partly because of pressure from the private sector. For example, there's correspondence from CP Rail saying they wanted these people off the streets because they were afraid that they would be unemployed and cause problems. So there was pressure on the government to do this from the private sector. So we hope that these kinds of abuses never happen again, and we look forward to being educated about them through the Canadian Museum for Human Rights here in Winnipeg. Thank you.

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1957 Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to rise and add some comments to the debate on this resolution. Mr. Speaker, if we could lay our partisanship aside for one moment this morning, I think it would benefit all of us to support the intent of this resolution.

Maybe we all don't agree with the specific language in the resolution because it does refer to action that our provincial government maybe should take and action that was taken by a previous Liberal government, but I say to the legislators here that this is an issue that should tr anscend all political parties in terms of its importance and in terms of its support. Mr.

Speaker, I am of Ukrainian descent and therefore resolutions of this kind cut fairly close to the heart when you bring forward, I guess, the memories of people who were interned during the First and Second World War, but this particular resolution speaks specifically to the First World War and the people that were interned during that period of time who were not just Ukrainian. There were Chinese, Ukrainian, German, Mennonite families who were interned during that period of time because they were considered enemies of the country even though they had sworn allegiance to the Queen, the King, to the monarch.

They were, because of a War Measures Act, they were considered unfriendly people in this land. But what is even more tragic, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that many of these people lost all of their belongings. They were confiscated. Their property was confiscated. Their money was confiscated and was never, ever returned, a nd I think that there is a debt owed to these people and to the descendants of these people even today because we, as a society, need to look at how individuals' rights have been trampled upon and how those things need to be corrected in a modern society.

I remember the fight that Inky Mark put up with regard to recognizing this incident, this event in history. Inky Mark is the MP for the Dauphin-Swan River constituency who took it upon himself, because he represents an area that has a large population of Ukrainian people in it, to fight the fight, if you like, even when he was in opposition. It was that fight, Mr.

Speaker, that I would have to say motivated a government to pass a bill recognizing this particular incident in history and to try to put measures in place that would rectify this on behalf of the government to the people who were descendants of the families that were interned. But I don't believe anything to date has happened, as I can recall. For whatever reason, governments have not moved on this issue and it is time that they did act upon it. I don't care which government is in power in Ottawa, whether it's a Liberal or Conservative government.

That responsibility still lies with government to rectify this terrible situation. It's long past due, but, nevertheless, today is the second best day to do this since it wasn't done when it should have been. Mr. Speaker, the THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED also talks to the provincial government. I think as a provincial government regardless of which party is in government, we, collectively as legislators, have a responsibility here. Therefore we need to inform Manitobans about this tragic event in history. We need to ensure that it never happens again.

We need to ensure that–you know, Manitobans, in general, are informed about the true history of what happened in this province regardless of whether it is negative to us or not as a society, because it is from those types of incidents and that kind of I guess history that we all learn so that it is never repeated again. We oftentimes talk in this House about racism. We talk about the fact that we are a multicultural province and that we need to be tolerant and to respect each other regardless of what ethnic background, what culture we come from. If we can't demonstrate that tolerance here in the Legislature, Mr.

Speaker, how do we really expect Manitobans outside of the Legislature to show respect and tolerance of one another? It is by example that we lead here and I think it's incumbent upon each one of us to do that. Now, from time to time in the Legislature we get a little bit excited, especially during Question Period. Sometimes comments are made which we later regret. But that happens in the heat of an argument and that's why we're always given an opportunity to correct the record, to perhaps correct our statements and then to move on.

But, by and large, I think we have to show the example as legislators to the rest of Manitoba so that, indeed, the population in our province can show the kind of tolerance that we show in this Legislature. Mr. Speaker, I do believe that there is a responsibility not only of the federal government but also of the provincial government to show the initiative, to take the steps forward that should be taken so that this kind of historic event, negative as it is, may, in fact, be commemorated appropriately.

