MG-8048 Fourth Session -Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 41 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No. 42-1:30 p.m., THURSDAY, APRIL 15,1993 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA. LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen , Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LA THLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osbome Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkirk Concordia Arth ur- Virde n Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Rin Ron La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River Rupertsland PARTY.

Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

169 5 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, Aprll15, 1993 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Mr. Leonard Ev ans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Stuart Pri nce , Cam Brown, Rit a Cullen and others reque sting the Family Services mi ni ster (Mr. Gillesham mer) consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba. Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Alfred Spence, Alvin North, Earl Sinclair and others requesting the Family Services mi nister (Mr.

Gilleshammer) to consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba. Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Cora Lee Poirier, Emily Duguid, Dawn Bates and others requesting the Fam ily Service s min ister (Mr. Gil les hammer) consider restoring funding for friendship centres in Manitoba. *** Mr. Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Lawrence Disbrowe, Wallace Everelle, Henry Arvin McKay and others requesting the Minis ter of Natural Resources (Mr.

Enns) to consider restoring funding of the Northern Fishermen's Freight Assistance Program to the level it was in 1990-91 . READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speak er: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Leonard Ev ans). It complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr.

Clerk (William Re mnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that: WHERE AS the United Nations has declared 1993 the International Year of the World's Indigenous People with the theme, "Indigenous People: a new partnership"; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has totally discontinued funding to all friendship centres; and WHERE AS the provincial government has stated that these cuts mirror the federal cuts; and WHERE AS the elim ination of all funding to friendship centres will result in the loss of many jobs as well as the services and programs provided, such as: assistance to the elderly, the homeless, youth programming, the socially disadvantaged, families in crisis, educa tion, recreation and cu ltu ral progr amming, housing relocation, fine options, couns elling, court assistance, advocacy; WHEREF ORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Family Services minis ter to consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Dewar). It complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS the United Nations has declared 1993 the Inte rnational Year of tho:� World' s Indigenous People with the theme, "Indigenous People: a new partnership"; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has totally discontinued funding to all friendship centres; and WHERE AS the provincial government has stated that these cuts mirror the federal cuts; and

WHEREAS the elimi nation of all funding to friendship centres will result in the loss of many jobs as well as the services and programs provided, such as: assistance to the elderly, the homeless, youth programming, the socially disadvantaged, families in crisis, edu cation, recr eation and cu ltural

169 6 LEG ISLATIVE J!.SSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 programming, housing relocation, fine options, counselling, court assistance, advocacy; WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Family Services ministe'r to consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba. *** Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Martindale). It complies with the privileges and practices of the House ;:md complies with the rules. Is it the will of the Hous'e to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citiz,ens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS Manit oba has the highest rate of clhild poverty in the country; and

WHEREAS over 1 ,000 young adults are curre1ntly attempting to get off welfare and upgrade their education through the student social allowances program; and

WHEREAS Winnipeg already has the highest number of people on welfare in decades; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has already changed social assistance rules resultil'l!) in increased welfare costs for the City of Winnipeg; and

WHEREAS the provincial government is now proposing to eliminate the student social allowan<:es program; and WHE REAS el im inating the student social allowances program will result in more than a thousand young people being forced onto <:ity welfare with no me ans of getting further full-time education, resulting in more long-term costs for <:ity taxpayers. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Family Servic:es (Mr. Gilleshammer) to consider restoring funding1 of the student social allowances program. *

(1335) Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I din�ct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from the Churchill High School, thirty Grade 9 students, under the direction of Ms. Terri Gartner. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock). Also this afternoon, from the La Broquerie School, we have thirty Grades 5 and 6 students, under the direction of Mr. Thiessen. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger).

On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Royal Trust RelocaUons Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. In June of 1991 , the Premier promised to Manitoba some 200 jobs would be relocated to the city of Winnipeg from the Royal Trust Company, with a payroll of some $6 million. The announcement went on to say that the government would provide a million-dollar repayable l oan. We, of course, hav e asked this question subsequent to the an nouncement of the government.

In fact, December of 1992, the Premier said in this House, and I quote: "We have remained in close touch with the Royal Trust people, have had continuing discussions with them. They still are committed to an in vestment in Manitoba. I assure him that there will be news on that in the not too distant future.8 Could the Premier please advise us of the status of those 200 jobs, some of which were going to be located in the province of Manitoba, actually, in the spring of 1992 and have yet to appear? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is entitled to ask whatever questions he wants to, but in attempting to make political hay on an issue, he is raising a matter that obviously is not one that any of us would want to pursue. The fact of the matter is that Royal Trust, through problems with respect to its investment portfolio and massive losses over a space of the last two years, is-{inte�ection] Mr. Speaker , you know the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) has all the smart answers. He does not care about Manitoba and about corporations. He applauds corporations which are in difficulty.

He is smarter than everybody

April 15 , 19 93 LEG ISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 169 7 else in the world, but that attitude will get him exactly nowhere, as it has to date. If I may carry on, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that Royal Trust has experienced serious financial difficulty. Suc h financial difficulty denied them the opportunity to make a multimillion-dollar investment during that period of time. I have spoken with Royal Trust people as recently as late January and again last month, met with them in Toronto. They are now, of course, under a res tructuring as a result of their new ownership by the Royal Bank of Canada.

The people we spoke to indic ated that if it is at all possible they are still looking to im prove their presence in Winnipeg, in specific, and looking at alternatives to try and meet the kind of commitments that we were looking at a couple of years ago, prio r to their financial difficulties when the announcement was made. I cannot make any guarantees. Obviously, our hope is that company will be able to be restructured in a way that they are on sound financial footing and we can, once again, look at the prospect of them devolving some of their operations into Winnipeg.

We will continue to work positive ly with them, Mr. Speaker. I think that is the way in which we can look for better things in future. *

(1340) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, as I say, we are very disappoi nted that even though the losses were well known in December the Premier left us with a lot of opti mism when he assured us, in this House, that there would be some news on this in the not too dis tant future , in terms of their in vestment in Manitoba and the jobs that would come here. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier, what is the sta tus of those 200 jobs that were pending in Manitoba, in light of the Royal Bank takeover of Royal Trust?

What is the corporate plan for that Royal Trust takeover, and what are the specific plans for those 200 jobs that were promis ed to the city of Winnipeg, in terms of the new principals of the company, the Royal Bank? Mr. Fllmon: Mr. Speaker, just so the member does not imply that I was misleading him or anybody else in my comments in December, I can tell him that when I met with some specific individuals in late January, the in dividual who was su pposed to be coming here as manager of the new facility was one of the people I met with.

So indeed plans continued to be afoot for movement of a signi ficant portion of their operations in to Winnipeg as late as January. All things have changed as a result of the new ownership and the restructuring. Our intention is to continue to work to convince Royal Trust, under its new ownership, or in deed the Royal Bank or many of the financial institutions. We have been meeting with a considerable number of them in the course of our dev elopmen t of ou r strate gy to attract back-office functions in the area of telecommuni­ cations and computers from many of Canada's major corporations here.

The member is probably aware that our work continues to pay fruit with announcements by Unitel a month or so ago, announcements by Canada Post and yet another annou ncement to be coming forward within an hour or so today. CN Rail Running Trades Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we are certainly pleased about the announcement today of the service centre jobs being added to Manitoba in terms of the province. We have been aware of that sit uation for some time, and we are pleased the se rvice centre will be amalgamated in Winnipeg.

We are also concerned about the loss of jobs on the running trades in the same railway. We lost 110 brakemen in November of '92 from the railway. We have lost 200 or so maintenance-away employees. Mr. Speaker, 170 jobs were announced at Weston, the diesel shops, to be lost, which is now put on hold because the facility apparently in Moose Jaw is not large enough.

In light of the discussions the Premier is having with the senior officials of the railway today and the good announcement he has today, can the Premier advise us on the status of the running trades in the province of Manitoba and the long-term status of the running trades, Mr. Speaker, i n light of some of the job losses we have .had, regrettably, over the last couple of months? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, unlik e the New Democrats who, when they were in government, made the bald-faced statement that they could continue to raise the taxes in Manitoba on the railways to puni tive levels because, as his predecessor said when the New Democrats were in

169 8 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 office, what are they going to do-tear up the trBicks, pull up the tracks? The fact of the matter is that by imposing punritive tax levels on both railways, we have seen significant reductions in the operations of the railways in Manitoba. This government is working to makEt the operations of the railways in this pr ovince competitive and advantageous, Mr.

Speaker, and as a result we are finally seeing some positive moves with respect to the announcement today that takes a total turnaround from the situation we were put in by New Democrats who were throwing jobs out of this province by raising our taxes on railway diesel fuel to the highest in the country. That is what happens. *

(1345) Stubble Burning Health Risks Ms . Judy Wasyl ycla-Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, last fall all of us in this House received hundreds of calls and letters from Manitobans suffering from the effects of stubble burning. We heard from parents of children with asthma living in fear and worry about the health of their children; we heard from people unable to leave their homes to get to work; we heard from physicians reporting that stubble burning in fact was a health hazard. The government promised action and today we have received its response. In terms of public health, Mr.

Speaker, there seems to be little more in this report than band-aid solutions and cosmetic changes. I would like to ask the government, since it WQuld seem that Manitobans may, instead of waking up to smoke, will be coming home to smoke, how dloes this announcement significantly reduce the he,alth risks from stubble burning for all Manitobans and ensure that the health hazard of last fall is not repeated again this year? Hon. Glen Cummin gs (Minister of Envlronme,nt): Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the member WQUid reread the announcement .

The fact is that we now have a regulated regime in this province for the control of disposal of waste straw, stubble, and I would fully expect that Manitobans, particullarly Winnipeggers, will be able to enjoy the outdoors and the comfort of their yards in the fall as well as other seasons of the year. The regulation enables us to take particular action if a situation changes, for example if we have burning this spring, that has potential to cause difficulties, we can within six hours notice implement the regulations in a regime that will protect the health of Manitobans.

