Manitoba Hansard — 12 May 2004 (Sitting 37, 38th Legislature, 2nd Session)

38-2-37

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LV No. 37 - 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, May 12, 2004

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Eighth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation AGLUGUB, Cris The Maples N.D.P. ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thom pson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CUMMINGS, Glen Ste. Rose 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. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri 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. LOEWEN, John Fort Whyte P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon.

Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn, Hon. Minto N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. MURRAY, Stuart Kirkfield Park P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa Seine River N.D.P. PENNER, Jack Emerson P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. REIMER, Jack Southdale P.C. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. ROCAN, Denis Carman P.C. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SALE, Tim, Hon. Fort Rouge N.D.P. SANTOS, Conrad Wellington N.D.P. SCHELLENBERG, Harry Rossmere N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface N.D.P. SMITH, Scott, Hon. Brandon West N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. TWEED, Mervin Turtle Mountain P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

2001 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, May 12, 2004 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS Mr. Speaker: I would just like to inform the House that Hansard will be late. The printing press is down, and it will be about an hour and a half before they can deliver Hansard. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Proposed PLA–Floodway Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

These are the reasons for this petition: The Province of Manitoba has tabled legislation in the Legislature that may result in the $660-million expansion of the Red River Floodway by the summer of 2005. The Premier of Manitoba plans to subject all work related to the project to a Project Labour Agreement (PLA). The proposed PLA would force all employees on the project to belong to a union. Approximately 95 percent of heavy construction companies in Manitoba are currently non-unionized.

The Manitoba Heavy Co nstruction Association has indicated that the forced unionization of all employees may increase the costs of the project by $65 million.

The chair of B.C.'s 2010 Construction Leaders Taskforce has stated, "Major industrial projects built under project labour agreements from the energy sector in Alberta to o ff-shore development on the East Coast have repeatedly incurred cost overruns, labour disruptions and delays." Organizations including the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the Manitoba Heavy Construction Association, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Merit Contractors Association of Manitoba, the Winnipeg Construction Association, the Construc- tion Association of Rural Manitoba and the Canadian Construction Association have publicly opposed the Premier's plan to turn the floodway expansion project into a union-only worksite.

Manitobans deserve an open and fair competi- tion that protects taxpayers from unnecessary costs and respects workers' democratic choice. Manitobans support the right of any company, both union and non-union, to participate in the expansion of the Red River Floodway. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider ending his Government's forced unionization plan of companies involved with the Red River Floodway expansion.

To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider entering into discussions with business, construction and labour groups to ensure any qualified company and worker, regardless of their union status, is afforded the opportunity to bid and work on the floodway expansion project. Mr. Speaker, this is si gned by Leonard Klassen, Darren Klassen, Hermann Grauer and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. Minimum Sitting Days for Legislative Assembly Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: The Manitoba Legislature sat for only 37 days in 2003.

2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 Manitobans expect their Government to be accountable, and the number of sitting days has a direct impact on the issue of public accountability. Manitobans expect their elected officials to be provided the opportunity to be able to hold the Government accountable.

The Legislative Assembly provides the best forum for all MLAs to debate and ask questions of the Government, and it is critical that all MLAs to debate and ask questions of the Government, and it is critical that all MLAs be provided the time needed in order for them to cover constituent and party duties. Establishing a minimum number of sitting days could prevent the government of the day from limit- ing the rights of opposition members from being able to ask questions.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba to consider recognizing the need to sit for a minimum of 80 days in any given calendar year. * (13:35) Signed by Fely Ines, Joe Buen, Annabelle Reyes and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. Highway 227 Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition.

It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel roads of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie. Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway. Residences along Highway 227 are not acces- sible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of roadway. The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unaccept- able. Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure.

We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) to consider having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 and 227 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure for the safety of all Manitobans and Canadians who travel all Manitoba highways. Signed by L. Bullock, Barrie Tully, Don Walsh and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House.

Alzheimer's Disease Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Alzheimer's is a debilitating disease. Cholinesterase inhibitors are known to slow or even prevent the progression of Alzheimer's. The provincial government asked for the devel- opment of an Alzheimer strategy in 2000 and was presented with nine recommendations in 2002, none of which have yet been implemented.

In the absence of a provincial Alzheimer strategy, the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority put in place a policy in November 2003 whereby

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2003 Alzheimer's patients entering personal care homes are being weaned from certain Alzheimer medica- tions in a move that the WRHA's vice-president of long-term care has referred to as a financial neces- sity. The administrative costs of the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority have more than tripled since 1999, to a total of more than $16 million a year. In a move that amounts to two-tier medicine, the families of Alzheimer's sufferers in personal care homes may request that the drugs continue to be delivered at the family's expense.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) to ensure that his attempts to balance his depart- ment's finances are not at the expense of the health and well-being of seniors and other vulnerable Manitobans suffering from this debilitating disease. To urge the Minister of Health to consider reversing his decision to deny Alzheimer's patients in personal care homes access to certain medications. To request the Minister of Health to consider implementing a provincial Alzheimer strategy. Signed by B. Watts, C. Gill, A. Jacques and others. Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. Proposed PLA–Floodway Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: The Province of Manitoba has tabled legislation in the Legislature that may result in the $660-million expansion of the Red River Floodway by the summer of 2005. The Premier of Manitoba (Mr. Doer) plans to subject all work related to the project to a Project Labour Agreement (PLA).

The proposed PLA would force all employees on the project to belong to a union. Approximately 95 percent of heavy construction companies in Manitoba are currently non-unionized. The Manitoba Heavy Co nstruction Association has indicated that the forced unionization of all employees may increase the costs of the project by $65 million.

The chair of B.C.'s 2010 Construction Leaders Taskforce has stated: "Major industrial projects built under project labour agreements from the energy sector in Alberta to o ff-shore development on the East Coast have repeatedly incurred cost overruns, labour disruptions and delays." Organizations including the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the Manitoba Heavy Construction Association, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Merit Contractors Association of Manitoba, the Winnipeg Construction Association, the Construc- tion Association of Rural Manitoba and the Canadian Construction Association have publicly opposed the Premier's plan to turn the floodway expansion project into a union-only worksite.

Manitobans deserve an open and fair competi- tion that protects taxpayers from unnecessary costs and respects workers' democratic choice. * (13:40) Manitobans support the right of any company, both union and non-union, to participate in the expansion of the Red River Floodway. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider ending his Government's forced unionization plan of companies involved with the Red River Floodway expansion. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider entering into discussions with business, construction

2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 and labour groups to ensure any qualified company and worker, regardless of their union status, is afforded the opportunity to bid and work on the floodway expansion project. Signed John Duerksen, Betty Duerksen, Terry Williams and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. Highway 32 Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

These are the reasons for this petition: Rural highways are part of the mandate of the Province of Manitoba. Under a previous commi tment, the Province of Manitoba would be covering the costs of four-laning that portion of Highway 32 that runs through Winkler, Manitoba. The Department of Transportation and Govern- ment Services has altered its position and will now undertake the project only if the City of Winkler will pay half of the total cost of construction. The provincial government's offloading of its previous commitment will cost the City of Winkler several million dollars.

The City of Winkler has now been informed that it will have to wait several years before this project could be undertaken. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Transportation and Government Services to consider honouring the previous commitment and complete the four-laning of Highway 32 through the city of Winkler, absorb- ing all costs related to the construction as previously agreed.

To request the Minister of Transportation and Government Services to consider the responsibility of the Department of Transportation and Govern- ment Services for the construction of rural highways. To request the Minister of Transportation and Government Services to consider the significant and strategic importance of the completion of four-laning Highway 32 through the city of Winkler, especially as it relates to the economic growth and the develop- ment of the city of Winkler and its trading area.

To request the Minister of Transportation and Government Services to consider the valuable contribution of the city of Winkler and its trading area to the provincial economy and reprioritize the four-laning of Highway 32 for the 2004 construction season. Submitted by Garry Wiebe, Jake Siemens, Vince Anderson, Ken Hildebrand and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. Proposed PLA–Floodway Mr. David Faurschou (P ortage la Prairie): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

These are the reasons for this petition: The Province of Manitoba has tabled legislation in the Legislature that may result in the $660-million expansion of the Red River Floodway by the summer of 2005. The Premier of Manitoba plans to subject all work related to the project to a Project Labour Agreement (PLA). The proposed PLA would force all employees on the project to belong to a union. Approximately 95 percent of heavy construction companies in Manitoba are currently non-unionized.

The Manitoba Heavy Co nstruction Association has indicated that the forced unionization of all employees may increase the costs of the project by $65 million. The chair of B.C.'s 2010 Construction Leaders Taskforce has stated, "Major industrial projects built under project labour agreements from the energy sector in Alberta to o ff-shore development on the

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2005 East Coast have repeatedly incurred cost overruns, labour disruptions and delays." Organizations including the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the Manitoba Heavy Construction Association, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Merit Contractors Association of Manitoba, the Winnipeg Construction Association, the Construc- tion Association of Rural Manitoba and the Canadian Construction Association have publicly opposed the Premier's plan to turn the floodway expansion project into a union-only worksite.

Manitobans deserve an open and fair competi- tion that protects taxpayers from unnecessary costs and respects workers' democratic choice. Manitobans support the right of any company, both union and non-union, to participate in the expansion of the Red River Floodway.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider ending his Government's forced unionization plan of companies involved with the Red River Floodway expansion. * (13:45) To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider entering into discussions with business, construction and labour groups to ensure any qualified company and worker, regardless of their union status, is afforded the opportunity to bid and work on the floodway expansion project. Signed by Ivan Stadnyn, Ann Bray, Roberta Linnett and others. Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with the Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Nancy Allan (Min ister of Labour and Immigration): I am pleased to table the Manitoba Labour and Immigration Supplementary Information for Legislative Review for the Departmental Estimates for 2004-2005. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Manitoba Day Hon. Peter Bjornson (M inister of Education, Citizenship and Youth): I have a statement for the House. It is my pleasure today to rise and provide a ministerial statement about today's celebration of Manitoba Day with Manitoba's youth. Mr.