1958 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 Whether it's through a plaque that is placed in the Legislative grounds, whether it's a monument that's placed–you know, just last week, we passed the second reading of a bill that will put a monument up to people who have died in the line of duty. But this kind of event I think even supersedes something like that in terms of the tragedy of it and also in terms of its historic significance. We also passed a resolution in this Chamber last year that was brought forward by the Member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale), and I was happy to speak to it, support it, and, indeed, we unanimously passed it in the House here. [interjection] Oh, it was back in 2005. It was not last year, but two years. Time passes quickly. But, Mr. Speaker, that's the kind of co-operation I think that is needed in order for us to mark these types of events, to show the public, to show society that, indeed, we are sensitive to those types of issues that occur in our history and that we move forward and try to rectify them and ensure that in the future these types of incidents don't ever, ever occur again.

So I'm looking forward this morning to us dealing with this resolution and perhaps it doesn't meet every need that we have, and perhaps government finds it somewhat sensitive that we are calling in this resolution upon the government acting in a particular way, but I don't see this as compelling the government to take action in a negative way.

It calls on government to consider supporting the Ukrainian-Canadian community in developing forward-looking proposals that will help commemorate their historical experience and educate Canadians about the history in order to highlight and commemorate the contributions that the Ukrainian- Canadian community has made to Canada and to promote a cross-cultural understanding and shared sense of Canadian identity. I think that sort of speaks to the intent of the resolution and I'm hopeful that, together, we can pass this resolution in the Legislature this morning. * (11:30) Hon.

Christine Melnic k (Minister of Water Stewardship): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to speak to this resolution. As other private members' resolutions, as the Member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) has shared with the House some personal experience with internment, I, too, have had Ukrainian relatives who were interned in the Cape Breton area. I also have an aunt who is Japanese who was brought from British Columbia to, ironically enough, around a town that was named after my own family and was interned during the Second World War.

So, my family is not immune to this and I think it's very important that we recognize that the threat is always there. I think we have to take a very hard look at some of the measures that are being taken today in our country around internment of people. I'm very concerned about what has happened around some Muslim Canadians being interned with no representation, with no right to legal counsel, no right even to the evidence that is being presented about them.

So we must be ever vigilant and we must–I know the sentiment in the House today is "never again," but we have to look at what is happening today and be very clear on what is and is not acceptable for Canadians. Of course between 1914 and 1920, two years after the First World War ended, Canada witnessed its first internment operation under the War Measures Act,

an act that has been controversial throughout the history of Canada, Mr. Speaker. Nearly 9,000 Canadians of Ukrainian origin were systematically arrested and interned in 24 camps throughout the country simply because of their ethnic background.

Others, approximately 80,000, were forced to register as enem y aliens during this period and when we look at what is playing out south of the border in the United States where we see illegal aliens and all sorts of terms being played upon people and all sorts of, I feel, unlawful practices being carried out in Guantanamo Bay and hidden centres around the world which were traced by people who are concerned about human rights, actually tracing plane routes and finding out where these planes were taking people, and they were finding they were taking them actually to hidden jails and hidden internments throughout the world.

I think we have to be very, very concerned about what is happening south of the border. These internees, the Ukrainian internees suffered from economic loss. Again, in the story of my own family, my father's cousin was walking along a road in Cape Breton, was picked up by the RCMP, put in an internment, put in a prison. His family were never told; he was given no representation. After the war ended, he was taken back to that exact place, given his civilian clothes, and just dropped off, and ended up walking home, and his family again had no idea where he was. Was he alive? Was he dead? Was he healthy?

Where was he? They had no idea.

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1959 I think it's also important to recognize the PMR that was passed unanimously in this House, brought forward by the Member for Burrows some two years ago, and I'd like to read some of the language from that. It's very good.

WHEREAS Ukrainians, Italians and Germans were interned in camps during the First and Second World Wars as a result of the War Measures Act enacted in 1914; and

WHEREAS Chinese immigrants were subject to a poll tax as high as $500 between the years 1884-1923, after which the Canadian government passed the Immigration act which respectively excluded all Chinese immigration to Canada until after the Second World War; and

WHEREAS from 1907 to 1914, a series of restrictive measures, such as the "continuous journey" legislation of 1908, were imposed on immigration from southern Asia and India countries (mainly Sikhs), which effectively brought immigration from those regions to an abrupt end; and

WHEREAS during the Second World War, 711 Jewish refugees from the holocaust were interned under suspicion for being spies and 900 Jewish refugees from Nazis Germany aboard the liner St. Louis were denied entry into Canada on June 9, 1939. THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Manitoba Legislature commend the federal government for allocating $25 million over the next three years in the February budget of 2005 for commemorative and educational initiatives meant to highlight the painful aspects of Canada's history; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manitoba Legislature urge the federal government to continue negotiations with the affected communities to resolve their individual grievances and enable these communities to properly commemorate those tragic events and to ensure they will be understood and remembered by all Canadians.