So I would ask for her co-operation, and I would expect that Winnipeggers in particular will reap some considerable satisfaction from the regulations that we put in place. Ms. Wasylycla-l.els: Mr. Speaker, in January of '92 the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) said, we fully support a review by the Clean Environment Commission of stubble burning.

His head of well ness and health said that although no evidence has existed previously about the health effects of stubble burning, he had since changed his mind due to medical evidence, and in October the MMA clearly called for a review under the Clean Environment Commission. I would like to ask the Minister of Health if he is satisfied that the concerns of professionals and physicians in this area have been addressed, and whether he can assure us that Manitobans will be absolutely protected from the health hazards of stubble burning in the future. Mr. Cumm ings: Mr.

Sp ea ker, the memb er chooses to ignore the fact that this is the result of a recommendation of a working group which represented the parents of asthmatics, which represented health in terests, also represented community interests, agricultural interests. The Lung Association was also involved in this nine-person group.

The reason that we brought forward the regulations at this time and the reason that we have taken such sweeping powers which we have under The Environment Act, in order to be able to provide the enforceme nt of these regulations, is precisely the reason that she is asking about, is that we do care about the health of Winnipeggers and Manitobans at large. Winnipeg is the main concern but the regulations are province-wide, and under The Environment Act we have exceedingly large and sweeping powers, virtually frightening in the eyes of some people, I would suggest.

I tell you that those powers will be enforced in order to protect that very issue of the health of Winnipeggers or others in the public who are sensitive to the smoke. It is a practice that the

April 15 , 19 93 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 169 9 Min ister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) has been working very hard to have reduced and elimi nated, and what we have here is a coming together of communities. The agricultural community has been extremely co-operativ e in developing a control mechanism , and those who represent the urban issues have also brought their points forward strongly and support this approach. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, in this announcement there is no permit system with tough guidelines and meaningful penalties. There is no Clean Environment Commis sion review on health.

There is no new research into alternatives. There is no new education- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would like to remind the honourable member this is not a time for debate. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: My question, Mr. Speaker, since we remain concerned about how this will deal with the health hazard of stubble burning on Manitobans is: What longer term contingency plan does this government have in place in the event that this regu lation, this announcement does not adequately protect people from the health hazards- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question. Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, I am appalled that that member would put such false and misleading information on the record. It says right in the press release that the first ticket has fines of up to a thousand dollar s under summa ry conviction. Beyond that, for repeat offences or for flagrant and very abusiv e situations, we can go to The Environment Act which, frankly, has fines up to $50,000. Now if that is what she says is insufficient, then I suggest that they are talking about dracon ian government and that is not what this province wants. *

(1350) VIolence Prevention Programs Government Resources Ms. Avis Gray (Cres centwood): Mr. Speaker, it is not diffi cult for any Mani toban to pick up a newspaper or to be in a conversation where there is not talk about the increased amount of violence among our young people, and in fact in our schools and in our society. The Min ister of Finance (Mr. Manness) said yesterday that families must take some responsibility in managing children with behavioural problems.

No one would dispute that, but governments also have a responsibility to assist families and to assist children in dealing with these particular behavioural problems and certainly with increasing violence. I would ask the Min ister of Family Services if he could tell this House and in fact tell Manitobans, if a family does have a difficu lty with a child, a child who is experie nci ng behavioural prob lems, what resources are available to that family so they can be good parents and they can receive the su pport that they need for the children who are misbehaving and for children where there is increased violence?

Can the minister provide that information today? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Servi ces) : Mr. Speaker, the first response usually comes through the school system where funding is provided for more guidance counsel lors today than the school system has ever had before. School guidance counsellors are often the first line of defence in terms of working with those children who are finding difficulties in the school syst em, and working with those families and with the teachers who deal with those children on a day-to-day basis to resolve the issues there.

The school counsellors not only work within the school setti ng but from time to time work with the families in their home as well. I know from personal experience that many of those fine professionals do some tremendous work in alleviating the problems that students have in the school setting. Child and Family Services Ms. Avis Gray (Cres centwood ): Mr.

Speaker, with a supplem entary to the same minister: For families and children who are experiencing those problems, the school pers onnel, teachers are telling us that when they make referrals for severely disturbed children to Child and Family Services, that in fact if you are 14 years of age and over, the chances of your receiving service are very, very low.

Can the mi nister tell us, given that he has increased the workload of the Child and Family Services personnel and given that they have elimi nated the family counselling program since 1988 with the government, what resources are really available there for these families and for these parents? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Fami ly Servi ces) : Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member, in doing her research on this particular ques tion,

17 00 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 talked to members of the media who contacted the executive director of Child and Family Services Bind he informs me that is not the case. They do w1ork with children who are over 14 years of age. Ms. Gray: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Family Services then tell this House if Child and Family Services, which comes under his jurisdiction, is working with children who are over 14 and is accepting all the referrals?

Why do we have qualified teachers in the'se schools who are in fact saying they are not picking up the referrals and there are no services for 1he children? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, certainly thEtre are difficult children in the school system that parents have difficulty coping with at home, the school system has difficulty coping with, and the)' in turn do access services provided by Child and Family Services.

In a conversation with the executive director earlier today, I am sure prompted by the member asking the question, I am given the understanding that they certainly provide services for children who are over 14. * (1 355) Child and Family services Reduced Workweek Mr. Doug Martlndale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, as we have seen, there is increasing concern across the country for the interests of children and the increasing caseloads of different provi ncial governments and cutbacks which are reducing services.

In the province of Manitoba we have seen the street children and youth program closed, cuts in staff to Indian and Metis friendship centres as a result of budgetary decisions, 10 percent reductions in agency budgets. Can the Minister of Family Services, in follow-up to statements that he made in Interim Supply, tell the House if he has had a chance to meet again with the chief executive officer of Child and Family Services and other agency heads to see how they are going to implement provision of services when there are 3,000 hours less service to provide to children? Hon.

Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Famllly Services) : Mr. Speaker, if the member had listened to my previous answer, I had discussions with the executive director this morning. Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, my question is: What have the agency heads said and what are they going to do? How does this minister account for the discrepancy between what the CEO of Winnipeg is saying about less hours of service, underfunding, understaffing now, and an increasing caseload? What is this minister going-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr.

Speaker, I am sure many of us read the same articles in the local papers today, that governments in Newfoundland, Saskatchewan and Ontario were finding some difficulties in this area. Manitoba has the most comprehensive and most numerous Child and Family Services agencies across this country. Certainly, executive directors and board chairs have acknowledged the challenge that lies ahead of them in working with children who are having difficulty, and they have worked co-operatively with us and accepted that challenge, and are in the process of finding those solutions. Mr. Martindale: Mr.

Speaker, we want to know from this minister what the specifics are, other than the rhetoric about meeting the challenges, because we cannot count on this minister to protect the interests of ch ildren when there are fewer resources, when there are budget reductions, when there are fewer staff, fewer investigations- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member, there are more resources there today than there were in 1988 when we came to government.

We have dramatically increased the funding in most of the social areas, and the plans that the member is asking for are now being formulated by the executive officers of those agencies and their staff. I know that later today, some of these decisions are being communicated to staff. When they become public, we will make them available for the member. Child Car&- The Pas Funding ReducUon Mr. Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Family Services.

April 15 , 19 93 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 17 01 Mr. Speaker, this government, through Northern Affairs, likes to talk about the work that the Northern Economic Development Commission is doing in the North currently. The Minister of Family Services I am sure is aware that one of the themes that has already emerged from those hearings so far is that northern people, particularly women, be given every opportunity to access employment, training and business. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services whether he can table in this House today a study, a report, any research material or criteria that he used to justify those cuts to the daycare program in The Pas. Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, some weeks ago we announced the changes in daycare. This comes after a dramatic increase in funding over the last number of budgets. When we came to government, the Day Care line was $26 million or $27 million. We have virtually doubled that amount of money.

I do not know whether the member heard the other day, I did leave some misleading information in the House when I said that our program was three times as big as Saskatchewan's. In fact, it is four times bigger than Saskatchewan's. So we this year will show, and I am sure the member has already noticed that, an increase in our daycare budget, but we have certainly brought in some changes which freeze the licensing of new spaces and also caps the subsidy at 9,600 spaces. Mr. Speaker, we are going to work with the daycare community to see that it has a minimal impact on any particular daycare. *

(1400) Mr. Lathlln: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can ask the minister to answer my supplementary question, because he never did answer my first question. Mr. Speaker, can the minister explain to this House today why the daycare program cuts in The Pas represented 13 percent of those cuts made across the province-13 percent? Can he explain or point out to members here where the fairness is in those cuts that were made? Mr. GIIIeshammer: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that his information is wrong.

The change that we are making in the daycare is bringing down the number of subsidized spaces from 1 0,000 spaces to 9,600 spaces, some 400 spaces. With the number of centres and daycare operations across the province, we are trying to manage these changes so that no particular daycare centre would lose more than one subsidized space. Mr. Lathlln: Mr.

Speaker, my last question to the same minister is: Will the minister reconsider those cuts his government made to The Pas daycare program until such time that he has come to The Pas, met with those people who are involved in the daycare program and after he has adequately studied the daycare situation in The Pas? Will he consider his decision? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in a previous answer, the member's information is wrong.

I would offer to meet with him later today or tomorrow to look at the numbers that he has before him to indicate that the changes we are making in the daycare do have a fairness about them. School Tax Levy Fairness Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, on every city property tax bill, you have a city tax that you pay, you have a school tax portion that you pay. The city tax is applied equally throughout the city of Winnipeg. The school tax, on the other hand, is not.