Speaker, 134 years ago The Manitoba Act received Royal Assent, officially creating our province as part of the young nation of Canada. Today is the time for Manitobans young and old to reflect on where we came from, what we have achieved in those many decades, who we are today and how we wish to shape our common future.

The youth of today are the generation who will shape the world of tomorrow, and their ability to meet that responsibility will depend on our ability as parents, teachers, leaders and role models to help Manitoba's youth understand what it means to be a citizen of this nation and a member of this community. Our commitment to this task is reflected in the recent change in the name of the department to include citizenship.

The change signals a greater emphasis on preparing youth to develop the knowledge, skills and values that are necessary to understand the role of citizens and to actively participate in shaping communities. Through a wide variety of initiatives in and out of school the Province has placed a special focus on assisting students and youth to understand the role of citizens and to encourage them to become fully engaged members of society.

We are reaffirming the role of education in preparing youth to become informed and involved members of our communities today and the guard- ians of our democratic legacy for the years ahead. Manitoba Day is a moment to reflect on our past, our accomplishments, our sh ared achievements as a people and as a community. It is also a time to look to the future, to ask ourselves what are our hopes, our dreams, our aspirations for ourselves and those generations who will follow us on this journey. It is for this reason that we particularly want to celebrate Manitoba Day with Manitoba's youth.

2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 I want to conclude by thanking the youth for joining us today in the Legislative Building to celebrate Manitoba Day. I also want to thank the performers affiliated with Manitoba Film and Sound who provided us with live entertainment, the Wailin' Jennys. Again, Happy Manitoba Day. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I am pleased to share a few remarks about Manitoba Day, celebrated today, May 12, in honour of Manitoba's 134th birth- day.

I was glad to be able to attend the celebration at the Grand Staircase earlier today and take some time to reflect on the great day in 1870 when The Manitoba Act created the province of Manitoba. I did really enjoy the music of the Wailin' Jennys today. It was just beautiful. I am sure I speak for all members of the Chamber when I say this is an especially important day for all of us as we continue the work of our former colleagues, serving the citizens of Manitoba and representing their interests here in the Legislature.

I trust that all members will take a few minutes to ponder the importance of remembering Manitoba's history and the people who made Manitoba what it is today. * (13:50) I recognize that we are putting increased empha- sis on our youth today, as witnessed by the number of young people with us today. It is not only about celebrating Manitoba's history but also a time to reflect on our rich cultural traditions. Aboriginal people and immigrants from around the world have come together to make a cultural, diverse and culturally rich population for Manitoba.

Although we share different customs, practices and languages, we are all proud to be part of the province. I would like to take the opportunity just to reflect on a few highlights. As I mentioned, 1870, the prov- ince of Manitoba came into being with The Manitoba Act. In the 1880s there was a decade of expansion for the CPR, extending tracks through Winnipeg and across southern Manitoba. 1885 was the year Louis Riel experienced his final days. In the 1890s, Manitoba became home to Ukrainians, Russians, German Mennonites, Icelanders and other Europeans as well as U.S. and Ontario homesteaders.

In the 1900s, Manitoba petitioned the federal government to extend the western boundary. In 1913, the founda- tion of the Manitoba Legislature was laid. In 1916, Manitoba was the first province to grant women the right to vote. 1919 was the year of the infamous– Mr. Speaker: Order. I regret to interrupt the honourable member, but our Rule 25(3) states the person may speak for no longer than the minister spoke, and I note the honourable member's com- ments are now considerably longer than those of the minister. I would ask the honourable member to please conclude your comments. Mrs. Taillieu: In conclusion, Mr.

Speaker, today as Manitobans remember our individual and collective past, we celebrate our accomplishments of our province thus far, and I would like to ask us all to say Happy Birthday to Manitoba today. Happy Birthday was sung. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I ask for leave to speak to the minister's statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: I heard a no. Leave has been denied. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 211–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I move, seconded by the Member for Ste. Ro se (Mr.

Cummings), that Bill 211, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Veterans' Licence Plates), now be read for a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Eichler: This bill requires the Registrar of the Motor Vehicles Branch to make licence plates bear- ing veteran's graphic available to all soldiers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2007 the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today Mr. Eddy Lamoureux from Mississauga, Ontario who is the uncle of the honourable Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), and accompanying him is Ms. Cathy Lamoureux, who is the wife of the honourable Member for Inkster. I would like to draw the attention of all honour- able members to the public gallery where we have with us from Robertson School 19 Grade 5 students under the direction of Ms. Karla Yallits. This school is located in the constitu ency of the honourable Member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale).

Also in the public gallery we have from Springs Christian Academy 31 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. Chris Budlong. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you all here today. * (13:55) Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Carman, on a point of order. Mr. Denis Rocan (Carman): On a point of order, Sir. I think I heard during ministerial statements the minister making a statement on Manitoba Day and then a member of the Opposition making a reply to the said statement.

I did say no when you asked for leave. I was thinking of a different subject so I would ask for leave of the House to ask you to ask if there is leave one more time. Mr. Speaker: First of all, I am asking leave to revert back to ministerial statements. Is it the will of the House to revert back to ministerial statements? [Agreed] Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I ask for leave to speak to the minister's statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave to speak to the ministerial statement? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted. * * * Mr.

Gerrard: Happy Birthday, Manitoba. Today is a wonderful day to celebrate the extraordinary contri- butions and the extraordinary history of Manitoba. I believe it is fitting that we talk specifically about young people because young people are the future. Clearly, in this party we have talked for a long time about making sure that we change the nature of government, that we can change the approach of the provincial government to improve things for young people in this province.

We have a proud history with the First Nations making major contributions to our province, with the Métis and Louis Riel, with the Liberal premier, Thomas Greenway, leading the charge in getting immigrants to this province, with the Liberal premier, Tobias Norris, making sure that women could have the vote in Manitoba. It is a wonderful province to live in. Happy Birthday, Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: Now we will move on to Question Period. ORAL QUESTIONS Alzheimer Strategy Implementation Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): In early 2000, the Health Minister (Mr.

Chomiak) directed his department to develop an Alzheimer strategy for Ma nitoba. In October 2002, the minister received a report called The Strategy for Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias in Manitoba. In March 2003, at the Alzheimer Society annual conference, the minister's representative announced the Doer government was committed to the implementation of the strategy, Mr. Speaker, yet here we are in 2004 and no action has been taken. Can the Premier explain why his Government has not moved on implementing the Alzheimer strategy? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I know, Mr.

Speaker, that we have introduced a number of actions consistent with the strategy, including many drugs that were not covered in the past. Mr. Murray: Early last year this Government, Mr. Speaker, told the Alzheimer Society that they accepted the Alzheimer strategy and they promised them that the stakeholder advisory committee would

2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 be formed in the summer of 2003 to develop a proposed plan, an action plan to deal with the report's recommendation. Let us be clear. Prior to the last provincial election, the Doer government promised hundreds of Manitobans that they would quickly implement the Alzheimer strategy, but following the last provincial election campaign, this strategy has quietly been shelved. * (14:00) How does this Premier explain why his stake- holder advisory committee, which was supposed to start working on an implementation plan last June, has not even yet been established? Mr.

Doer: We have increased the capacity of personal care homes to deal with some people who are dealing with this challenge. As I mentioned before, many drugs that were not covered in the past are now covered under this Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak). We are still completing action on other areas of the plan, Mr. Spea ker, and there is action that has been taken. Mr. Murray: Manitoba has a growing aging population. We have more people in Manitoba that are being diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or related dementia, Mr. Speaker. The Government supposedly recognized how important that was back in the year 2000.

They promised that they would address it and yet, four years later, they have done nothing. As a March 17, 2004, letter from the Alzheimer Society to the Health Minister stated, and I would like to quote from the letter, "The Alzheimer Society of Manitoba along with the people with Alzheimer's disease and related dementia, their families and the people who care for them are frustrated by the lack of movement by your Government.

We urge you to uphold your prior commitment and take immediate action to form the stakehol der advisory committee to begin developing the implementation plan." A direct quote from a letter sent to this Doer government. Will the Premier tell us when his already long- overdue commitment will be established? When will he live up to his promise? Mr. Doer: As I mentioned, Mr. Speaker, three drugs that were not covered in the past are now covered, which was recommended by the organizations and is now implemented and in the Budget.

Secondly, there have been a number of legitimate improvements and upgrades to deal with recommendations dealing with individuals in personal care homes. Mr. Speaker, those recommendations have been implemented. There is a third set of recommenda- tions, nine recommendations that have been made to the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority. We have costed them out at being over $3 million. We are working on prioritizing those recommendations– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite talks about action.

There would have been cuts to Alzheimer's and every other program in Government if we had implemented the 1% solution the member opposite proposed in the election. Alzheimer Strategy Implementation Mr. Jack Reimer (Southdale): The Alzheimer association is complaining about the inaction of this Government. In early 2000, Manitoba's Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) directed Manitoba Health to develop an Alzheimer strategy in order to start plan- ning for the future. Fo ur years ago a steering committee was created.

There were representatives from Manitoba Health, regional health authorities, the Alzheimer association of Manitoba, the Centre on Aging, Manitoba Society of Seniors and the Seniors Directorate, who sought opinions from over 3000 individuals. In November 2000, nine key strategic initiatives were addressed and submitted to the minister. Mr. Speaker, nothing has happened on those nine strategic initiatives. There has been no meeting, there has been no contact. The Alzheimer association has written letters. Nothing has happened. Hon.

Jim Rondeau (Minister responsible for Healthy Living): I am pleased to inform the member I met with the Alzheimer group twice. I also went and talked to the area GM. Mr. Speaker, we have been in communication. The other thing is that our Government, unlike the members opposite, has moved forward on this

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2009 file. In the year 2000, we asked for the report to be developed. We have worked with all the stakeholders including the RHAs, the deliverers, everything else, government departments, and we have come up with a strategy. Since then what we have done is the strategy has been sent out to all RHAs, all different organizations, and what we have asked the Government depart- ments to do after we have developed the strategy is find out what best practices are happening in the RHAs.