So, again, that was unanimously supported in this House, and it is unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the Liberal government of the day set aside some $25 million and did not follow through on any actions. I think that that is a false promise and that is a slight on the people who have suffered. Every day, these people are passing, and they will pass without any recognition of what was done to them, to their families, to their communities, what was done to them in an economic way, what was done to them in a social way. I think it's very important that the federal government move quickly on these.

I would like to say that I was pleased to see redress for Japanese Canadians. Again, my aunt did benefit from that, if you could call it a benefit. She did receive compensation when in 1988 Canada apologized to the Japanese for the miscarriage of justice that took place when some 22,000 Japanese Canadians were given 24 hours to pack before being interned. Their belongings, assets and communities, I would hold, land, business were also confiscated. The 1988 Government of Canada admitted that these past government actions were influenced by racial discrimination.

The government signed a redress agreement providing a small amount of compensation. Again, it is very important that the federal government of the day carry on, as they have, with compensation for Chinese Canadians. I think it's an important statement to the world. You know, what happens in this country the rest of the world looks at. There was compensation provided for Chinese Canadians, but I understand to this day there has not been official policy or redress from the Canadian government for the mistreatment, unjust internment and confiscation of possessions.

Again, I stand with Ukrainian Canadians across Canada and all Canadians who have been displaced and who have had possessions taken from them, and identity. I think that we cannot, when we look at the pattern of displacement, we cannot not mention the people of the First Nations of this country where there is so much work to do. So, again, I support the Kelowna agreement that we worked so hard for. I applaud our Premier (Mr. Doer) for working so hard for that, and I applaud the members who are speaking today.

You know, social justice isn't just a phrase, social justice has to be a reality, and here in Canada we can provide an example, but the federal government does have to step up to the plate and make sure that we are taking our rightful place in the countries of the world and in the United Nations. There are lots of resolutions in the United Nations to move forward with such redress. We have the wording; we just have to turn it into action. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. * (11:40) Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I, too, wish to make a few brief comments on this matter before us.

I want to give it a brief historical context. I happen to have

1960 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 been in Rome a while ago and went to the Coliseum where they took upon themselv es the art of throwing Christians, for that matter, into the Coliseum onto the floor. They then had lions which they starved for 10 days–no food, no water, in darkness–and turned them on the people in the Coliseum, and that was called sport.

Rome, however, never took it upon itself to reflect, to look back on what it was doing, and never apologized; never saw that maybe it was something that was so, so wrong, fo r a nation state to do something like that; never reflected and apologized for what they did. We, however, do have that luxury. We have what I would consider a democracy that grows, that changes, that understands that things that might have been acceptable a hundred years ago are no longer acceptable today. In fact, there was a time when women were not allowed to vote, something for myself and even so for my children.

I talked to classrooms and I explained to them that it wasn't that long ago that women really had no vote in democracy, and they look at you blankly. I mean, it's just a given for our generation that that be the case, and we realized as a democracy that there was a problem with that; that that was wrong. The same thing with slavery. You look at the speeches that Abraham Lincoln gave. I mean, finally, finally they realized that it was so wrong that it had to be changed. Well, so, too, is it what happened with the internment.

There is a list, and probably this one's not exclusively, although the Ukrainians were the significant majority of those in the camps. There were, and they were imprisoned or registered as enemy aliens: Poles, Italians, Bulgarians, Croatians, Turks, Serbians, Hungarians, Russians, Jews and Romanians, as well as Germans were included in that. It's unbelievable that we, as a democracy, as what was then a very modern nation state, would turn on our citizens like this.

So what we have in front of us, I would suggest to this Chamber, has a lot less to do about the individuals because by and large, most of them have passed on to eternity. It really has to do with us as a democracy. I often say to my children, as an example, I say, when you apologize, you're not apologizing because of the other person; in fact, it has very little to do with the other person. It really has all to do about you as an individual. It has to do with you as a conscience. It has to do with you as your character. It has to do with where you are as an individual in life.