Because of the current structure of the school divisions, if you happen to live in a $70,000 home in Winnipeg School Division No. 1 , you would pay $1 ,034 in property tax. If you happen to live in St. James or Winnipeg No. 2, on a $70,000 home, it would be $756. Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Finance is: Can the Minister of Finance tell me, is that in fact a fair tax when up to 25 percent more is being paid from some residents in the city of Winnipeg than others? Is that fair? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance) : Mr.

Speaker, now that the member for Inkster has done his research and he now understands that there is a difference as per tax rates, I would indicate to him that the provincial levy applies equally to those two homes, regardless of where they are in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, if the member then wants to draw into the debate to what extent the local school divisions should have autonomy and should have the freedom to make their own budgetary decisions and consequently reflect that in different special levies as between one school division and the other,

17 02 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 then I say to him, that is a big issue. If the member is saying collapse the school boards and the big power of government come in and ultimately make everything uniform, then let him say that. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, there is only one way this inequity can be resolved, and that is if this governmen t brings in the necessary legislation-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. This is not a time' for debate. The honourable memb er for Inkster, with his question, please . Mr. Lamoureux: Mr .

Speak er, how can the Minister of Finance justify, in Weston you would !pay $443; in Brookla nds, right across the street from Keewati n, you w ould pay $324? That i:s a significant diff erence. How does the minister- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable memb er has put his que stion. Mr. Manness: Mr . Speak er, as I say to the would-be leader of the Liberal Party, I have agriculture land in the School Division of Morris ­ MacDonald and I have agriculture land in the School Division of Seine River. They are bounding each other in two different school divisions.

I dare say, although the same productivit)• is there, the mill rate, as a result of the special levy in one school division, is an additional five mills as com pared to one school division to the other. That is on the basis of the fact that one school division has decided to off er greater program ming and charge its people acco rdingly. It is not an assessment issue. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr . Speaker, can the Minister of Finance tell me why the poorest people in the city of Winnipeg have to pay the highest property tax because this government refuses to act on !this issue? Explain that. Mr. Manness : Mr.

Speaker, I do not need to explain the decision of trustees duly elected under an autonomous system, to make decisions in council which obviously, in some cases, caus,e a greater cost to be ap plied against ratepayers in one school division vers us another. It is not my mle. [interjection] No, no. The memb er said two diff erent school divisions. So, Mr . Speaker, if that is the que stion and it is between different school divisions, it is not my role to stand here and an swer that question. Income Tax Act Dr. Connie Curran ExempUon Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr . Speaker, Clause 31 (

f) of the Connie Curran contract allows her to apply for exem ptions from Canadian tax and Manitoba tax. The Minister of Finance refused to answer the que stion yesterday, but he did tell the newspaper his department is going to or is looking into the matter. Connie Cur ran looked into the matter before she signed the contract. Now the province is looking at the matter as to whether or not she will pay taxes. Why is the province only now looking at the matter, Mr. Speaker, about her tax obligations on a $3.9-million contract to the people of Manitoba? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, this is not the country of Manitoba. This is the country of Canada. I dare say decisions on taxes with respect to a situation such as this are made completely and totally and entirely within the Department of Finance federally. We do not, as the Province of Manitoba, have any juri sdiction as to deter mine residency of any individual. I dare say we were not consulted by the feder al government with the development of their laws. At this point in time we are not ever consulted by Canada with respect to a judgment that is being rendered. Now we un derstand that APM has sought a judgment from Canada.

Our thinking at this point in time, at least of what we know, is that if they are not resident they will not be paying tax-like every other consulting group from outsi de of the country. Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, the minister had the ability to negotiate this contract. There are clau ses in this contract dealing with tax and nonliability for tax.

My ques tion to the minister is: Could not the minister put a clause or clauses in this contract that would have specified that she meets the criteria so that she would be entitled to pay taxes and that there are basically three eleme nts to that cr iteria, from the tax advice that I have received? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, we followed the same format that the memb er 's p arty did when they were in government and engaged themselves in the contract also with consult ants fr om the U. S. Furthermo re, what the mem ber is saying is, well, you should have twisted the arm off of APM and got

April 15 , 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 17 03 them to concede that they would voluntarily pay taxes in the province of Manitoba. I would say, Mr. Speaker, to the memb er, live in the real world. That does not happen. It is just like if I were to ask the member to voluntarily pay mor e tax than he is now as a citizen of this province, he would probably tell me to go somewher e else. *

(1410) Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, in the real world people do not get paid $3.9 million a year. Income Tax Act Dr. Connie Curran Exemption Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdo nan ) : My final supplemen tary to the minister. Does he think it is fair-{ interjection] That is right, Mr. Speaker. Teemu opens hospitals, not closes them. We hear the shot from the Premier. My final supplemen tary to the Premier, since he is saying so much on this issue from his seat: Does he think it is fair to allow a U.S. consultant to earn $3.9 million in one year from the Province of Manitoba, plus expenses, tax free? Does he think that is- Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member 's qu estion is clearly seeking an opinion and therefore out of order. The honourable member fo r Kildonan, would you want to kindly rephrase your question, please. [interjection] Order, please. I had advised the honourable member for Kildonan that it was seeking an opinion and was therefore out of order. Kindly rephrase your question. Mr. Chomlak: My final supplemen tary is to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness).

Will the Minister of Finance reveal in this House what the per diem rate is for Connie Cur ran, the per diem rate that we are paying this woman and these consultants to come in from the U.S.? Will he reveal it, since she has apparently no competitors and she has no- Mr. Speaker: Order, please . The honourable member has put his question. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend is really attempting to malign a process which two hospitals, their boards, their administration urged government to engage in. Mr.

Speaker, I want to remin d my honour able friend the New Democrat in opposition that this is the mos t open sharing of informa tion. My honourable friend would not have a single que stion around this engagement of APM if we had not given him the contract, for the first time I think probably ever that consultants' contracts -prior to them being engaged, has been tabled at a news confere nce. Mr. Speaker, that contrasts qui te significantly to the circums tance that I discovered when I became Minister of Health that the NDP, through the back door with no one kno wing, en gaged U. S. consult ants to study home care.

There was no contract tabled. There were no details. There was no tendering. There was only a uni lateral decision behind closed door s by New Democ rats in government. They, Sir, are hypocritical in oppositio n. They do exactly the opposite they do in government. Point of Order Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the Minister of Health ought to know that what he says is patently wrong- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. That is clearly a dispute over the facts. Children's Dental Program Funding Reduction Impact Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr.

Speaker, over the past three years it has become obvious that the commitment to job creation and services for rural Manitobans has become again another broken pr omis e by this government. I would like to ask the Minis ter of Rur al Development (Mr. Derkach ), does the minister have any reports or studies stating that the cuts to the dental program for rur al children will not negatively impact on the 60,000 children, including 700 children from the Interlake alone? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I presu me my honourable friend is posing a question about the Children's Dental Health Program. As I have indicated to other questions from memb ers opposite and in response to questions

17 04 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 about the budget, yes, we did make the decision to remove the treatment component in the Children's Dental Health Program, which is available to children going to school outside of Brandon and Winnipeg, but we have maintained, Sir, the m'ost significant and important, however less costly, part of the program, that being education and treatment.

In addition to that, Sir, I want to tell my honourable friend that since we have come to office we hatve expanded the fluoridation grants to a number of communities in rural Manitoba, so that a significant number of additional children in Manitoba now dri:nk fluoridated water, which has been proven to substantially increase dental health. Mr. Cllf Evans: Mr. Speaker, did this minister consult with the health specialists, the rural municipalities and the officials? Did he consult with these people as to the effect and the impact this would have on the communities and on people in rural Manitoba with children? Mr.

Orchard: Mr. Speaker, when you are making budgetary decisions, there is some inability to go out and consult and communicate, etcetera, as to what some of your program decisions are. Sir, I want my honourable friend to understand that we did not make this decision with any particular joy, and I simply say to my honourable friend, neither did the government of Saskatchewan that madet a similar decision. These are very difficult times for all governments in Canada, and in formulating a budget which attempts to protect prevention and target servicos, Sir, we had to make some difficult decisions.

In rny ministry this time around, one of the difficult decisions was the treatment portion of the Children 's Dental Health Program, wh il e maintaining the integrity of the prevention education program. Lakeside Camp Proposal for Use Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, further on rural development and creation in economic development, I want to ask the minister and this government why do they not support the applicati,on of Mr. R.J. Moore to purchase and reopen the closed Lakeside Camp? Do they not believe this is an important step for the future? Hon. Harry En ns (Minister of Nat u ral Resources): Mr.

Speaker, the hono ura ble member is referring to a facility that is known to us as the Lakeside Camp, and it was formerly operated by the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities. There has not been a satisfactory alternative user for that property found, principally because the terms and conditions that we have laid down, namely, that if at all possible the facility be maintained in such a manner that it can still provide the service to the community, including the school children in that community, there just simply has not been an accep table proposal call made to government. Mr.

Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. House Business Mr. Speaker: Prior to getting into Orders of the Day on the debate on the budget, I will recognize the honourable government House leader, l believe, on House Business. Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I apologize for not rising sooner. On House Business,! would like to announce that the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections will meet on Tuesday, April20, 199 3, at7:30 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to discuss the organizational process for public hearings for The Freedom of Information Act. Mr.

Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable government House leader for that information. ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE (Sixth Day of Debate) Mr. Speaker: On the adjourned debate, the sixth day of debate, on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Rnance (Mr. Manness) and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer ), in an amendment thereto, and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Second Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs), in further amendment thereto, standing in the name of the honourable member for Point Douglas who has 19 minutes remaining. Mr.

George Hlckes (Poin t Dougla s) : Mr. Speaker, I will continue on the Budget Debate. Like I was saying yesterday, a lot of the cuts that we see are impacting on the working class, the poor, the

April 15, 1993 LEG ISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 17 05 aboriginal people, and we hear the government talk about the fairness of this budget. When we have a child buying a Big Mac, who will pay more towards reducing Manitoba's deficit than a corporation like Great-West Life, is that fairness? I say, no, because if you have a meal at the restaurant under $6, you have to now pay taxes on it. The children who buy a Big Mac at a store will have to now pay taxes for that, so you are taxing even children now.