That information is currently coming to us and different RHAs are developing a plan currently to address those nine issues. Mr. Reimer: Last year the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) told the Alzheimer association that a stakeholder advisory co mmittee would be formed. That was last year, in 2003. This has not happened. They are asking when will the stakeholder advisory committee be formed so they can implement some of the recommendations. The minister is stating they are talking to all these associations. The biggest part of the association is the Alzheimer association. They are not being consulted.

There is no action on the recommendations. I am asking this minister when will they have the meeting. When will the stakeholder advisory committees happen? When? Mr. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the member again that I have not only met with them twice, but we have discussed how we are looking at the recommendations that were outlined in the report, how we are getting information from the RHAs to see what is happening already in the nine recommendations. Mr. Speaker, it is important to note there is good work going on in the field in regard to Alzheimer's and many other health-related aspects.

What we have done is there is lots of good practice going on there. It does not make sense to re-create the wheel. What we have said to the Alzheimer strategy and to the association is we would get the information from the RHAs on what they are doing right now, right now what the areas are doing in relation to the strategy, and see how we can share best practice and not recreate the wheel. Mr. Reimer: The minister is referring to his meetings with the association. I will table a letter that they sent back to the minister, the honourable Minister of Healthy Living, and I will quote from the letter.

They are saying, this is to this minister that was just speaking, "We are frustrated by your depart- ment's obvious misinformation regarding the origin of the report, and we are concerned about the unnecessary duplication of the two-year research process spearheaded by the Department of Health." The letter to his department and to the minister is saying that they are not satisfied. He keeps talking about consultation. The consultation is not working. I am asking the minister when will there be some concrete action on this report.

The report that was started in 2000, tabled in October of 2002 and nothing has happened. Mr. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I look at the actions that this Government did. We were one of the first prov- inces to expand the Alzheimer's drugs to all people in Manitoba. We were one of the first provinces to develop an overarching Alzheimer strategy and then ask what is happening in the regions to make sure the best practices are out there. The member opposite does not have faith in the regional health authorities, the people who deliver health care services.

We know good work is going on in the RHAs, good work is going on in personal care homes, and good practice is going on in home care throughout the province to help support not just the Alzheimer's patients but the families. We are looking forward, we have commissioned a study, we are moving forward on this important issue and we will continue to move forward unlike members opposite. Conference of the Reducers Sponsorship Mrs.

Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): At a time when Manitoba Hydro is experiencing a minimum $359-million loss, at a time when the Government has raided Manitoba Hydro for $203 million and at a time when Manitoba Hydro has gone before the Public Utilities Board for a 7.5% increase in residential rates, why would this Government be demanding Manitoba Hydro provide sponsorship money for a conference in Toronto? Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, yesterday I reported to the House that Manitoba Hydro had provided a $5,000 sponsorship to an international conference in the largest market

2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 for energy in Canada that once again profiled what Manitoba Hydro and the Government of Manitoba are doing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this jurisdiction. This is giving us a first-class reputation not only in Canada but throughout the world. For $5,000, it is very good value for this province. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr.

Speaker, since the Manitoba Government is the only provincial government that is sponsoring this conference, and Manitoba Hydro is not even identified or receives any benefit from the sponsorship dollars that this Government demanded, will this Government indicate why they would force or demand that Manitoba Hydro pay sponsorship dollars when they get no benefit, when Manitoba Hydro is losing money? * (14:10) Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, there is an assumption there that Manitoba Hydro was forced to put $5,000 into the conference.

Anybody that knows the CEO and president of Manitoba Hydro, he only makes investments when he thinks it will serve the best interest of that Crown corporation which is owned by the people of Manitoba. I can tell you, that is a– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That Crown corporation has a world-class reputation, the lowest hydro rates not only in North America but now the lowest hydro rates in the world and one of the best greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies in the world. We are proud of the work they do.

We are happy to showcase them in the largest market in the world and in Canada through Toronto. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, at a time when the Minister of Finance has said that they are looking for ways to reduce expenditures, why would the Manitoba government force Manitoba Hydro to sponsor a conference in Toronto to pay to get the Premier's name on the agenda when he is not even there to speak? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): The member opposite would probably know that we do not ask our Crown corporations to pay our airfare to Monte Carlo to study gambling procedures so she should be a little careful when she is being holier than thou in this Chamber. Mr. Speaker– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I know members opposite mothballed the Conawapa project.

We had developed two sales to Ontario, the 200-megawatt sale that was agreed to in 1987, another sale that was agreed to in a feasibility study that was signed off by the former government, former Premier Filmon and former Premier Peterson. Regrettably, Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba govern- ment cancelled that Conawapa project. It is very consistent with the Cons ervatives. They cancelled Limestone, they cancelled Conawapa. We are out selling Hydro. Hydro is out selling hydro because we believe in a future of ec onomic growth. We are not the mothball party of Manitoba, Mr. Speaker.

Conference of the Reducers Sponsorship Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance suggests that the chairman of Manitoba Hydro cannot be forced to make any decisions that the Government asks, but when they ask him and he does not do it, they force it by legislation. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier, if it cost him $5,000 to get on the agenda, can he tell us what the other ministers that are on the agenda to speak today paid to get on their agenda. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, members might recall that we had a Manitoba task force chaired by Lloyd Axworthy on how we can be among the leaders in Canada on greenhouse gas emissions reduction. Our Minister of Energy, Science and Technology (Mr. Sale) is in Toronto explaining the Manitoba strategy on reducing greenhouse gases. We have received very positive editorials in the Toronto Star, as well as in the National Post, looking at how Manitoba Hydro can be a solution to gree nhouse gas emissions and the brown clouds floating overtop of the city of Toronto. This is a tremendous opportunity for this

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2011 province. I am proud that our minister is down there making the case for Manitoba as one of the solutions to greenhouse gas emissions in this country. Mr. Tweed: Mr. Speaker, the minister refers to a hired gun by the Province of Manitoba. Why is Lloyd Axworthy not down there making this presen- tation to the people then? Mr. Speaker, I asked a question and I will ask the minister again, if it cost the Premier (Mr.

Doer) of Manitoba $5,000 to get on the agenda, what did it cost the Minister of the Environment for Canada, the Minister of the Environment to the United Kingdom, the Minister of the Environment for Australia. Is the Premier the only one that has to pay to get on the speaking agenda? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the whole premise of their question is completely wrong. We have a prov- ince here that is among the leaders in the industrial world on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

We should be proud of the fact that people are coming from all over the world, from Australia, from Great Britain, from all sectors of North America, to see what we are doing in this province to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is something we should be proud of. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. It is getting very loud and it is getting very difficult to hear. I need to be able to hear the questions and the answers. Once again, I would just like to ask the co-operation of all honourable members. The honourable Minister of Finance, have you concluded your comments? Mr.

Selinger: If I had more time, I would be happy to– Mr. Speaker: Yes, you have about 16 seconds. Mr. Selinger: Sixteen seconds, well, I will see if I can get this quote on the record. In 1993, former Premier Filmon, "For that investment of $15,000 at the real Earth Summit, I think there are some long- term benefits to the province of Manitoba in terms of keeping our leadership in sustainable development first and foremost." We did it for 67 percent of that cost, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Tweed: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the minister does not want to say why he paid $5,000 to get the Premier (Mr. Doer) on the agenda.

I will ask him why he would ask or force Hydro to pay $5,000 to get on an agenda when they talk about it in the Financial Post . It talks about the reducers, the program they are putting on. They are suggesting that it is a very scary issue they are dealing with. I just want to know why, when Manitoba Hydro and Manitobans are suffering to such great length, he is forcing Manitoba Hydro to finance a government bill? If the Government wants to go out and spread their propaganda, that is up to them but they should not demand and force Hydro to do it. I would ask him to respond to that. Mr.

Selinger: Yesterday we saw in this House the members ask a whole bunch of questions of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh) that were based on absolutely no facts at all, completely wrong. I suggest the same thing is being done today. I suggest anybody that wants to phone the CEO and president of Manitoba Hydro and ask him whether he voluntarily made a $5,000 contribution so the Minister of Hydro and the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology, Mr.

Tim Sale, could make the case for Manitoba in Toronto, we will understand that is a good investment for promoting this province in an international media centre on a global basis. [interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. Before recognizing the honour- able Member for Emerson, I want to once again remind all honourable members, when addressing ministers, it is by their portfolio, not by their name, and members by their constituency and not by names. * (14:20) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Compensation for Producers Mr.

Jack Penner (Emerson): As everybody in this Chamber knows, we are approaching, on May 20, the first anniversary of the one and only BSE case in Canada. The Government of Manitoba has told the people of Manitoba in a series of advertisements that they have made $180 million available to offset the damages that have been incurred by BSE to livestock producers. During the Estimates, however, we found out that the actual amount of money paid out to

2012 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 producers in programs was $31.9 million. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) said they had allocated $46 million, yet they advertised $180 million. Can the Minister of Agriculture tell us which of these numbers is correct? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, indeed it is approaching the anniversary of the first case of BSE in Canada, and we are hopeful that we will see movement. The U.S. Secretary of Agriculture said they would deal with this in an expedited way. We hope that she will live up to that word.

The con- sultation period is complete. They are now reviewing the comments. If the U.S. government was going to make a decision based on science, there is no reason why our borders should continue to be closed. They should be open. There also is a precedent that has been set. In no other country before, when there has been a case of BSE, has boxed beef ever moved. That has been moving, and we hope that we will see the border open very soon. Mr. Penner: The Minister of Agriculture evades the number. There is good reason why.

She has told us, through requests we made through her department, that they have actually only paid out $31.9 million when they advertised that they had made $180 million available. We know that they have driven farmers into debt by $58.9 million in this province. We also know that the Minister of Finance has stated in Estimates that they only allocated $46 million. Which of these numbers is correct? Which number is correct? Ms. Wowchuk: We did make available a significant amount of money to producers. In fact, we made close to $180 million available. Of those programs, that money was made available.

Some of it is still available, and we have paid out on programs. People have certainly taken advantage of the programs. It is quite interesting, Mr. Speaker. On one hand the Opposition is saying that we should not be spending money, on the other hand they are criti- cizing us because we are not spending enough money. In total about $98.3 million has been spent by the Province on BSE programs. This does not include the money spent by the federal government. So the numbers that the member is quoting are wrong. Mr. Penner: Mr.