That's where we, as modern democracies, as nation states, look back at our history, and it's not to rewrite history, but it is to acknowledge that something we did was not right. It is to put up a benchmark, to put up a memorial, to indicate that we viewed that as being something that we would never do again. It has everything to do with us as a democracy, with us as a nation state, as an evolving form of government, an evolving system of government. That's what this has everything to do with. Where are we as Canadians with our democracy? Where are we as a province? Where are we as a legislative Chamber?

This Chamber existed during that time period and maybe there were some that stood up in this House and said, that's wrong. I actually don't have that information, but we have the opportunity right now to stand up and say: We view what happened to those individuals as being wrong. We apologize. In fact, we are big enough to go so far as to put up some kind of memorial that says, for generations that come after us, that that kind of thing is not acceptable. It is really about this Chamber. It is really about democracy. It doesn't have as much to do anymore about the individuals that were incarcerated.

It is really something that looks forward. It is about growing a democracy. It's about growing a democratic system. We are all democrats in one form or another. We believe in the principles of freedom; one woman, one man, one vote. We believe those principles and the resolution we have before us points no fingers. I appreciate that. It points no fingers at anybody. It doesn't lay blame.

What it says is, hereon forth going forward, we, we as a Chamber, will recognize that incarcerating individuals for really no reason whatsoever, for no crime having been committed other than where they might have been born, or a religious belief, that we will not tolerate that going forward. I appreciate this motion coming forward. I support it because I believ e that, first and foremost, we should be about individual rights, and individual rights were sacrificed at that time. We, as a democracy, must keep evolving. We must get better.

We must view what comes from our past and look at it through that prism that, can we improve on that. I think this, what is before us, this private member's motion, is very much appropriate and, certainly, we, on the Progressive Conservative opposition side,

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1961 would now be prepared for this to go to vote, that this now be accepted by the Manitoba Legislative Assembly. Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): It's my pleasure to rise to speak to this resolution proposed by the honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard), Canadian Internment Camps. As most folks in here will know, my community of Transcona has a very large Ukrainian population.

Of course, I've had the distinct pleasure of working with the good folks of my community on a number of fronts, and a number of issues, and I'm quite proud of the fact that we've had a very good working relationship during my years in this Manitoba Legislature. But, of course, before I had the opportunity to come to this place, I also had a chance to work at the Canadian National Railway shops in Transcona and, of course, there was a very, very large Ukrainian population working in the Transcona shops. In this particular weekend coming, Mr.

Speaker, I have the distinct pleasure and I've been invited to participate with the St. Michael's Ukrainian Catholic Church congregation, the good folks of that church, as they celebrate the 90 th anniversary in my community. I can only think of how important the history of Canada is with respect to the Ukrainian people living in Canada now, people of Ukrainian ancestry living in Canada.

The fact that we have such a dark period in our history as a country in how we treated our first citizens, so to speak, first people that immigrated to our country and to our province and the fact that during this dark period in our time that we chose, by the actions of our Canadian federal government, to restrict or to limit the activities of individuals in our country and did not allow them to fully participate in the development of our country. It's very fitting as I look around this Chamber here today, members of the Legislative Assembly, Mr.

Speaker, with each of us wearing our poppies, commemorating the service of our Canadians in world wars that our countr y has participated in, and to think that during those periods of time when we had people of all ethnicities serving our country that we would take such steps to restrict the freedoms and liberties of certain segments of our society. The very rights and freedoms that those people were out putting their life on the line for, and in fact dying for, and the poppy is a symbol of that sacrifice, and yet we have such a dark period in our history that penalized so many people of our country. Mr.

Speaker, 93 years ago, of course, was the time when the St. Michael's Church started its activities in the community of Transcona. Of course, we're quite proud of the history of the Ukrainian people as they built our great city and our great province, and are proud to have so many friends in the Ukrainian community living within the community of Transcona. But I can only think back , Mr. Speaker, some of the experiences that I've had in my life. I've had the chance to work with so many different people in my life, quite proud to call them friends.