If you stand there and make light of it where you are taxing the children and the corporati ons are not being added on, that is a sad, sad day for Manitoba. Also in this budget we saw nothing about job creation. If you go into northern Manitoba it is devastated right now. There are no jobs; there is no possibil ity of jobs. A lot of the families have lost hope, and yet the opportunity to create employment is there, but no one has taken that. If you jus t look at the community of Churchill, they have come up with some ideas to try and save their rail line, their port, the space progr am . * (1 420) (Mrs.

Lou ise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) When I was up there it was a couple of days prior to ministers going up there with a delegation from Russia and the commu nity was just a-buzzing. They were so enthused, and they said we are going to get 500,000 tons of wheat through our port. It is going to save our rail lines, it is going to save our community. And they really, really believed that. The deal had been signed and ships were going to be coming into the port this summer.

Since that time they have been sitting idly, patiently waiting, and there has been nothing, absolutely nothing come out of that except an opportunity for a little bit of press and a few pictures. The commu nity of Churchill right now is hur ting badly, and they have to try and come up with some alternative to em ployment opportunities. They had a proposal together to try and rej uvenate that space port . A few years ago, when they used to have Pan American Airways up there running that space port, they used to fire rockets into space to look at the weather, and they used to em ploy quite a few local people.

The facil ity is still there. There are interested parties wanting to go up there and fire rockets for various sate llite reasons and study the au rora borealis. But there is not the support from the government that the mayor and council of Churchill has been seeking. They have been trying to get partners, they have been trying to get companies to bring their business up there and create jobs. They were talking the possi bility of 200, 500 jobs. For a communi ty the size of Churchill that is a lot of em ployment opportunities for that community.

But now they are totally fru strated , and the hope of that commu nity is slowly disappearing. We have sum mer season coming up with hopef ully a possibility of ships coming in to take grain to various parts of the world, but there is nothing that has been told to that community yet. They are looking for leadership fr om this governmen t, from the federal government, and they have not been seeing it. I know that they are writing letters constantly because they always send me copies of them .

So I hope the government will see in their wisdom to try and go up there and have a meeting with the mayor and the councils and try and help them stimula te their economy and hopefully gain some jobs for their community. Also in that budget we saw where 56 agencies had been cut. The government had said, well, we wanted to try and announce it to give them as much lead time as possi ble. Well, a lot of those agencies had em ployees in place for years and years. In the friendship centre there was an em ployee who had been employed there for 15 years and because of the cuts had to be laid off.

The only notice that the friendship centre gave to the individual was what the government allowed was two weeks. Two weeks notice, tliet is all they gave them. That is the government that did that. So a person who was em ployed for 15 years, there was no money available for even a severance package, not even a severance package. They were trying to find ways and means of trying to get some income to at .least reward a person for 15 years of dedication and a lot of hard, hard work. That has happened to a lot of staff of the fr iendship centres across Manitoba, which is a good idea. The Minister of Justice (Mr.

McCrae) had talked about zero tolerance, which is good when you read about it, but just to talk about it is not enough. There are a lot of families and women who are put in

17 06 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 situations where they are very vulnerable. For an example, taking away the funding for the Flin Flon crisis centre is stepping back years. So if something happens, say one, two o'clock in the morning and a spouse is threatened with their life, where do they now go? A lot of families do not have vehicles where they can jus t jump in and d1rive to The Pas. Where do they go now? That is the qu estion that commu nity people are asking, the workers have been asking. They have nowhen� to go, and yet we hear the government talking about zero tolerance.

Well, zero tolerance should be jiust as important in northern Manitoba as it is in southern Manitoba where we have crisis centres available here in the South. By taking that one away, that is putting a lot of people at risk, and also they have said that the bus lines have offered tree transportation to individuals who want to go from Rin Ron to The Pas to their crisis centre there. But how do you jump on a bus at two o'clock in the morning, four o'clock in the morning? You cannot predict the exact hour that a spouse is going to try and abuse their partners. So that system is not going to work.

I think it is a big mis take removing the funding fmm the crisis centre . I think it is even just as bin a mis take by reducing the funding for the friendship centres that have delivered valuable services for aboriginal people and for all Manitobans. When )'OU look at the programs of the friendship centres, they not only delivered programs tor aboriginal people; there was a lot of nonaboriginal people who W4�re utilizing the programs that were available.

It is not only a recreation glorified drop-in centre which some people think it is, because they gave the opportu nities and services tor family counselliing and visitations and op portu nity for our elder s to ��et out a little bit and the opportuni ty to have some of their ethnic food. pnte�ection] Well, it has some good points, but a lot of negative points. It is a mixed bag, but it is not a budget of fairness. That is for sure it is not. pnte�ection) No, it is not.

Like I said yesterday, if it was such a fair budg1et, your MLAs on that side would not have had to be sending out letters to the constituents to try and sell it, because a good budget would have sold its•elf. [interjection] Come on, you know that. Anythiing good can sell itself. You know that yours,�lf. [interjection] When I was speaking yesterday, ! was giving you some examples of exactly what happened in northern Manitoba. I was in the remote commu nities of Bloodvein and Berens River, and you cannot tell me that removing the freight subsidy is fair to northern people, because they have no alternatives.

There are no alternative routes for those communit ies. They do not have a road. The only way they can get anything in and out is by airplane. I was saying yesterday, the fish prices-the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) knows, the price of fish has been stagnant for years. It has not gone up a cent, yet the costs for fishe rmen have greatly gone up. The boats and motors have gone up; people are still buying them. Canoes have gone up. Boats have gone up; people are still buying them. Paddles have gone up; people are still buying them. But the price of fish has not gone up.

By reducing the freight subsidy, it is a direct hit on remote fishermen. Who makes up most of those remote fishermen? It is aboriginal people. That is who lives in most of those remote commu nities and who are trying to make a living fishing. At one time, they used to make a living trapping, but the price of fur has gone down so a lot of families have stopped trapping, which is a shame because trapping used to be a way of life for a lot of the aboriginal people. It was not ju st a money-making process; it was a way of life. •

(1430) When they were out there trapping, they were bringing meat back fortheirfamilies and their elders. Also when they were on the trap line, a lot of the young family memb ers who were in school, when they were out on their break and stuff, always went to the trap line with either their grandparents or their parents. When you are on a trap line, you are rem oved from a lot of the attention that children pay now to TVs and these Nintendo games which occupy their time.

When they were on a trap line with their grandparent s or their parents, they were being taught their language, they were being taught their culture, and it was very valuable. Since the price of fur has gone down, the whole language and cultur e is slowly being taken away from aboriginal people. [interjection] Well, I am speaking to whoever is against trapping, because obviously they have not lived a life as a trapper or unde rstand the values of trapping.

April 15 , 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 17 07 It is not only the catching of the fur . It is a whole way of life. It is a culture. It also brings in meat for the family where now a lot of those families are trying to go to the Hudson Bay stores in their communi ties and trying to buy pork, beef and chicken. The prices we pay here for beef, pork and chicken is not even clos e to wha t the people in those re mo te communi ties have to pay. Some of the prices are doubled. With the high number of people unemp loyed, a lot of the people have to live on social assistan ce.

If you look at social assistant rates, they are not really adequate for re mote commun ities that have to pay these high, high pr ices for mea t and even vegetables. How often do you ever see fresh vegetables going into some of these remot e communi ties? Spring breakup, they never see any. A lot of that whole lifes tyle has been changed. That is a real cultural way of life that is slowly being destroyed by people who have not lived up there, people who have not lived that life, people who do not unders tand that kind of life. I say again that it is a shame.

That is where I learned-when I was growing up, the only language I knew was my own lnuk titut language. It is the only language I knew until I went to schoo l. I was out hunting and trapping, and I was always being taken either by my parents or my un cles. They never spoke to me in English, because that was their given language. I never had store-bought food until I was way in my teens. I never had beef steaks or beef roasts or pork roasts . I never had that because we could not afford it. The prices were so high. Getting back to what I was talking about was the meeting I had with the Berens River fishermen.

What they were saying was that their auditing services had been taken away from them. They now had to hire aud itors to try and come in and do the audit, and they do not have the fu nds to do that. So they were wondering what they are going to do. They were hoping to have a meeting with the government and ma ybe explain thes e circu mstances around their problems, and hopef ully something could be worked out. The other thing they were talking about, which I was really, really surprised, because I have a lot of respect for the minister of CEDF.

He mus t have been given some aw ful, aw ful bad advice, because apparently what happened was the fishermen who took out these loans and were su pposed to pay these off monthly, they went directly to the co-op to deduc t whatever the fi sher men had in their accoun ts, whatever it was in their accounts, whether it was $1,000, $2,000, $10,000, that some of them got absolutely zero. Some of them got absolutely zero, and they had a family to try and feed.

They were trying to feed a family; they got abso lutely zero pay cheque. [interjection] Well, they were trying to make payments as the agreement, because the agreement was they would pay so much every month. All of the sudden, bang, instead of going to them-[interjection) Well, I am jus t passing on to you what they were telling me, because they still were saying that they were trying to pay every month. At the end, they went to whatever they owed, at the end of the season, they took the whole pay cheque out. [interjection] Well, you still have to have something to feed your family. [interj ection) No?

Because when a perso n is out there fishing, they are deemed empl oyable, and the communi ty will not give them social assistan ce. That is a fact. They do not have access to social assist ance, so if they are out there, whether they make a thousand dollars a week or a hu ndred dollars, the commu nity views it as them being employed. The other thing that surprised them was, why did the government not go to the individuals and say, okay, you have an outstand ing loan, or you have a loan, okay, let us make arrangeme nts to pay it?