Speaker, I want to table for the minister's edification her own advertisements, and the numbers that I have received out of her office directly which she gave to me. They will prove that my numbers are correct, and if they are not, then she gave me the wrong numbers. I want to ask the minister what damage do you think you have caused by repeatedly telling farmers of Manitoba, Mr. Speaker– Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Reluctantly, Mr.

Speaker, I just wonder if you could remind the honourable member that questions and remarks in the House are to be directed through the Speaker, which means that rather than using words like "you" or "Mr. Minister" or "Mrs. Minister," it is a description in the third person. That is to reduce the tensions that sometimes develop in this House. It is for a good reason. It is a good tradition. I think we should try and uphold it. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, he does have a point of order.

All questions and answers should be through the Chair, and I would ask the co-operation of all honourable members. * * * Mr. Penner: I want to ask the minister, then, through you, Mr. Speaker, whether she recognizes the damage she has done by repeatedly telling the farmers of Manitoba that the borders would open when she was in Minnesota, when she was in South Dakota, when she came back from Washington and others, and I believe that Washington trip was a U.S. holiday. Mr.

Speaker, we have also been told by the minister that the only amount of money that she has paid out of the $180 million she advertised was $31.9 million and borrowed or lent farmers another $58.9, driving them deeper into debt. What are farmers in Manitoba supposed to use for money to buy food for th eir children, to buy feed

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2013 for their cattle and to support the expenditures on an ongoing basis on their farms? What are they supposed to use for money, Mr. Speaker? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the member opposite is also hopeful that the border is going to open very soon. All of us are hopeful that the U.S. will make a decision based on science. In reality, if the U.S. was making a decision based on science, the border would be open.

However, I want to say that the decision by the U.S. to open the border to boxed beef and for Mexico to open their border to boxed beef from Canada has been significant. The number of animals moving to market is very high, Mr. Speaker, and there are animals being slaughtered and farmers are having income. Under the loan program that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) called for, he said, "Put in place a loan program or cash advance." He called– Mr. Speaker: Order. Gaming Facilities Brandon Casino Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr.

Speaker, only two years ago, residents of Brandon voted against a casino for their city. Brandon residents have spoken, yet this past weekend, the minister responsible for gambling in the province told a Brandon newspaper that he would not rule out government moving forward with a government casino on its own or in partnership with someone else. What part of no does the minister not under- stand? Will he today give residents of Brandon an assurance that his Government will not consider building or licensing a new casino independently or with another group in the city of Brandon? Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Stewardship): I think the member knows that we set in place a process in terms of First Nations casinos. One is up and running and despite the doomsday suggestions from members opposite, it is proving to be a major asset for the community. It is very strongly supported by the town of The Pas in addition to OCN and the R.M. Mr. Speaker, discussions have been ongoing in terms of the other process.

The member knows there are no other Aboriginal casinos currently being looked at other than the Brokenhead Casino, which was one of the original five that were announced as part of the process back in 2000. Mr. Goertzen: I am disappointed that the minister who represents the community of Brandon did not have the guts to stand up and answer this question. The mayor of Brandon, Mr. Dave Burgess, was quoted as saying that he would not support a casino in Brandon. The mayor respects the decision made by Brandon residents only two years ago. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Ms.

Mihychuk), the same member who in 1999 said that there is nothing worse than gambling, has a responsibility to stand up for local municipal deci- sions. Would she go to the minister responsible for gambling and tell him that no means no, and there will not be consideration given to building a casino in Brandon? Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable First Minister, I just want to ask the co-operation of all honourable members.

The use of the words "having the guts" has been ruled unparliamentary by some Speakers and it has been ruled parliamentary by other Speakers, but any words used that could cause a disturbance in the House could be ruled unparliamentary by any Speaker. I just want to caution all honourable members, pick your words carefully. * (14:30) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I was just going to point out to the member opposite that there is a Minister responsible for Lotteries (Mr. Smith) and there is an Acting Minister responsible for Gaming and, please, there are different responsibilities.

The separation, I believe, was made after the Desjardins report. We have carried that out and we would like to live with that in this Chamber. Mr. Goertzen: I am sorry for using that terminology. Apparently, the Member for Brandon just does not have the nerve to stand up and answer the question. The minister responsible for gambling has put out a request for a study to examine expanding gambling in the province of Manitoba. Will the minister responsible for gambling today just recognize that what we need in Manitoba is not

2014 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 more casinos, we need a long-term, economic plan and scrap any idea for building new casinos in Manitoba or in Brandon? Mr. Speaker: I just want to remind members when referring to ministers, the proper titles are available to all members and it is the honourable Minister for Gaming, not minister for gambling. It is the honour- able Minister for Gaming (Mr. Sale). [interjection] Order.

If members wish to have titles to ministers or constituencies of members, we will be happy to supply them for any member who is unsure of what the titles or constituencies are for members. Mr. Doer: I would ask the member again to perhaps do a little homework before he comes into the Chamber and understand the difference between the Minister responsible for the Lotteries Corporation (Mr. Smith) and the Minister responsible for Gaming (Mr. Sale) and the Acting Minister of Gaming. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, he c ould address the question to the proper minister in the future. Point of Order Mr.

Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is one thing for the Premier to scold us as to how we pose our questions, but the reality is that we pose the questions to the Government. Recently we have seen that the Premier has taken it upon himself to be the minister of all things and stands up on many issues that are asked of his Government.

I suggest that if his minister is not capable of answering the question, then at least he should answer the question and not simply admonish this side of the House. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised–the honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I just remind the House it is up to the Government to decide who answers questions. That is not a point of order. Mr.

Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Official Oppo sition House Leader, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all honourable members that questions, when they are put through the Chair to the Government, it is entirely up to the Government which minister they choose to answer the questions. Wuskwatim Dam Export Sales Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I table today testimony from Mr. Ken Adams, vice- president of Manitoba Hydro, before the Minnesota State Senate Jobs, Energy and Community Develop- ment Committee on March 12 of this year.

He said about Wuskwatim, "In fact, by the time we get this generating station in place, we will not be in a position to sell as much energy throughout our export customers as we do today." Mr. Adams said explicitly that Wuskwatim is not designed for export sales. It is designed solely to address rising energy consumption in Manitoba. I ask the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology (Mr. Sale) to con- firm what the vice-president of Manitoba Hydro said with respect to the Wuskwatim dam. Is this dam being built solely for the purpose of the internal needs of Manitoba? Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): I will take this specific question as notice. [interjection] Well, Mr. Speaker, okay, I apologize because I know you cannot take it as notice and then answer so I will answer it on the next question. Mr. Speaker: Just a reminder to all members or ministers, when taking a question as notice, you cannot use a

preamble or post-amble. When taking a question as notice, there is no

preamble to or post- amble after. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Adams' testimony in Minnesota was quite clear. He talked about correcting what he referred to as the misconception that Manitoba has plans to sell new power to the United States. But, strangely, Mr. Speaker, three days later, he testified before Manitoba's Clean Environment Commission to say that Wuskwatim dam is being primarily built for the export market to increase exports of Manitoba electricity to the United States. I would ask the Premier, which is it. Is Wuskwatim dam being built for the internal market of Manitoba or for the export market?

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2015 Mr. Doer: Just in general terms, first of all, we are pleased that all the opposition to the second Northern States Power deal, the Xcel agreement, have now been cleared and we have confirmation of the $1.7- billion sale to Minnesota. I am pleased the member has raised that because that is truly very important news for Manitoba. Secondly, Mr.

Speaker, the Northern States Power sale, which was opposed by members opposite, and the Limestone Dam had a component of the construction dedicated to export sales to the United States and a portion of the sale to deal with increased demand in Manitoba. There have been three measures to deal with demand in Manitoba initiated by the hydro utility. Mr. Speaker, one has been the conservation measure for the 250 megawatts, the virtual dam that has conserved energy.

The second measure is to introduce more renewable energy such as wind power, which has not quite concluded.Thirdly, the Wuskwatim dam will equal one third of that, one third of the total 750 megawatts to deal with the future needs of Manitoba. It will mean that the gap of exports and domestic use will not be reduced in terms of domestic use as demand goes up. Mr. Gerrard: I table further transcripts and testi- mony, Mr. Speaker, showing very clearly that Mr. Adams was saying one thing on March 12, and he was saying completely the opposite on March 15.

I would ask the Premier, given that we are in the middle of the Wuskwatim dam review right now, that this is a critical process very important to the province of Manitoba, how can this process have integrity when the chief spokesperson for Manitoba Hydro before the Clean Environment Commission is saying so diametrically opposing opinions so close together. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the member opposite that the matter of Wuskwatim is before a quasi-judicial body.

It is not the practice of a member of this Legislature to necessarily take views that the quasi-judicial body has been charged with taking. We have been very careful in our answers since the matter has gone to the panel not to prejudice the findings. I think the Clean Environment Commission and the lawyers, there are lots of lawyers at the Clean Environment Commission hired by lots of people who are opposed to Wuskwatim and in favour of Wuskwatim, will be able to identify in testimony, in cross-examination, the point raised by the member opposite.

I understand what the two issues are in terms of domestic versus export sales because I understand it is the issue of, over the next 10 years, what the gap will be between domestic sales and export sales. I am sure that the Clean Environment Commission and the quasi-judicial body which is made up of members from the PUB will be equipped to deal with it. I am surprised the member opposite would have so little respect for a quasi-judicial body that he feels he has to turn this Legislature into that forum. * (14:40) Red River Floodway Expansion Impact of Ground Water Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr.

Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Water Stewardship. Recently I raised in this House constituent concerns regarding the potential effects a deeper floodway channel could have on ground water in the areas of St. Clements, Springfield and East St. Paul. My question is to the minister: Will the minister update the House regarding the design of the flood- way that will address these concerns? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Stewardship): This is a very important question. I credit the Member for Selkirk for having raised it.