I think back to the time when the Canadian government was negotiating at the time with the people of Japanese ancestry living in our community. There was a principal living in my community that was spearheading the reconciliation, so to speak, with the Japanese-Canadian community. Of course, it was negotiated at that time that there would be some recognition that the Japanese Canadians were treated unjustly and unfairly during the Second World War.

I can think back to a particular neighbour of mine, an individual that I worked with for some 20 years whose family was of Japanese ancestry and had been living in British Columbia at the outbreak of the Second World War. His family were stripped of their land and put on a train and transported to the interior of Canada.

That individual living in my community, still to this day, tells me that that land that the family was stripped of, just by simple fact that they were of Japanese ancestry, that particular land now has a shopping mall on it worth many millions of dollars, and yet the family never received any restitution for that loss. Of course, that family was disadvantaged for their en tire life and it went on for more than one generation. * (11:50) It's interesting, Mr.

Speaker, that while this individual living in my community harbours no ill will toward the Canadian people, he is very saddened by the fact of the actions that were taken by the then Canadian government and that there was no way that you could ever recover what has been lost to you and the sacrifices that you've had for your family. Now, Mr. Speaker, I looked through the resolution that has been brought forward by the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard). I know that my colleague the Me mber for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale) has suggested that we have already dealt with this matter in a previous Manitoba legislative session and that we have put in place the proper

1962 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 recognitions for those that were disadvantaged as a result of the actions of the Canadian federal government. I had the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, in preparing for this special event that's going to occur in my community this weekend, looking at some of the history of people of Ukrainian ancestry that are living in Canada and what it meant to them at the time when the Canadian government introduced the War Measures Act in 1914. It was through an Order-in-Council.

It wasn't passed by the democratic institution of the Parliament of Canada; it was done by an Order-in-Council of the Canadian government of the day, causing all people of Ukrainian ancestry to be rounded up in the country and to be transported elsewhere into internment camps and to be essentially used as slave labour within our country. Now, that is a very black period on a country like Canada.

I've often prided myself that we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada and that we would let such a dark period in our history occur if we were so concerned for other individuals, but perhaps that is part of th e genesis for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to make sure that these types of events never occur.

Nevertheless, in 1914 the government of the day introduced the War Measures Act that stripped people of Ukrainian ancestry, and there were some 80,000 folks living in Canada at that time that were declared enemy aliens or that they were declared people that needed to be watched in our country and that were moved elsewhere and used as slave labour. They lost their possessions, their landholdings, their homes and they have never essentially recovered from that. I have to think, Mr.

Speaker, that one of the things that we pride in our country, one of the things that was developed through this forced labour of the Ukrainian population was Banff National Park. I'll never be able to go back to Banff National Park again and see it in the same light that I have in the past, knowing that our Canadian population, our Canadian government forced slave labour to build that particular park. I'll never be able to look at it the same way that I have in the past.

Now, the people of Ukrainian ancestry that were rounded up, not only used as forced labourers to develop Banff National Park, they were also used for the logging industry in northern Ontario and Québec. They were used to build the steel mills in Ontario and Nova Scotia. They were used in the mines of British Columbia. The corporations, I guess, benefited by this to some degree because, with respect to this particular group of individuals, the Ukrainian forced labourers, Mr. Speaker, was the fact that this particular law was carried on for an additional two years afte r the end of the Second World War. So, Mr.

Speaker, I think that we have to recognize that Ukrainian Canadians, Italian Canadians, German Canadians, Japanese Canadians and all others that were affected through the various War Measures Act brought about by the government of Canada we have some responsibility to righting the wrongs that have occurred in the past. I think that's a responsibility of the federal government. The federal government was the one that brought forward this Order-in-Council that affected the Ukrainian Canadians but also other Canadians. I think that the federal government has the responsibility.

I'm disappointed that the federal Liberal government of the day chose to put the $25 million into a fund but never expended any of those funds to help to restore and to right that wrong because they had some 13 years to right that wrong. Mr. Speaker, perhaps as my colleague the Member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale) has indicated, the Canadian Museum for Human Rights will be a way to help to educate other Canadians to the atrocities–and I use that word guardedly–that have occurred with respect to the trampling of the rights and freedoms of Canadians, and that the Canadian Museum for Human Rights will help to inform and educate not only Manitobans but people from all walks of life in all parts of the world. So, Mr.