Why totally distrust those aboriginal people in those commu nities and say, bang, wherever you draw your pay cheque, we will garnis h-not even a garnishee order? It was just, bang, take out their whole money. [interjection] Well, if you owe the government money and if you are working for the governmen t, there is a garnishee orde� placed first. [interjection] No, no, because there is a garnishee order that is placed first, and then you go through the proper process.

I have never seen anyone go to an em ployer, say the gover nme nt-if I was wor king for the governmen t, if I owed the government money, I have never seen them go right to the government and say, okay, he has, say, $2,000 coming, bang, I take it all. I have never seen that. You will get a garnishee order, and it is worked out to a cost of living. You take someone's whole pay cheque out from a civil servant. An Honourable Membe r: That is not the issue.

17 08 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 Mr. Hlckes: That is the issue, because those aboriginal people in Berens River, whatever they had coming to them from fisheries, 1 00 percent was grabbed, 10 0 percent. There was not even a courtesy of sitting down and saying, okay, thin is what you need to feed your family. This is what JfOU need for a, b, c and d. That was not even done. That is what they were so upset about. They said we want to be treated equal like everybody else. [inte�ection] That is not exactly what happened. [interjection] Yes, I am sure. Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

The honourable member's time has expired. Hon. Eric Stefanson {Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism) : I am pleased to rise and say a few words in support of the 19 93-94 budget. At the outset, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to acknowledge and thank my colleague the Minister of Rnance (Mr. Manness) for his dedication and hard work in bringing forward this fair and balanced budget in these difficult times. This is my third budget since being elected in the fall of 19 90 and, quite simply, they certainly are not getting any easier. It is a difficult process.

I happen to serve on Treasury Board along with other colleagues. It is a difficult process and certainly one that leads to many difficult and trying decisions. The reality is, it is not only facing the governmEmt here in Manitoba ; it is facing governm ents all acro,ss Cana da: provincial governmen ts , mu nicipal governmen ts and, of cou rse , the fede!'al government within Canada. When you start with a budget, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would think one of the things that Y'ou start with is to look at some of your objectivEts.

Certainly, in reflecting back on our process, I want to outline a few of the objectives that I started with when dealing with the 19 93-94 budget proce�;s. Firs tly, I would like to think that we all want to ensur e that there is a reasonable level of service to all Manitobans, particularly in vital areas such .as Health, Education and Family Services. Another objective would be to ensure fair and reasonable levels of taxation for all Manitobans. Another would be to ensure that our public debt is manageable, with an overall objective ultima tely of a balanced budget.

Another objective, Mada.m Deputy Speaker, should be to ensure our economic clima te enhances economic development, that 1is, wealth creating based on both our natural resouro:ts and on innovation. Another objective should be that we ensure that we do not leave a legacy of debt that will be a burden for our children and future generations and not allow them to have the same quali ty of life that we all enjoy today. • (144 0) These are some fundamental objectives that I believe when dealing with a budget. I am sure there are more that others oould add.

I hope these are objectives that everybody in this House shares when dealing with this budget, and I think If that is the case, Madam Deputy Speaker, the conclusion will be that in light of those objectives this 1993 -94 budget should be su pported by all mem bers of the Chamber. I would like at this time to turn, Madam Deputy Speaker, to various aspects of the budget starting with expenditures. Governments, businesses, families, individuals are all wrestling with oontrolling expenditures. It is nothing new.

I think when we do this, I know there is some element of doubt occasionally on the other side of the House and amongst the other parties. I think it is im portant to look at what some of the other provinces are doing to give a sense of reality for those who do not recognize that there are difficult decisions being made not only here in Manitoba, but across this oountry. I have a summa ry of the Saskat chewan budget that was brought down on March 18 , 19 93. I am sure the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) is interested in some of the decisions that they had to make in Saska tchewan.

I should start by reading from a

section which, I think in many respects, tells a great deal, Madam Deputy Speaker. The

section is called Living Within Our Means. It reads: Difficult choices also had to be made with respect to programs provided directly by government. In making these decisions, we had to ask ourselves if these programs were affordable not only this year, but in future years. I think questions that provincial governments not only . in Saskatchewan but across Canada are asking are certainly being asked here in the province of Manitoba. Let us look at some of the decisions that the Province of Saskatchewan had to make in dealing with their budget. They reduced expenditures in terms of third-party funding. Starting with hospitals, 19 93-94, 3 percent reduction; 19 94-95, 2.8 percent

April 15 , 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 17 09 reduction; K to 12 schools, '93-94, down 2 percent; '94-95, down 4 percent; universities, '93-94, down 2 perc ent ; '94-95 , down 4 percent; urban muni cipalities, '93-94, down 5 percent; '94-95, down 8 percent; rural muni cipalities, '93-94, down 3.3 percent; '94-95, down 8 percent, Madam Deputy Speaker. They also reduced their prescription drug plan to target now only low-income families. That gives you an idea of some of the kinds of decisions that are being made in the Province of Saskatch ewan.

To touch on at least one more province, let us look at New Brunswick. Let us go east this time and see the kinds of decisions being made in eastern Canada. What we have in New Brunswick in their budget brought down on March 31 st of '93, we see a moratorium on construction of new facilities. We see 500 full-time positions being elimina ted. We see 23 government agencies being elimi nated, and we see another 23 agencies being amalgamated into six. That gives you a sense of some of the kinds of decisions being made in other provinces.

Here in Manitoba, we had a situation where we brought in a budget that will reduce program exp en ditu res by 2 pe rce nt-s ome $1 00 millio n- leading to an overall expenditure reduction on our budget line of 1.2 percent. There are no easy decisions when it comes to reducing expenditures for any government in any province in Canada. The ultimate test, Madam Deputy Speaker, has to be a balan ce and a se nse and also an accomplishment to retain the fundamental core services that we have in place.

The overriding principle has to be the prese rvation of our fundamental core services, not only for today but for tomorrow. So in areas lik e fam ily services, we have preserved programming for our most vulnerable citizens. In health care, we have mai ntained our health care syste m and we have maintained all major components of health care reform. In education, we continue to provide signi ficant financial resources, and we have consoli dated government skills training init iatives into one portfolio now.

At the same time, within education, we capped a cost that can be passed on to the taxpayers of Manitoba and we capped the increases that can be passed on to students at our universities. Individual aspects of our decision making have been discussed on a day-to-day basis in here, through Question Period and through comments made as part of the budget, and I will not go into all of the individual decisions. Certainly, there is not unanimous agreement, but I would hope that there is a recognition that difficult decisions had to be made, not only here in Manitoba but everywhere in Canada.

I want to turn, Madam Deputy Speaker, to revenue. On the revenue side of the budget, provinces are not expecting signi ficant revenue growth unless they bring in tax increases as we have seen in, I believe, one province within Canada. This budget shows that revenue growth will be some .2 of 1 percent. That is after a reduction of 5.1 percent in federal transfe rs, which make up 36 percent of the budget. That is actually from budget to budget about a $94 -million reduction in those federal transfers. What are the options to fill that void? Increase in taxes?

Certainly some I guess would suggest that, and I will get back to that in more detail a little later. The past record of some in this House indic ates that that is their solution and has been their solution. By broadening the base on the sale tax, by collecting the sales tax at the border and by changing the treatment of the sales tax for used vehicles, we were able to accomplish holding the line on our overall sales tax rate at 7 percent, the second lowest rate in all of Canada, tied with British Columbia. So clearly that is an important issue for all Manitobans.

As a result of some of the other measures that I will touch on in a minute, we were abie to bring in the sixth budget in a row, Madam Deputy Speaker, that has no major tax increases in person al, corporate, provincial sales, payroll or capital tax rates. It puts Manitoba where in the overall taxation scheme within Canada? Approximately in the middle. So that tells you something about where we began back in 1988. We began at amongst the highes t tax regions in all of Canada.

In this budget, beyond holding the line on the major tax increases, we were also able to target specific areas that will be of benefit to Manitoba's economy. I know the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) is always interested in the transportation

1710 LEGISl ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 sector. I am sure he is supportive and pleased to see that we were able to freeze the diesel fuel t1:ax, that we were able to bring in a 3.15 cent-per-litre reduction on railway diesel fuel tax, that we WEtre able to bring in a .8 cent-per-litre reduction in aviation fuel tax-all actions that will enhance and continue to facilitate the development of ctur transpor tation sector here in the province of Manitoba.

We were also able to continue the 10 percent manu factu ring investment tax credit, which is important to the manu fa cturing sector in the province of Manitoba. Madam Deputy Speaker, through all of that we were also able to increase the payroll tax exemption from $600,000 to $750,000 for small businessns. What that means is of the 43,000 Manitolba em ployers, this will reduce the number paying the tax from 2,300 to 2,085, a 9.3 percent reductictn.

Another 670 emplo yers in Manitoba will pay the tax now at a lower rate-a ll positive initiatives 11or Mani toba's ec onomy in transp orta tion, manu factu ring and other sectors. To accomplish all of these things and hold the line on major tax increases, Manitobans are being asked to contribute additionally to the finances of the Province of Manitoba. Nobody denies that for a minute. We are introducing a one cent-per-lttre gasoline tax. We are introducing a $75 reduction in the minimum proper ty tax credit. We are introducing a $250 minimum property tax threshold which will be income tested.

In terms of that issue, in terms of the minimum property tax threshold, I ask the question, is it not reasonable that everybody in this province who is rece iving services in terms of po lice , fire, ambula nce, garbage, snow, go on and on with the list of municip al services, that those people make some contribution for that very direct service that they receive? Is that an unreasonable position to take, Madam Deputy Speaker? I do not think so, and I would hope all memb ers in this House would recognize this.

It is also reaso nable, in terms of the property tax credit adjustment and the pensioners' school tax assistance , that it will now be income tested to protect those most in need. So the people who s;tiiJ require that assistance will, in fact, be able to obtain that assistance on an income test basis. There is no doubt that Manitobans will pay a little more as a result of some of the decisions of this budget. Let us compare that, Madam Deputy Speaker, to the alternative, to the tax increases that some might propose and has happened in one other province that we know of.