When the original floodway was built, there were significant impacts on ground water. When we announced the floodway, in fact, when the Premier (Mr. Doer) made the announcement, we made it very clear that, in addition to focussing on improved flood protection for Winnipeg and parts of the Red River Valley, Mr. Speaker, we would give prime focus to protecting against potential ground water impacts and mitigating against them. I am pleased to report to the House that the design now from the engineers indicates that we may not have to go more than two feet deep if at all.

That is going to have a very significant benefit in terms of minimizing impact on ground water. We will also be setting up a mitigation fund through the Floodway Authority.

2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 The news that will be taken to the public over the next matter of weeks is that we may be able, in fact we probably will be able to now minimize the impact on ground water. That is very important to e member's constituents. th Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Minnedosa Rotary Club Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, on April 24 the Minnedosa Rotary Club celebrated their 60th anniversary of community service to Minnedosa and area.

I had the honour of attending this extra- ordinary event at the Minnedosa Curling Club and was delighted to share a few words with those in attendance. The Minnedosa club was most successful in bringing together members of the public and past associates of the Rotary Club at this event. With refreshments, speakers and displays about the club, everyone had the opportunity to relax and learn a little bit more about the history, commitments and hard work of Rotary Club members. Founded in April 1943, the Minnedosa Rotary Club has worked on numerous projects in and around the community, Mr.

Speaker , such as blood donor clinics, constructing recreational facilities and purchasing medical equipment for the local hospital. Mr. Speaker, Minnedosa club members truly live out the Rotary motto, Service Above Self, which is evident in the projects they are committed to. Currently there are three noteworthy commitments of the Minnedosa Rotary, including the handi-van, adults' and children's literacy and youth programs.

At the celebration the local Rotary Club announced their most recent community project, partnering with the Minnedosa Child Care Co-operative to raise funds and community awareness on this important com- munity initiative. I would like to thank all 19 Minnedosa Rotary Club members for their effo rts in making the 60th anniversary celebration a success. I commend their efforts to serve the community and contribute to so many worthwhile causes, both locally and around the world. The community of Minnedosa would not be the same without the Rotary Club.

Once again, congratulations to the Rotary Club on 60 successful years of community service. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. University of Manitoba Graduation Powwow Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members of the Legislature to the 15th Annual Traditional Graduation Powwow held at the University of Manitoba, which I attended on May 1. This ceremony recognizes the Aboriginal graduates of both the University of Manitoba and the University of Winnipeg.

Hundreds of Aboriginal families, friends and supporters gathered to celeb rate the achievements of the over 100 new graduates who participated. There were also over a dozen traditional singing groups. I was particularly proud to watch a dear friend of mine, Meredith Brownlee, be recognized as the sole graduate from the Faculty of Dentistry. This celebration mirrors many promising trends and accomplishments in our province. Mr. Speaker, the University of Manitoba is graduating more Aboriginal doctors, lawyer s and engineers than any other university in Canada.

Manitoba's university Aboriginal enrolment has increased 7.7 percent from 2000 to 2004, and Aboriginal enrolment at our colleges is up 15.5 percent over the same period. ACCESS programs began under the NDP government of the early 1970s. Sadly, these valuable programs suffered tragic setbacks in the 1990s when our predecessors, the prov incial Tories and the federal government, cut support to the ACCESS programs. I am very proud to say that this Government's 2004-2005 Budget increases our support by 3.5 percent, Mr.

Speaker, including $175,000 for the new ACCESS program, the Integrated Aboriginal Education Program. We are also committed to working with northern and Aboriginal communities to develop the University College of the North so that post-secondary education becomes even more accessible and viable for northern and Aboriginal people. Mr. Speaker, I wish to recognize the efforts of this Government's Minister of Advanced Education (Ms. McGifford) and the Mini ster of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. La thlin), but, more import-

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2017 antly, on behalf of members of the House, I wish to extend our congratulations to the many Aboriginal students who have recently graduated from the University of Manitoba and the University of Winnipeg. They are and should be justifiably proud of what they have accomplished. Thank you. Amy Homestead Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Manitoba has a rich history. A few years ago, four Canadians were given the opportunity of a lifetime to become modern pioneers and live the life of early settlers for 11 months in a small community a few kilometres north of Stonewall.

Mr. Speaker, the Amy Homestead in Argyle has since become the subject of a celebrated historical documentary series called Pioneer Quest . There are many amazing and historical attractions in Manitoba and the Amy Homestead is definitely a stop that any Manitoban should take. We are fortunate today to have such oppor- tunities to experience what our early pioneers did to survive. When you arrive in Argyle, your first task is to hike a quarter of a mile down Old Faith Trail which, in the days of the pioneers, was an old Red River cart trail.

Once you arrive at the homestead, you can explore and experience what the four modern pioneers did. I encourage all Manitobans young and old to contact Charlie Amy and visit his homestead. The experience will enrich your appreciation of the trails that our pioneers had to face to settle our great province. This is one of our great historical tourist attractions and will prove to be a great learning tool for our youth over the years. Thank you. Victoria Hospital Guild Ms. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Fort Garry): Mr.

Speaker, I rise before the House today to speak in regard to the annual fundraising bridge luncheon I attended on May 4 at the Waverley Heights Community Club. This event was held by the volunteer guild of the Victoria General Hospital. The bridge luncheon is one of many fundraising initiatives organized by the guild. This year, 200 people came out to play many exciting games of bridge as well as to enjoy an appetizing lunch. The proceeds of this event helped to fund and finance equipment, furnishings and scholarships for the hospital.

I would like to thank the guild's volunteers and executive for organizing this important event. It was a delight to participate and experience the enthusia sm of all the bridge players. I would also like to commend the guild on attaining their 50th anniversary. In 1954, the guild of Victoria General Hospital was established at the River Avenue location. In 1970, the auxiliary and the guild amalgamated under the name of The Guild of Victoria General Hospital. Since their inception, they have enhanced patient care and services in the hospital.

We are all aware that a strong, vibrant vol- unteer community is an important asset, especially in regard to our hospitals. The work of the volunteers of the Victoria General Hospital are no exception. They share their time, talents and life experiences to enrich the lives of the many patients and visitors. Their smiling faces and helping hands are a welcoming feature for all the people that visit the hospital. I would also like to take this time to thank the organizers and many volunteers of the event and to commend the guild on the attainment of their 50th anniversary.

Once again, I would like to thank the organizers for their 50 years of serv ice and dedication. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (14:50) Wuskwatim Dam Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, the Wuskwatin Dam in northern Manitoba is an important dam for Manitobans, those in northern Manitoba and those in southern Manitoba. It is important that Manitobans know why the Wuskwatim Dam is to be built: for Manitoba's needs, or for export.

It is important that the environmental review be carried out to high standards so that the goal of the project and any environmental impacts can be clearly known and understood and so that appropriate miti- gation measures can be unde rtaken to the extent that they are needed. It is also very important that there is a clear understanding of the project and its goals and impacts, Mr. Speaker, in order that public concerns can be adequately considered and met.

2018 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 Mr. Speaker, it is to be regretted that the Manitoba government has changed plans on more than one occasion with respect to the procedure for the environmental review. Indeed, the Manitoba government changed the process twice partway through the procedure, hardly a good thing to do for an important quasi-judicial process. It now comes to light that a senior official with Manitoba Hydro, the proponent, has sent very different messages when speaking at two different venues. Before the Minnesota State Legislature, Mr.

Adams said the Wuskwatim Dam was being built solely for internal energy needs in Manitoba. At the Clean Environment Commission three days later, the Vice-President for Manitoba Hydro said the Wuskwatim Dam is being built to supply the export market. The lack of clarity by the senior Manitoba Hydro spokesperson is causing confusion and putting at peril the integrity of the Wuskwatim Dam review process. ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Would you please call Supply, according to the agreement yesterday, in one place. As well, in the House, Mr.

Speaker, would you please call the following business: second reading, motions 49 and 50; debate on third reading on Bill 13; third readings on Bills 17 and 18; debate on second readings on Bills 9, 14, 20, 26, 29, 31 and 40. Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed, one

section of the Committee of Supply will now meet concurrently with the House in Room 255. SECOND READINGS Bill 49–The Municipal Amendment Act Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): I move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the honourable Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Mr. Bjornson), that Bill 49, The Municipal Amendment Act, now be read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Ms. Mihychuk: I am pleased to introduce for second reading Bill 49, The Municipal Amendment Act.

Bill 49 proposes amendments to The Municipal Act, which provides the legisl ative framework for all municipalities outside of Winnipeg. Most significantly, the bill proposes to give new enabling authority, Mr. Speaker, to municipalities outside of Winnipeg to use tax incremental financing, an innovative funding model to support community and neighbourhood revitalization efforts. It will provide complementary broad authorities to municipalities to develop tax credit programs and grant programs.

Other proposed amendments will provide tools to municipalities that are contemplating restructuring by amalgamating and will give municipalities greater flexibility when dealing with mobile homes. These amendments demonstrate government's commitment to municipalities to making sure they are equipped with the right tools to manage their affairs efficiently and effectively. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik), that we adjourn debate. Motion agreed to. Bill 50–The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act Hon.

MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Mr. Bjornson), that Bill 50, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce for second reading Bill 50, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act. Bill 50 proposes amendments to The Municipal Assessment Act, which provides the legislative framework for the assessment of property in the province.

Two amendments are proposed in this bill. The first amendment gives municipalities and non-profit organizations the ability to work together to ensure

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2019 continued operations of municipally owned property, notably local community clubs. Issues related to tax liability have hampered the ability of municipalities to devolve control over such facilities to non-profit gr oups that have expressed interest in operating them. This amendment addresses those issues. The second amendment will exempt trails owned by the Manitoba Recreational Trail Association and similar non-profit organizations from taxation.

The amendment removes a barrier to the growth of the trail system and enhances Manitoba's portion of the Trans-Canada Trail network. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), that we adjourn debate. Motion agreed to. DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE AND THIRD READINGS Bill 13–The Public Schools Amendment Act (Appropriate Educational Programming) Mr. Speaker: Resumed debate on concurrence and third reading of Bill 13, The Public Schools Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach).