Speaker, I think that there is an opportunity here for us to recognize the Ukrainian Canadian Congress for the wo rk that they have done and the fact that we have also had the chance to pass the Member for Burrows' resolution unanimously in a previous session of this Legislature and that it's incumbent upon the federal government to do the work that they have to do to right this wrong. Thank you. Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, it's an important resolution, I think, that's worthy of support. I commend the Liberal leader for bringing forward this resolution.

I would ask at this time for leave of the House to vote on this resolution and to allow the government, of course, to be able to stand up and vote for the resolution as we will on this side. Thank you.

November 6, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1963 Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to vote on the resolution or are there more speakers? Some Honourable Members: No. Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: No, it's been denied. There are more speakers up. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, on a point of order? Mr. Hawranik: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let the record show that members on this side of the House, including the Liberal member, have supported the leave and– Mr. Speaker: Order.

Points of orders are to point out to the Speaker a breach of a rule or a departure from the procedures of the House, not to be used for debates or disputing facts that other members have put on the record. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Inkster, on a point of order? Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Yes, Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Just given the comments, I'm wondering if there might be leave of the Chamber to allow for those that would like to speak on the resolution to speak and then have a vote immediately following those that want to speak on the resolution. Mr.

Speaker: Is there leave of the House for members that wish to speak, to speak on the resolution and then once it's concluded that there would be a vote? Some Honourable Members: No. Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: No? It's been denied. * * * Mr. Bidhu Jha (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I rise to put a few words on a very important point relating to this bill which I think relates with human rights. I'm led to believe that in the past, the Member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) has already talked about this particular issue.

We have discussed this in the past and it was unanimously dealt in the past, as I understand. Now– Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for River Heights, on a point of order? Mr. Gerrard: I just want to make sure that the Member for Radisson (Mr. Jha) knows full well that if he keeps on talking, we will not be able to have a vote. Mr. Speaker: Order. Once again, I remind members what a point of order is. If members wish to discuss amongst themselves, we have loges to discuss that.

But the points of order are to bring to the attention of the Speaker a breach of our rule or a departure from our practices. The honourable member has no point of order. * * * Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Radisson has the floor. Mr. Jha: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to take permission of the House to take leave, because I would not be able to finish what I want to say in a few minutes. I'd like to speak on this particular resolution because I believe that we have discussed this, and the Member for Burrows talked about that this resolution brings the values of the Canadian society. I, Mr.

Speaker, when I chose this country to be my home, I came with a dream of making Canada a country that we all know is the God's land, I call it. I think we have already seen several things that h a v e h a p p e n e d i n t h e p a s t t o m a k e s u r e t h a t w e understand that we all, we all have learned from the history. Members have spoken about what problems have– Mr. Speaker: Order. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member will have nine minutes remaining. [interjection] Order.

Was the honourable member asking for leave for the Speaker not to see the clock for him to conclude his comments? Is that what the honourable member was asking, or were you asking for leave to continue with your speech? Mr. Jha: No. Mr. Speaker: Okay. He did not officially ask for leave.

1964 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 6, 2007 When this matter is again before the House, the honourable Member for Radisson will have nine minutes remaining. The hour being 12 noon– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The hour being 12 noon, we will recess and we'll reconvene at 1:30 p.m.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, November 6, 2007 CONTENTS ORDERS OF THE DAY PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Second Readings–Public Bills Bill 209–The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act Hawranik 1943 Dewar 1944 Lemieux 1945 Lamoureux 1946 Bill 216–The Municipal Water System Phosphorus Control Act Gerrard 1948 Ashton 1949 Melnick 1951 Debate on Second Readings–Public Bills Bill 202–The Apology Act Oswald 1947 Lamoureux 1948 Resolution Res. 11–Canadian Internment Camps Gerrard 1953 Martindale 1955 Derkach 1957 Melnick 1958 Schuler 1959 Reid 1961 Hawranik 1962 Jha 1963

The Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Debates and Proceedings are also available on the Internet at the following address: http://www.gov.mb.ca/legislature/hansard/index.html

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-1-32a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 1st hansardpdf 32a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d565eb400c33a6fb5b7cf70f53047c081f934d99

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