Let us compare that to the record of the NDP in 19 82 to 19 87 in this provi nce. Let us look at the legacy of tax increases that was left by that government.

From 19 82 to 198 7: increased retail sales tax from 5 percent to 7 percent, cost to Manitobans $195 million; introduced an increased payrol l tax of 2.25 percent of payr oll, cost there $230 million; introduced personal net income tax and surtax, $230 million; increased corporation income tax from 15 percent to 17 percent, cost of $16 million; increa sed corporation capital tax from .2 to .3 percent, another $35 million; increased gasoline from 6.4 cents per litre to 8 cents, $20 million; increased diesel fuel tax from 5. 7 cents to 9.9 cents per litre-look at that incr ease, Madam Deputy Speaker -$1 5 million; increased railway fuel tax from 3.8 cents per litre to 13 .6 cents per litre, $25 million.

The member for Transcona is concerned about the transporta tion industry. Look no further than decisions like that, I tell you. * (1 450) Introduced land transfer tax and increased tobacco tax from 1. 4 to 5.5 cents, total $820 million. That is an exam pie of the legacy that was left by the government under the NDP from 19 82 to 19 87. H that is the kind of solution they have in terms of dealing with a budget, I would suggest that all Manitobans would say no to that solution, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Let us look at what an NDP government in British Columbia is doing, just to add some additional credibility to what we have seen happen in Manitoba from 19 82 to 19 87.

Let us look at some of the tax incr eases brought in, in British Colu mb ia-a personal income surtax increased from 20 percent to 30 percent; a corporate income tax increase from 16 to 16 .5; elimination of a renter's tax reduction program effective Janu ary 1, 19 93; social service tax increase from 6 percent to 7 percent effective March 31 , 19 93; fuel tax rate of clear diesel increased from 10 .5 cents per litre to 11. 5 cents; gasoline tax increased by one cent from 1 0 cents to 11 cents. Those are some examples, Madam Deputy Speaker, and there are many more.

April 1 5, 1993 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOB A 17 11 Let us now take a look at what people are saying about those decisions in British Columbia. Globe and Mail, March 31 , 19 93: Mike Harcourt's B.C. continues to ignore the recession and tax and spend its way through a growth spurt, as Ontario was once able to ignore what was going on in the rest of the country. The Harcourt government pays lip service to deficit control and budgetary restraint, but its circumstances are just so different from every other province.

Major expenditures on health, education and social services are increasing at rates greater than the growth in the economy or inflation. Where other provinces are cutting grants, laying off civil servants and closing hospitals, B.C. is proceeding down this path. Globe and Mail, April 1, carries on in the editorial: Never mind, he says- talking about the Finance minister of B.C.- that taxes will rise 13 percent this year on top of last year's 12 percent hike, on top of an average increase of 1 0 percent per year in the three years before that.

There are higher corporation taxes, higher property taxes, higher personal income taxes, and sure, the sales tax is up to 7 percent. When we talk about the sales tax, a quo te here from a B.C. publi cation as well: A total of upt o4, 200 jobs could be lost in the retail sector because of the increase in the B.C. sales tax, the Retail Merchants Association of B.C. said Monday. That shows you the impact of the kinds of decisions made in British Columbia and shows you the kind of impact that the decisions made in Manitoba from 1 982 to 19 87 have had in our province.

I want to now turn, Madam Deputy Speaker, to what holding the line on taxes means, what holding the line on personal income tax means to the economy of Manitoba. This is not my information. This comes from the Conference Board of Canada whom we have heard quo ted in here on many occasions. It talks here about the Manitoba provincial government holding the line on taxes for four straight budgets. We now know that is six budgets. It indicates that pay cheques will actually go further this year, in part because the tax load has been lightened.

What that means, Madam Deputy Speaker, in 19 93, the Conference Board of Canada expects Manitoba's disposable income to increase by $204 for every man, woman and child in the province after adjusting for inflation. [interjection] $204. The Manitoba per capita increase is the fifth best amongst provinces and the best outside of Atlantic Canada. It will result in an additional $224 million in take-home pay. The Manitoba 19 93 increase is nearly three times the $71 incr ease for all of Canada.

For 19 94, the Conference Board ex pec ts Manitoba to lead the nation with an inflation adjusted per capita of disposable income increase of $340. This translates to a further $375-million increase in Manitoba disposable income. For the two-year period, 19 93 and 19 94, Manitoba real disposable income is expected to incr ease by $544. This implies that Manitobans will have an additional $600 million in income after taxes and inflation to spend in Manitoba economy. To do what, Madam Deputy Sp ea ker? To boost ec onom ic grow th.

The $600-mil lion incr ease in Manitoba disposable income will be the third largest aggregate dollar increase behind Quebec and Ontario. This is even though Manitoba only has a small fract ion of the popula tion of those two provinces. The 19 93-94 Manitoba increase of $544 is nearly twice as large as the national increase of $283. The Manitoba increase is the fourth best among the provinces and the best outside of Atlantic Canada. It is more than double the increases of Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia.

That tells you, Madam Deputy Speaker, what holding the line on personal income can do to the economy of Manitoba. In the final analysis, I believe that Manitobans will know best how to put this money to use. I want to turn for a minute, Madam Deput y Speaker, to talk about debt and deficits and a topic that I know is interesting to all members of this House. Once again, I want to go back in history jus t a little bit because we have had a fair bit of discussion about debt and deficit and who is responsible and what happened in years gone by and how we got to the situation we are today.

I want to go back to 19 82-83 for the benefit of the mem bers of the New Dem ocratic Party who formed a government in and around that time. I will give you some interesting statistics, and actually if you want to look in the budget book that was handed out last week, you can find them in that book as well on pages 14 , 15 , 16 and 17 , so individuals can look for themselves if they doubt some of the information that I want to read into the

17 12 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 record. Budget year 19 82-83, as an examjple, Madam Deput y Speaker: Revenue growth to Manitoba was 10 .5 percent. What was expendhure growth in that budget? 16 .9 percent. What was the inflation rate in that particular year? 8.3 perc4�nt. Expenditure growth doubled the inflation rate. What kind of a deficit did the government of the day bring in for Manitobans? It was $435 million. A deficit per capita of $421 , the first year of government for the NDP in Manitoba, and many members who sit across the way today were a par t of that governm ent.

I will now move to 19 83-84 just in case something changed dramatically for the good of Manitoba. Revenue growth in that particular year, the secc1nd budget year of their government, 16 .1 perce•nt; exp enditure growth, 13 .4 percent; inflation, 15.1 percent; deficit, $429 million; per capita deficit, $41 0 per capita. Let us go to 19 84-85 budget, same government. Revenue growth now down to 4.5 percent, expenditur e growth now at 5.6 percent. Where is inflation? 3.3 percent. What is the deficit?

It was $482 million that year, staying consistently between $400 million and $500 million for those three years, Madam Deputy Speaker, now at $457 per capitat. Let us move on to '85-86. Let us see if things net any better. Revenue grow th, 6.5 percent; expenditures, 7 percent; inflation down at 4.5 percent; deficit that year, $528 million; deficit per capita, $496 . Not getting any better. In fact, I would think most would agree getting significantly worse. Let us go to 19 86-87, same government- An Honourable Member: Is that still the sarne NDP government? Mr. Stef anson: Same government, same NDP government.

Revenue growth that year of 8.7 percent; expenditure, 8.2 percent; inflation that ye,ar of 4.3 percent; deficit, $559 million. That was 19 86-87. Deficit per capita, $522. In 19 87-88, reve nue growth that year, 19 1.3 percent -fa ntastic; expenditur e growth, 10 percent; inflation, 4.2 percent ; deficit that year, $300 millic•n; deficit per capita, $278. Let us go to the defeated budget, the 19 88-89 budget. We all know what happened there. It is not hard to tell, when looking at the track record to da.te and looking at the num bers in 19 88-89, why that bud get was defeated.

In 19 88-89: re venue grow th, 8.3 percent; expenditure, 7.5 percent; inflation was down at 4.4; the deficit, $334 million; deficit per capita, $308. * (1 500) Let us look at the average during that particular government, because we know they were defeated in '88 of that year: average revenue growth during that period of 10 .6 percent; average expenditure growth, 9.8 percent; average deficit, $438 million; average per capita deficit, 41 �ignificant revenue growth.

At a time when many busi nesses, many individuals would be dealing with the expenditur e side, working towards a balanced budget and, heaven forbid, creating a surplus or building for a rainy day or building for the futu re, and look at the kind of expenditur e growth and look at the kinds of deficits run up durin g that particular period. Thankfu lly, that '88-89 budget was defeated, Madam Deputy Speaker, and there was a change of government, so a different budget was brought in.

What the budget for that year ended up being was: rev enue growth of 12 .5 percent; expenditure growths now down to 3.4 percent; inflation actually that year was higher than expenditure growth for the first time-inflation was running at 4.4 percent; deficit brought down to $141 million; 13 0 per capita.

To be fair, let us move through a few of those years, 19 89-90, the next year: rev enue growth only 2.5 percent; expenditure growth that year, 7 percent; inflation, 4.7 percent; the deficit that year, $14 2 million-we are now getting down into the figures, the range, of 10 0 million to 15 0 million; the per capita that year, 13 1.

Let us go to 19 90-91 : Revenue growth was only .4 of a percent; expendi1ure growth was 4.9 percent, same as inflation that year-so the three budgets, one the expenditure growth was below inflation, one was the same, and one was slightly higher; the deficit that year was $292 million; the deficit per capita, 268. For 1 991 -92 : Revenue growth went to 5. 7; expenditures down at 4.7; inflation was 3.8-so expenditures were a little less than 1 percent higher; deficit that year was $334 million; the deficit per capita, 306.