Is it the will of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Russell? Agreed? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: No? There is no agreement? Okay, the bill will not remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Russell. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to put a few words on the record regarding Bill 13, The Public Schools Amendment Act.

Essentially, this bill requires school boards to provide appropriate educational programming to each pupil and in respect of that programming allows the minister to establish standards and a dispute resolution process. These proposals that originated in the Special Education Review Initiative, known as SERI, were started by the previous Progressive Conservative government in 1995 and were reported in January of 1999. Mr. Speaker, we have consistently encouraged this Government to act on the recommendations of the SERI report. I am glad that this bill has seen the light of day here in the Legislature.

I recently sent a letter, however, to the Mini ster of Education (Mr. Bjornson) requesting a copy of the regulations for this bill. I guess it is unfortunate that I have yet to hear back as to what the regulations are. There are some concerns that came up during the committee process, Mr. Speak er, that the regulations could potentially cost a fairly significant amount of money to school divisions, depending on how the regulations are drafted. Also, there were some concerns with respect to lack of consultation in this process as well.

I hope that the minister will agree to consult all stakeholders about the proposed regulations and certainly ta ke their concerns into consideration while drafting the regulations. * (15:00) I would have hoped that the minister could have provided Manitobans with a copy of the regulations before the bill was passed. Unfortunately, this has not taken place. We have no idea what the impact will be on the school divisions at this point in time in terms of the costs associated with this. Having said that, Mr.

Speaker, we certainly on this side of the House support the principle of this bill and have encouraged the Government to bring this bill forward. We recognize the importance of the passage of this bill. So at this time I would like to suggest that we agree to pass this bill on. Thank you very much. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise to say a few words on Bill 13. This bill is an important bill for people with special needs children in our school system. Mr. Speaker, it provides the beginning of a legislative framework for children with special needs.

It means that parents are going to be able to go to the school board and say that it is very important for my child with special needs that there be appropriate education provided. Mr. Speaker, the critical part of this bill actually comes in the development of the regulations, which

2020 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 we do not have here, which are very important, because they need to balance urban and rural needs and they need to make sure that there is a process in place which can individualize the plans, the educa- tional plan for each child with special needs and be able to find a balance here in what is appropriate for the child and of course what is deliverable and affordable by the school system. What is significant and, I think, important and one of the reasons why I support this bill is that it puts the child first.

By saying that there must be a legal framework for special needs children, it means that the child has some legal protection, the parents and the family have some legal protection when they feel that things are not being done in the way that they should be done. Let us hope that the minister will consult carefully and widely. I have already talked with the minister in the Estimates process and emphasized the need to have a process which is open and which, in fact, as many people as pos sible are aware of so that they can come forward w ith their ideas.

The wide range of children with special needs means that it becomes very important to be able to adapt to the wide range of children and have a flexible enough approach so that it can give what this bill asked for, which is an appropriate level of education for special needs children. It is, I think, significant here that in the change that we have seen in the last number of years to include special needs children within schools to make sure that they are part of the regular classroom, and to make sure that the opportunities are there for special needs children, that this bill can make a significant contribution.

I believe that there is a wide variety of circumstances already in Manitoba, in schools in Manitoba and in other jurisdictions which can provide examples of what is an appropriate education. There are research studies which would suggest that for certain children with special needs there is a research base one can draw on in terms of making decisions and making individual plans. So I am pleased to support this bill. We as Liberals are pleased to support this bill.

I believe that whether we are dealing with children with physical disabilities, with mental disabilities, with problems like autism or Asperger's syndrome, conditions like epilepsy; that whatever the special need may be, there is an opportunity to provide for that child an appropriate educational environment. I think it is timely not only in the development of education in this province but, Mr.

Speaker, I think, it is also timely in the development of educational assist devices, we might call them, whether it be computers, the Internet, instruments or technology that special needs children can use to help them with learning. We are at a time when there can be a lot more flexibility than there would have been possible say 30 or 40 years ago. So the timing of this bill, though a little slower I might add than the other provinces, nevertheless, comes now and we will be pleased that it is coming, is a step forward and a step forward that we as Liberals welcome. Mr. Speaker: Any other speakers? No?

Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is the concurrence and third reading of Bill 13, The Public Schools Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] CONCURRENCE AND THIRD READINGS Bill 17–The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act Hon. Diane McGifford (Minister of Advanced Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade (Ms.

Mihychuk), that Bill 17, The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and now be read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: No.

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2021 Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to just put a few words on the record in regard to Bill 17, The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act. I think this bill is a good one. It is strengthening an existing act and expanding the categories of people eligible to seek protection under the act to include persons in dating relationships and family members who have not lived together. Interestingly, I was listening to a radio program the other day.

On the radio program it talked about, at any given time in North America, 200 000 people are being stalked. Stalking often leads to domestic violence. But in the one particular instance that they spoke about, it was in an office situation where a young man was trying to date a young woman and she did not want to date him. Of course, co-workers could not understand what the problem was. He is a young urban professional, a nice-looking man. They did not understand. He kept pursuing her to the point where it became an obsession, that he kept phoning her. He showed up everywhere that she was. She became frightened.

When she became frightened, then she became very afraid that he would show up at her door. This kind of thing leads to obsessions that can lead to violence. We certainly need to think that we could now protect people against people that would pursue people like this. * (15:10) Under this new legislation, I think that this person would likely be able to get a protection order before a violent or a fatal assault might occur. Another point is that stalking and domestic violence are not always perpetrated on the woman.

Sometimes the woman is the one doing the stalking and in this case it is much harder to prove that a woman is stalking a man because it just does not seem that a man would be unfriendly to that idea, that a woman was pursuing him. But in the case that they talked about, this was, Mr. Speaker, in fact, the case, where the man became very frightened of this woman who was always, always there, and he could not seem to get rid of her. In fact, she was a student of his, which even made it more difficult.

I think we all remember the movie Fatal Attraction, where a physical attraction became one of aggression and control and ultimately death. There are just a few concerns with the bill, I guess. That is, how is it going to be enforced? I think if a protection order cannot be enforced, then I am not sure that it is valuable. This protection order is valuable as long as there are the resources there to make sure that it is enforced and the people actually do get the protection they are requesting. Often, the offenders are released and then get to go back and re- offend.

We have seen that time and time again with many cases, where someone has been released and they go and assault and actually kill people while they are out on bail. Domestic violence and stalking are threatening. We need to protect those people who are vulnerable, and any step in this direction is a good one, but, as I say, it needs to be enforceable. Mr. Speaker, when you talk about domestic violence and stalking, these are control issues, they are power issues and related to anger, jealousy, guilt and low self-esteem.

There is a delicate balance between love and hate, and I think once two people have had any kind of relationship, particularly if it has been an intimate one, then the relationship lasts forever in some form and often becomes a pathological relationship, where one partner does not want to be kept apart from the other one. In fact, we see women constantly taking back men who have been abusive and violent to them because they want to believe that this person will change their ways.

We have seen it in the case of Sheryl Zechel, from the member from Beausejour's area, where she let the man back into the house and he killed her. I would just like to say that we do support this bill, anything that will help prevent stalking and violence toward women and men. Mr. Speaker, I think that enforcement is key here and enforcement of protection orders. There needs to be a corresponding increase in resources and to make sure enforcement happens. We do not see provision for that in this Budget, so we have some concerns. However, I would just like to say that I am in support of this bill. Mr.

Speaker: The honourable Member for Fort Garry. Ms. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Fort Garry): Oh, no. Sorry. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, because normally I go back and forth from

2022 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 one side of the House to the other, so the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): We are very pleased to support the bill. We have supported this bill in second reading and in committee and again in third reading. We will support the bill. The bill itself broadens the scope of our legislation, the legislation that we introduced in the nineties when it was touted in fact as the strongest legislation of its kind with respect to anti-stalking.

The bill just simply broadens the scope of the legislation to include other family members other than just spouses. For that reason and for many other reasons in terms of protect ion of women who are in situations like that, we support the principle of the bill. Our concerns were in second reading and in committee with respect to enforcement, monitoring and resources. Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough to simply expand the scope of the bill and to expand the kinds of duties that were expanded within this bill without in fact increasing resources to ensure that the bill is enforced.

We have said time and time again that resources are important to allocate toward this initiative and without resources, of course, we can pass what we want, but if we do not enforce it, it is useless, so our concern with this bill itself is with respect to resources and the allocation of resources to ensure that the bill is enforced. Another concern that I had, was in fact yesterday in Estimates when I brought up to the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Mackintosh) with respect to the fact that Justice Scurfield about three or four weeks ago, declared some of the initial anti-stalking legislation, he proclaimed part of that to be unconstitutional. My concern was at the time that it took almost a month before the Justice Minister stood up and decided he was going to appeal that decision. I think that shows to me that he maybe has even weak support for his own bill. Why would he have taken almost a month to appeal a decision which directly affects Bill 17, the very bill that he is in fact introducing in the Legislature?

I was really concerned about that, and his answer was not very comforting. His answer was that they had to take time to make sure that they formulated an appeal in the proper fo rmat and in the proper language. Well, I reviewed that appeal. There is nothing magic to that appeal at all. That appeal should have taken no longer than a day or two, not almost a month. That to me tells me that the minister himself does not seem to even support his own Bill 17. I have had some concerns over that.

I think that, hopefully in the future, when there are constitutional challenges to Bill 17 and even the bill that it is broadening its effect, the minister does go forward and he does make it a priority of his Government to ensure that the provisions are consti- tutionally defended and defended properly and within a reasonable period of time. Having said that, as I have said before, we do support Bill 17. It does expand the scope of the legislation that we had in fact introduced in the 1990s, being The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Act.

This is simply an amendment to our existing legislation and it expands only the scope to which our existing legislation applies. I look forward to other submissions. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I, too, wanted to say a few words on the record prior to this bill being given third reading, which appears to be coming to a vote, Mr. Speaker. The Manitoba Liberal Party supports Bill 17. We see it as a step forward. I want to make reference to in essence two parts that really come to mind. One is the expanding of the eligibility to seek civil orders of protection, which will help victims of violence.

The second issue is the sunset of three years, once they have been issued. * (15:20) Both of these, Mr. Speaker, I think are ones that were discussed at meetings that I had within the constituency and I have had opportunity to discuss with others. All in all it is a positive bill. We do not have a problem in terms of its quick passage.

Having said that, there are other issues related to violence that I think that the government of the day does need to give more attention to, issues such as seniors and others that are in vulnerable positions, taking a more proactive approach at dealing with some of those day-to-day issues of violence. I truly believe that government does need to do more. We wait for government to come up with

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2023 initiatives where we can contribute to the debate to encourage the Government, Mr. Speaker, to come up with initiatives that will really make a difference. With those few words, we are prepared to see the bill pass third reading. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Any other speakers on the bill? The Member for Fort Garry? Are there any other speakers on the bill? Okay. I am going to call the question. Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr.

Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 17, The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 18–The Improved Enforcement of Support Payments (Various Acts Amended) Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education (Ms.

McGifford), that Bill 18, The Improved Enforcement of Support Payments (Various Acts Amended) Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to put a few words on the record about Bill 18, The Improved Enforcement of Support Payments (Various Acts Amended) Act. This legislation makes a number of changes with respect to Manitoba's maintenance enforcement system, including support payments for children and/or a spouse. For example, Mr.

Speaker, penalties will be assessed when a person fails to make the required maintenance payments and this penalty will be payable to the person entitled to receive maintenance. It also provides for up to $500 in compensation to the person entitled to the maintenance payment should the person required to pay maintenance miss payments. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, enhanced garnishment provisions will enable automatic and continuous paycheque deductions of child support payments where there has been a pattern of default. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, the legislation provides that garnishing orders for support received from other jurisdictions with which Manitoba has jurisdiction, the Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act, will be given legal effect in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, in an ideal world, legislation respecting maintenance enforcement would not be required. People would simply fulfill their monetary obligations to their children and their former spouses. However, we know that up to 50 percent of marriages will end in separation or divorce and often there will be children affected by marital break-up.

It is estimated frequently separation/divorces not only involve spouses but also involve children. I agree with the Minister of Justice that we need to send a strong message w ith respect to support payments and the obligation of parents to continue to financially support their children after the dissolution of family union.

It is the obligation of both spouses to support their children under the age of 18 years and it is also the obligation of both spouses to support children between the ages of 18 to 25 if the child is attending an educational program on a full-time basis or if the child has an illness or a disability which makes them dependent. I daresay that there is not one member of this legislature who has not been in contact by someone who has encountered difficulty in collecting the maintenance enforcement payments to which they or their children are entitled. Mr.

Speaker, their cases are heartbreaking and it is important that we take every opportunity to explore new and improved means of ensuring support payments are paid. The amount of child support payable by a parent is determined by the rules and tables in the Manitoba Child Support Guidelines and is dependent upon the income of the parent and the number of children to be supported. The amount to be paid can be varied due to the demonstrated undue hardship on the parent.

2024 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 Unfortunately, we know what happens when such support is withheld. It is known that more than 50 percent of clients in some Manitoba food banks are made up of single-parent families. Many of these clients are women with children who have separated or divorced from their husbands and are having trouble making ends meet. All too often women with children are forced to seek help from social assistance or from food banks when they do not receive their support payments. Single parenthood discriminates.

In 1996, 71.6 percent of single mothers in Manitoba lived below the poverty line and often women are the custodial parents in a marriage break-up. Women often have lower paying jobs compared to their spouses and often they have no job at all. The Prairie Women's Health report of February 2004 indicates that mounting evidence shows that women with low incomes have acute housing needs, are at a greater risk of living in unsafe and unhealthy environments and require specific supports to achieve stable and affordable housing. This stems from the high incidence of poverty among women. Mr.

Speaker, one in five Canadian women live in poverty and the proportions of women in poverty who are Aboriginal, immigrants or refugees, disabled, seniors and youth have yet higher levels of poverty. Penalizing those who do not pay child or spousal support is one way to reinforce the importance of meeting their legal obligations to pay support. It is also critical that garnishing orders and support orders can be enforced outside of Manitoba's boundaries so that a person who flees our province is unable to shirk their responsibilities to their children or former spouse.

People who entered into relationships must be cognizant of their legal and moral responsibilities. I agree that it is important that we regularly review and strengthen maintenance enforcement legislation so that children and fam ilies receive the support to which they are entitled. Mr. Speaker, those who would shirk those responsibilities must be held accountable. Maintenance orders are an obligation that must be met for the benefit of Manitoba children and families. I look forward to a further discussion of Bill 18, The Improved Enforcement of Support Payments Act, when it reaches committee. Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise to talk to Bill 18, The Improved Enforcement of Support Payments Act. I do this today to speak particularly with the very significant problems that have occurred in The Pas as a result of the approach that this Government has taken in terms of maintenance enforcement. What used to be a pretty simple system in The Pas, where on payday, usually the man, one spouse, brought in the maintenance support cheque and it was handed over to the other spouse, Mr.

Speaker, and immediately the money was accessible very quickly in a user-friendly justice system approach, has now been turned into a system in The Pas which is anything but user-frie ndly to those who are involved on one side or the other with respect to maintenance enforcement payments. * (15:30) This is not to take away from the fact that this is an important process and that it is very important that a spouse who is receiving support, most commonly the woman, is well supported. But, Mr. Speaker, I speak today to urge the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Mackintosh), in implementing this legislation, to make sure that he in fact consults widely around Manitoba and specifically with people who are using the system in The Pas. One of the problems has been that files which used to be in the same community for individuals are now in a different community. A series of files, for example, is now held in Thompson rather than being readily available in The Pas. It is not unusual for a lawyer in The Pas to have to sit on the phone for a long, long time to get the line in Thompson, the 1- 800 number. It is a waste of time. It is anything but a user-friendly system.

The way that the NDP have changed it has made it a system which has got more problems in a long way than it used to have. The result has been a lengthened rather than a shortened process. A process which was simple has been made by the current Government much more complicated and not nearly as efficient or helpful for those who are involved and particularly for the mothers who are so critically dependent on the maintenance support payments. There is a whole variety of circumstances. It is one thing if the spouse, Mr. Speaker, who is

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2025 contributing maintenance support payments, has got a steady job which continues day after day, week after week, month after mont h, year after year. But where you have a much greater variety of working environments, where the contributing spouse may all of a sudden find that he or she is laid off or sick and cannot work, that their curr ent system all too often does not have the kind of ability to adjust in a flexible way for the betterment, in particular, of the children.

You know it is going to be very easy to be having fines here, but what is most important is that the child, and the mother most frequently, as I say, is actually getting the support payments in a quick and easy, user-friendly way. With the new tax on justice that the NDP government has introduced in the latest budget, what this will do is mean that whether it is a mother or a father, or whether it is one spouse or the other, they will both be paying an additional 7 percent on all these services. If you are not careful, all this money is going to get eaten up in the new justice tax of the NDP government.

The tax on mothers, single mothers, who are trying to make their way in the world, and all the NDP can do is put another tax on them. It would have been simpler if this Government had approached this in a different way. It would have been simpler if there had been a more effective look at how the system would actually work. I will bet that there are many, many other examples all over Manitoba of problematic circumstances which could have been easily adapted to had there been a more reasoned approach by this Government to this matter. Certainly, we all want this to go very smoothly.

It is not a matter, I think, that the intentions of the Legislature here, whether one side or the other or the third side of this House, have a view that is similar, that we want to make sure children are supported and the money gets promptly to the parent who is receiving the support payment. But the realities of life are often not quite so simple. The realities of life mean that we need to make sure that we develop a more user-frien dly justice system that does not need as much lawyers' time sitting for hours on the phone trying to reach the 1- 800 number in Thompson.

It is time that we have a government which is a little bit more sensitive to people in northern Manitoba. It is time that there was a government which did not want to put a 7% tax on mothers who are seeking maintenance support. It is time that we did not have a 7% tax on human rights and ordinary justice matters, people just trying to live their lives and work with circumstances that are not always easy to work with.

The reality is that many families where their maintenance support payments are facing problems, not only in the internal family dynamics but also problems in earning money, having steady jobs and in having good relationships. What we need to create, Mr. Speaker, is an environment which can be more user-friendly. So it is in this context that I suggest, politely, to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh) that he look very carefully at how the regulations and procedures are developed around this legislation. I would suggest, Mr.

Speaker, and I mentioned this when I discussed this bill with a lawyer in The Pas, she said, "These pe ople, the NDP government, are totally out of control in what they are trying to do." The reality is that it is not the intentions, it is how this Government is going about it.

It is time that the representative of The Pas listened more closely and it is time that the Justice Minister listen more closely to the needs of people in Manitoba, and make sure that as this bill is implemented that it is implemented in a more us er-friendly way than some of the other things this Government has tried to do in the Justice system.

So, although we will in fact not vote against this bill, we will urge the Minister of Justice to make sure that as it is implemented we have a situation which is better and not worse for families, for dependent parents who are supporting their children and for the whole system. Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): We have supported this bill in second reading, and we have again supported it in committee. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that in th ird reading we look forward to the passage of the bill in third reading as well.

We do have some concerns about the bill, though, and we have noted them in committee and in second reading. Mr. Speaker, that is with respect to resources again, similar to what we said in Bill 17,

2026 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 that maintenance enforcement is already stretched to the limit. The budget is already stretched to the limit. The resources of that department certainly may need to be increased because of this bill. Although it is important, I believe, to recognize that there are a number of reasons why we would support the bill.

First of all, with respect to penalties for late or missed payments, I was very pleased to see that the penalties in fact do not go into general revenue, that the government does not in fact benefit from missed payments, but in fact it goes to support recipients, and I think that is an important principle to recognize. Also, extra-provincial garnishing orders are now recognized in Manitoba.

I think it is important that spouses that flee their particular province to get away from maintenance payments to support their children–If they flee into Manitoba that we do recognize extra-provincial garnishing orders so that a spouse who is left without payments has an easier way within which to collect on a spouse that flees into Manitoba. That is another reason why we support the bill. * (15:40) The third reason is that what we have seen in the past, in the courts, is that maintenance arrears, at times, are forgiven for lack of payment if they are left for any length of time. This bill, in fact, Mr.