The 19 92-93 budget: revenue reduction of 1 percent; expenditure growth of 3.6; and we have an estim ate for the inflation of that year of 1. 8;

April 15 , 19 93 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1713 unfortunately, that year, the deficit was $562 million; 51 3 deficit per capita. Now we have the 19 93-94 budget before us. We have revenue growth of .2 of 1 percent. We have expenditure reduction s for the first time in all of these figures that I have read off, expenditure reductions of 1 .2 percent. We have a projected deficit of $367 million and a 330 per capita deficit.

The average during that term, instead of revenue growth of 10 .6 for the first term that I showed you, we are now talking revenue growth averaging 3.3 percent, which is comparable to all other parts of Canada because of what was happening in terms of revenue growth. Instead of seeing expend iture growth of 9.8 percent as we saw in that first term , we now see expenditur e growth of 3.7 percent. Ins tead of seeing average accu mula ted deficits of $438 million, they are at least now down to $306 million and heading in the right direction, Madam Deputy Speaker-and the per capita deficit down to 280 from 41 3.

I took the time to walk through all of that, because what does that all now mean in terms of where we are today when we look at our accu mula ted general-pu rpose debt? Let us go back to 19 82-83, a time when some mem bers across the way formed a government, an NDP government in Manitoba. They started off with an accumu lated deficit of $1.8 million, so in 19 82-83, their start ing point was an accumu lated deficit of $1.8 billion.

When they left office in 19 88, the '87-88 budget year, their last budget, the accu mu lated general pu rpose debt was up to $5.1 billion, an increase during their term of six years, an increase in the accumula ted debt of six years under NDP government of $3.3 billion, 18 3 percent increase in si x years. We have now been through six budgets. Starting with 19 88-89 and going up to 19 93-94, we inherited the accumula ted debt of $5.1 billion. We started at the starting point.

The $5.1 billion that we were left with from the NDP legacy of '82 to '87, the accumula ted debt is now at $6 billion, a increase of . 9 billion, $900 million over six years, Madam Deputy Speaker, about a 17 percent increase. But more importantly, look at the magnitude, the $5.1 billion that was left at the end of '87-88 under the NDP government, and we now see what that transla tes into. We know whom we hold responsible for the fact that the public debt costs in our 19 93-94 budget will be $550 million, or 10 .1 percent of our provincial bud get.

You need to look no further than the accumula tion of debt that occurred dur ing that time period. Horrendous. I mean, people who were a part of that government, I would think, would have to hang their heads in shame for the legacy that they have left after their term governing this province. I would like to very briefl y deal with the '88-89 budget because there has been some controversy as to what we were left with in that budget. I dug out a copy of the budget book, the 19 88 Budget Address with the minister ofthe day, Mr.

Eugene Kostyra, his picture in the book, and the net budge tary requirement in that particular year was a deficit of $334 million. The book is available for everybody to get hold of. That is the budget that was defeated here in this House. When member s of our party took government, they brought in an entirely different budget. Before they did so, they took various steps, Madam Deputy Speaker. Program expenditure under the PCs during the preparation of the '88-89 budget was $48 million, or 1 percent, less than the NDP budget that was defeate d.

There was also $21 million in doctors and nur ses settlements not included in the NDP expenditu res in this book that had to be included in the '88-89 budget brought in by the Conservati ves. The Conser vative budget also had to put in $20 million into Health; $8.4 million into Educat ion; $24.6 million into Agricultur e and $10 million more into Capital. After all of that, the projected deficit brought in under the PC, the revised budget in '88-89, was $196 million, or 41 percent less than the projected deficit of $334 million that was defeated here in this House, Madam Deputy Speaker.

In reality, the actual deficit in '88-89 came in even less than the pro jected. It came in at $141 million. I think the nu mbers tell the story in terms of the legacy of debt and the legacy of taxes that were left by the government of '82 to '87-88 . But, if one needs any additional confirmation of what can happen, let us look at B.C. and the NDP government of the day in B.C. Again I will qu ote from some newspaper public ations written in the last short period of time. This is from the Vancouver Sun of March 31 , front-page stor y: The budget docum ents tabled in

17 14 LEGISL ATIVE ASSE MB LY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 the legislature Tuesday show the New Democrats plan to borrow mor e than $3 billion in the year ahead as they did in the budget year that ends today. Because of this borro wing spree, the provincial dE1bt has skyrocketed $26.4 billion from $20 billion in the space of two years, an increase of 32 percent, the largest in the entire history of the Province of British Columbia. Sum marizing, this is a government that believ,es in higher taxes, bigger spending and more deli>t. Does that sound fam iliar?

Anybody who watched Manitoba from 19 82-88 knows very well what that means and what that stands for. That is one example of one article. They go 4)(1 and on. Another article, March 31 , 19 93, headline: NDP drives up B.C.'s net debt 30 percent to $26. 3 billion in two years. New Democ rats have increased B.C.' s total net debt 30 percent in jus t two years to a grand total of $26.3 billion. It goes on. An editorial on April 1 from Victoria, this is qu oting the Social Credit leader, JaGk Weisgerber, figures the combined tax hikes now to be levied by the NDP will skim $1,000 from averane fam ily incoma.

This fellow thinks that Weisgerber is being extremely cons ervative. On March 30, a Victoria newspaper: The new economic strate gy announced by Premier Harcourt Monday means adding to the public debt and handing much more power to provincial Cr01.1m corpora tions. So we see the sa me pattern , Madam Deput y Speaker. We see the pattern establishing there that we had to live through in this province from 19 82 to '88. I want now to talk for a few moments about Manitoba's economy. Madam De puty Sp eaker: The honour able minister has nine minutes remaining. Mr.

Stefa nson: Thank you very much. * (1 51 0) I want to turn and talk about Manitoba's economy. We spend a great deal of time in this House some days talking about economic indicators and so on. I want to outline for the benefit of all memb ers in this House how Manitoba is perfor ming in terms of many of the major and relative econom ic indicators and where Manitoba, in particular, is outperf orming the national average in many areas. For example, the curre nt Conference Board provincial forecast indicates real economic growth of 2.5 percent for Manitoba in 19 93, up from 1. 8 percent in 199 2.

Manitoba grew faster than the national average last year, and Manitoba's growth rate for the two-year period, 19 92 and 19 93, is expec ted to be 4.3 percent, the fourth highest in all of Canada. I want to tum to Manitoba's unem ployment ra te, Madam Deputy Speaker. It rose to 8.6 percent in March of '83 from 8.4 in Feb rua ry . This was caused by a strong growth in the labour force last month as more people were encourag ed to look for work. The same trend was evident in Canada at the national level as the rate rose to 11 percent from 10 .8 in February.

Despite the increase, Manitoba's unemp loyment rate in March was the seco nd lowest in Canada. For the first three months of 199 3, Manitoba's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate averaged 8.6 percent, the lowest in the country and more than two full percentage points below the national average of 10 .9 percent. let us talk about Manitoba em ployment, Madam Deputy Speaker. It was estima ted at 492,000 persons on a season ally adjusted basis in March of '93, up 2,000 from February. Manitoba emplo yment growth since August of 199 2 has totalled 14, 000 persons, with most of that growth in full-time jobs.

Ful l-time emp lo yment in Manitoba averaged 383,000 persons for the first three months of 19 93, a gain of 13 ,000, or 3.5 percent from the same period last year. This was the strongest growth of any province and much better than the Canadian average growth in full-time jobs of only .6 percent for the same period. Total capital inves tmen t, Madam Dep uty Speaker, private and public in Manitoba is expected to rise 3.8 percent in 19 93 from 19 92 levels, the fou rth best growth rate among the provinces.

Private capital investment in Manitoba is expected to rise 3.6 percent in 199 3, above the national average growth of 2.8 percent. Total manu fac turing capital investment in Manitoba is expected to reach $273.6 million in '93, up 30.8 percent from '92. This is the second best performance among all provi nces and much higher than the 4.8 percent growth expected at the national level. I could go on, Madam Deputy Speaker, with more and more econom ic indicators. Since you told me I

April 15 , 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1715 only have nine minutes, I want to move to a couple of other topics before my time is up. I know everybody in this House is always interested in good news stori es. I want to put a few on the record for the benefit of all of us because, occasionally, some memb ers like to preach doom and gloom or Dr. Death. I know the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) and others are very interested in good news stories . These have all happened certainly within the last year and many within the last few months, Madam Deputy Speaker, and they are in no parti cular order.

International Game Technology, the best in its class in gaming equipment and technology, has opened an assembly plant in Winnipeg. It is the only such plant in Canada and one of jus t three in the world. The company expects to source some 90 percent of its componen ts locally star ting with 26 jobs. Let us now talk about Ayerst Organics out in Brandon. A $123-million expansion to its Brandon operation will pump some $80 million into the economy each year and create as many as 1 ,000 direct and indirect jobs. Let us talk about Canada Post putting one of their call centres, where?

Right here in Manitoba-1 00 more jobs. Not long ago, my department was able to su pport the Peo ple's Co-ope rative dairy in Winnipeg. An employee buy out has saved 10 7 jobs with financial assistance from this government. Winnipeg will soon be the sight of Canada's first centre of excellenc e for the design of power generation plants. Our government will help UMA Engineering create the centre of its operation right here in Manitoba in pa rtnership with Black & Veatch of Kansas City, who are world exper ts in this leadin g-edge field.

This project shows how cross-border partnerships can help our industries pursue exports of services beyond our borders. Let us talk about North West Company, and I know there was some concern expressed in this House some time ago when we indicated that we were supporting North West Company.

They jus t recently opened their retail distribution centre here in Winnipeg, 13 0 jobs, their only retail service centre closing facilities in Toronto and Montreal, serving over 14 0 stores in all of Cana da, intending to procure a great deal of their product right here in Manitoba, opportunities for all kinds of Manitoba businesses. They have a state-of-the-art syste m and opportunities for Manitoba companies to supply products and services. Let us talk about Unital Com mu nications opening a telecommun ication centre here in Winnipeg, Manitoba, no later than the end of '93, crea ting 400 jobs.