Speaker, when it does set a

schedule for paying of maintenance arrears, which the payor does not pay, the full amount of the arrears can still be corrected. No arrears will be forgiven. I think, for those three principles alone, that is worthy of our support. But again, cautioning the minister about the fact that maintenance enforcement already is stretched to the limit. Certainly resources ought to be allocated there to ensure that spouses and women in particular, those that may not be able to afford looking after children and in fact have maintenance orders for them, that they are in fact looked after. Mr.

Speaker: Any other members wishing to speak? Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 18, The Improved Enforcement of Support Payments (Various Acts Amended) Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 9–The Manitoba Immigration Council Act Mr. Speaker: Resumed debate on second reading of Bill 9, The Manitoba Immigration Council Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Springfield. Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to put a few comments on the record. As the official critic for this bill, I have spent considerable time dealing with the individual items in the bill. I have had a briefing with the minister in her department. I have also had the opportunity to send out some 736 letters to stakeholders across the province asking for feedback.

The suspicion that I had has been confirmed with this bill in that the premise of it is certainly something that basically everybody agreed with, but as the former Minister of Education used to say, "the devil is in the details." I believe other members of this House have spoken and they have also put on the record concerns they have with the problems in how the mechanics are supposed to work. I will in a moment take some time and put some of those concerns on the record. I do, however, want to say that clearly as a son of immigrant parents, I appreciate the value of immigration to Canada and to Manitoba.

Certainly, we have prospered as a nation and as a province, Mr. Speak er, with immigrants and with entrepreneurs. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair In fact, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) and myself were at the latest Citizenship Court held here in the Legislature and I happened to recognize some individuals from my community. I went to introduce the Leader of the Opposition to them and I pointed out that they are quite an artist family, they make incredible art.

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2027 Right away the individual got up and handed the Leader of the Opposition one of his business cards and said, "If you ever need some really good pottery or some art, contact us." We all started to laugh, because that is what immi grants bring, they bring new ideas, new entrepreneurs, they view things differently. They think outside of the way we normally think and certainly make Canada a better place. In fact, I know that in some areas in Canada concrete was not poured in winter; in fact, that was an art that was brought over from Europe.

I heard it first-hand from an indivi dual from Alberta. They would pour steps and basements in the winter, giving them a leg up on all the other construction companies from Canadians until those companies complained and inspectors shut the whole system down, cut out a piece of the concrete and tested the concrete. The way it was set, it was stronger than normal, but the inspector took a little bit of extra time until the Canadian companies had figured out how to do it, thus levelling the playing field, but everybody was fine with that and it was a technology that was transferred to Canada.

So immigration is very important and it is very important for a province like Manitoba where we have an aging population base, where we do have a frustrating statistic happening and it has been happening for a lot of years, for tens of years, where our young people seem to look elsewhere instead of looking here to look for opportunities. So often what we do is we backfill those indivi- duals with immigrants. It was under the previous Filmon government that the whole program was established between the Province and the federal government. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, it then moved on to the current Government where the numbers have been increasing, those numbers designated to the Province of Manitoba, and I think the latest target is now 10 000. The minister has indicated clearly that, if one could put it, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Achilles' heel of the entire immigration coming to Manitoba is not that we are getting good numbers coming here, it is the fact that we are having trouble with retention, and out of that has come The Manitoba Immigration Council, certainly the premise of which we do support.

I used to be the chairman of the Manitoba Intercultural Council. Years ago, I was appointed and got to know the issues and the concerns of the multicultural community. Of course, I was there representing the interests of various communities. Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, immigration is one of those really exciting areas that multicultural communities love to get involved in. They love to see newcomers coming here, whether it be through family unification, whether it be for economic reasons, whether it be because of persecution for beliefs or religious reasons.

I believe that setting up the Immigration Council would have been a good idea if it would have be en given more substantive legislation. I am going to read for the record, and then I will conclude my remarks, some of the issues that were raised by individuals who we had corresponded with. One of the issues that was raised was that no provision was made for how these maximum of 12 persons are to be chosen or from where. This is the second one. The Government will get the recommendations it wants to get by appointing people it knows thinks as it does.

Again, the idea behind that criticism is, how are these individuals appointed? Is it directly a political appointment? The minister has indicated, yes, it is a direct political appointment. The next one is who is to nominate the members who shall be appointed by the Government. The next one is, if they are all to be friends with the government of the day, we will fail to see how that will best serve the interests of the council. The next one is the broad base of membership that we believe is required should have the support of the communities they would represent.

The next comment was that they, the leaders, would not necessarily be the leaders of those communities, but those leaders should be asked to nominate people for the council. The next one is that Bill 9 is lacking in this detail and the cynics amongst us, or are we realists, can foresee this council being nothing more than another patronage plum for friends of government. Again, Mr. Speaker, they are not specifying a political party. They are not specifying a political government. What they are talking about is governance and who will be appointing them.

2028 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 12, 2004 The next point was, we welcome the proposed act. We would however wish the act to specifically stipulate that membership of the council will reflect the ethnic diversity of our province. Another comment was there is nothing in it that defines either the composition of the council or the scope and nature of specific issues that it might consider in the future. It goes on to say in 4(1), not a mention about diversification of the council in terms of ethnic background and experience and also it does not talk about the minimum number of meetings.

They also mentioned that the minister "should" refer to the council instead of "may" refer and that deals with items 5 and 6, I believe. There was another quote and it says, "Seems like a good idea, should receive support. I used to meet informally with Premier Filmon and Becky Barrett. A formal process might be better." Again, that sort of reiterates the feelings of all the letters we got is that the council was not a bad idea but just that it needed to be filled out.

Then the last one that I would like to put on the record is I feel immigration is important to our country and would certainly support any bill that would allow the people making immigration access to more information and advice. So what the individual is saying there, to paraphrase, is that certainly we want immigrants to be able to access advice and get information about the complexities of our modern society whether it would be banking or legal services, et cetera. * (15:50) So, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I do want to begin concluding my comments by saying that from everything we have heard from the community, that the council seems to have broad support, but how are these individuals going to be chosen. Who are they going to be representing? The recommendations they make, are they just further addressing issues that are going to be sent to them by the minister or are they going to be allowed to branch out and recommend issues they see as being important to the Government? Mr.

Deputy Speaker, is this purely and solely trying to retain new immigrants or is it going to be a tool by which we attract more immigrants? What kind of resources are going to be added to them? I know the minister and her department indicated that there was no remuneration, they would cover some travel and lunch, a boardroom would be provided and perhaps a staffer, but those kinds of things should have been explained a little bit better. When we get to committee, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we would like to see the minister spend more time explaining what the intent is of government, how this is supposed to work.

These things should get off on a positive footing. They should get off on a very positive kind of way and not be allowed to get bogged down by criticism that certain points were not well thought out. We would like to see that, at committee, the minister take some time and address the concerns that were raised. Certainly, we look forward to hearing from Manitobans at committee. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I am pleased to stand and put a few comments on the record regarding Bill 9, The Manitoba Immigration Council Act. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I just want to provide a bit of history to the House on how we, when we were in government, recognized, under the leadership of our Premier then, Gary Filmon, that immigration was a significant component of our Manitoba makeup. We were built on waves of immigration, as a province, and prospered as a result, and really felt that government needed to take or make or focus more on immigration and the positive impacts on our province. As a result, the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation was changed. The name was changed, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, to the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, with the new mandate under that re-named department becoming aggressively pursuing an immigration agreement with the federal government. Negotiations started at that point in time, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I was pleased and privileged to have had that opportunity to look at the kinds of positive impacts immigration could and should have on our Manitoba community and on our ability to be competitive, to attract people for the jobs that were available here in the province.

We were not able to accomplish that formal or final agreement in my tenure as the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, but I do know that my predecessor, Harold Gilleshammer, had the

May 12, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2029 opportunity to sign the first formal agreement with the federal government that helped us to move forward. It is not only the issue of bringing immigrants to our province, but there are significant issues around settlement and having individuals feel comfortable coming to a new home. We looked at the settlement services that were available and tried to ensure that those were expanded and improved so that as people came to Manitoba that they were able to adapt and to adjust to their new country and their new way of life. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, also there was the issue of English language services that were significant. I had many opportunities to be out in the community to see, first hand, how those that had difficulty understanding the English language had difficulty fitting in to our Manitoba society and community. Those kinds of support services are essential. They need to be expanded as we look to expanding our role as a province that welcomes and accepts and actively recruits immigrants to our province. I am really pleased and proud that we have come as far as we have. We need to continue to move forward. If, in fact, Mr .

Deputy Speaker, the establishment of a Manitoba Immigration Council is another positive step forward, I welcome that, but I do hope that, as the Government moves forward and appoints people to an immigration council in the province of Manitoba, it will have meaningful input. We do know, from time to time, when

an act is as ambiguous, I think, as this act is, we are not really sure what the role and the mandate of this council will be. Will this council have teeth? Mr. Deputy Speaker, will the people who are appointed to the council be of a broad enough nature to bring forward constructive recommendations to government to improve our opportunities to attract immigrants and to retain immigrants here in our province? Mr.

Deputy Speaker, what we do not want to see is a revolving door where we do all the work in identifying skill shortages that we need immigrants come to fill, only to have them come and we, as Manitoba taxpayers, pay for the settlement services and the English language training, and get them settled in communities, only to have them find out that there is better opportunity in other provinces across the country. So they make this just a short stop in their move to a new country, and then move on to better opportunities in other provinces. We want to make sure that all of those issues are being looked at.

There is no point in creating a council unless they are going to be able to have meaningful input into the process and, indeed, ensure that we attract the immigrants that we need and that we want to our province, and that we have a strategy in place to keep them here in Manitoba once they arrive. We just have to look around our province to several communities, not only Winnipeg, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that have been very successful in attracting and keeping immigrants in their communities. I know the Member for Steinbach (Mr.

Goertzen) takes great pride in some of the accomplishments that have been undertaken in his community.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-2-37
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 2nd hansardpdf 37.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	dda67418898e53760e41a4e9a8f737a58f876a6d

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