I should go on, because there are more, Madam Deputy Speaker, so I want to touch on a few more before I move to another topic. Monsanto Canada Inc. of St. Louis has chosen Morde n, Manitoba, as a site of a $5.1 -million manufacturing plant with export sales of $50 million and 15 to 20 high-end manu fac turing jobs to start. They chose Manitoba over close to 50 locations that they reviewed not only in Canada, but throughout the world. They chose Manitoba because of cost competitiveness and because of quality of labour.

In Portage Ia Prairie, Manitoba, Calwest Textiles has set up shop in the former Campbell Soup's plant which has been idle since 19 90. This company which is western Canada's only fabric manu fac turer will emplo y 50 people at firs t and plans to hire as many as 40 more. ISM of Winnipeg purchased Utlas International Canada, the leading provider of library information services in Canada, adding 50 new jobs to our economy. Our Premier (Mr.

Filmon) referred earlier to an announcement that is probably taking place right now, that I believe is adding in excess of 200 more jobs right here to Manitoba, many of them coming as a result of consolidation from other parts of Canada, Madam Deputy Speaker. That is some of the good news. Internationally, our government is active as well. We have supported Smith Carter Architects and Engineer s of Winnipeg in partnership with two Edmon ton firms in examin ing the feasibility of building a resort in Ukraine.

In Nov ember, five private-sector representatives accom panied our government's delegation to China to meet with high-level government officials. Now, one of those companies, Feed-Rite, a Manitoba company, Madam Deputy Speaker, is leading the charge into China. They recently won a $2-million contract to build a feed mill in Shanghai. Those are some of the good-news stor ies. I could go on and on, but I want to move very qui ckly to a couple of other issues before my time is up. . F�� too often, we forget that Manitoba has many s1gnr f1cant advantages.

We on this side do not forget, but other memb ers in this House seem to forget on occas ion and fail to recognize the abilities

17 16 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 that Manitobans have and the ability to compe1te anywhere in the world. We are amongst the lowest-cost business locations in all of Canada. A U.S. company, Boyd Company of the U.S., found that Winnipeg and Manitoba was the lowest-cost location for a facility in all of Canada, the third lowest of some 45 to !)0 locations examined throughout North America. We have a highly skilled and sta ble workforce. We have a cen tral location , an excel len t transpor tation dist ri bution centre.

We have world-class research and health care facilities and, in my opinion, we have a quality of life that is second to none. I had intended to move on to talk about what should be composed of an economic framework, but I see my time is running out. I will save that for another day. I wanted to very quickly, Madam Deputy Speaketr, touch on Workforce 2000 only because it was raisnd by some other members in the House. I want to remind members of the significance of Workforc:e 2000. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doe1r) throws out a company name and the support givEm under this program.

Since May of 19 91 to February 8, 19 93, 43,81 6 employees have been assisted in Manitoba un der the Workforce 2000 initiatives. In fact, the irony there was even the NDP government in Ontario is running full-page ads in the Toronto Star -doing what? Promoti ng a program that sounds very similar to Workforce 2000, and how we will fund up to $10,000 for job training, training as a new program created with input from the busine�;s communi ty.

It is designed to help people in Ontario get back to work, a program with full-page ads very similar to a successful program here in our province, and the Leader of the Opposition pokes fun at that program, pokes fun at the 43,800 people who have received training and su pport through the program . In concluding, Madam Deputy Speaker, I had intended to make some comments on the response to the budget from the Leader of the Opposition, and I just want to close with two thoughts on his comments. Firstly, I have to admit that I was extremely disturbed with the tone of his comments.

When he contin ually refers to honesty and inte grity, I can assure him tha t all memb ers on the government side have honesty and integrity. I talte some offence to the kind of tone and the kind of comments he would make. I certainly wish when he deals with the budget that he would put forward ahernatives and tell us what the NDP would do if they were in power. Thank you very much. Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to rise today and put a few comments on the record in regard to the budget.

This is the si xth budget that this parti cu lar government has brought in, and I note that when the government presented their throne speech earlier this year they talked about innovation. They, I think, used that term about nine or 1 0 times in their throne speech, and one would hope that innovation would transfer and would also be used in their budget in how they decided to spend their dollars and spend the dollars on behalf of Manitobans. There are three areas that I would like to speak of today, Madam Deputy Speaker. Those are reform, restruc turing, responsibili ty-actu ally four-and revenue generation.

I think what this government has talked about but in fact what this government has failed to really put in place is real reform when it comes to governments. I know this government likes to talk about what happens in other provinces across this country. They refer very much to what goes on in Saskatc hewan, Ontario and British Columbia. In fact, I sometimes wonder if the First Mi nister (Mr. Filmon) should not in fact move to Saskatchewan and be the president of the Roy Romanow fan club because he speaks of Mr. Romanow so often and talks about the activities of the Saskatchewan government.

We recognize that across this country we are facing very difficult choices. We are facing difficuh choices in Manitoba. They are facing difficult choices in other provinces as well. We recognize that governm ents have to start looking at how they spend their dollars. We recognize that governmen ts have to get deficits under control and have to get the debt under control. * (1 520) (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) When you look at the last 18 years, Mr. Speaker, of the budgets in this Province of Manitoba, we have really gone on a downward slope in regard to the deficit.

I think that is a sad legacy that we are leaving our children. In fact, we have to start making some real changes. Remember, this government was elected in 19 88. h is a number of years later. It is five years later.

April 15 , 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 1717 This government has had an opportunity to actually cre ate some real reform and restru ctu ring in government. They have failed to do that. They have failed in a number of ways. Now they have made some successes and some gains. I will certainly admit to that. Overall, I believe, in regard to real reform and looking at a new way of doing business, looking at a new attitude, they really have not done the job that they should have. When I talk about reform , Mr.

Speaker, and a new attitude, we are talking about a government getting a grip on what exactly it is that governments really should do. What are the areas that they should provide services in? What are the areas where they should not be providing services but in fact should provide leadership in the area of policy and philosophy? What do governmen ts in the 19 90s and mo ving into the 21s t Centur y exp ec t Manitobans to do as far as taking respo nsibility for their own lives? How much does government provide support to individuals and to fam ilies? I think it is a very philosophical question, Mr. Speaker.

When I think of the extreme left and the extreme right and perhaps the group in between, I always think of the New Democrats as being a party who really believed in the philosophy that you should do for people, that rather than allowing for people to be on their own and get jobs and learn to grow and develop as individuals, the state like to intervene to such an extent that we were really providing so many services to people that they were not given an opportunity to go out on their own initiative and do things.

When I look at the extreme right side of the spectru m, and I am not saying that this government is necessarily totally on the extreme right, but some of their policies are, then there is that philosophy or that idea that as an individual you hav e responsibility for yourself and for your life without any government intervention. If you can succeed and you can get educated and you can do well in your life, so be it, good for you .

The more successfu l you are, the better, but if you are an individual that for whateve r reasons, a variety of reasons, wh ether they be socioeco nomic, education, geography, whateve r those reasons are, you have difficulties in fact in succeeding and perhaps succeeding in life, then government is not there to support you at all and you fai l, you do not do as well. Those are the individuals in our society who are disadvantaged and who do not have the same advantages. I think there has to be a balance, Mr. Speake r, between those two extre mes. There has to be a balance.

That balance is, yes, individuals should be responsible for their own well-being where possi ble, but sometimes there need to be supports and assistance in place to help those individuals, to help them actually move up the ladder to success, however they define success, to assist them, to provide some resources or some tools so they can, as they go back to an old model, actually learn to do by doing, but they need some resources to assist them. All individuals do not have the same opportunities to do well and to succeed. Government has to take on and provide some leadership in some of those areas.

Whether those par ticular services or supp orts, as an exam ple, fa mily couns elling services for parents and for families, whether it is providing reasonable health care for individuals, whether it is assisti ng a busi ness person in the form of a small business loan, whe ther ther e is assistance in the area of providing child care for families, whether it is assisti ng farmers in some form of financial assistance so that in fact they are able to continue on farm ing and then produce a successful crop and continue to be self-sufficient after that, whateve r the kind of resources that need to be available for individuals-and there is certainly a wide spectrum-gove rnment has to come to grips with what those services are.

My concern with this particular budget is that we are starting to see a move towards the right. We are star ting to see government move away from providing some of what I would call essential services, es sential resources and tools for individuals so that in fact they can proceed, so they can make a go of it if it is in a business, so they can provide for their families, so there is going to be a qua lity of life, Mr. Speaker, so this is my concern in this

part icular budget. We are starting to see that swing to the right, and we are not providing some of these services for people. We are starting to move away from that. When I say providing services for people, Mr. Spea ker, I am not ne cessari ly sayi ng that governments should deliver all of those services, but governmen ts have to provide the leadership to

1718 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 ensure that in fact those services and resources 21re av ailable in the commu nity. Perhaps it is com mu ni ty groups, perhaps it is non profit organizations who are actu ally providing those services. Perhaps it is busine ss who is act ually providing training for individuals or providing investment in their own province. Whichever the group that is providing that service, government has a responsibili ty to ensure that it is happening in our province.

They do not necessarily have to be the actual ser vice deliverers, but they have a responsibility to ensur e that those service are in place. When I think of some of the reform ini tiatives that this government could have taken but did not, I question really why they did not decide to be bold in some areas and why they actually did not take some steps. Did they really look at the entire ��6 departments and actually look at where some restructuring could occur? Have we seen any move towards education reform?

We had heard the words sp okEtn "education reform ," but we really have not seen ar1y real concrete examples or anyth ing written down on paper that can say, this is what the government ,of Manitoba feels that we should do as far as educatic•n reform. There are so many areas that need to be looketd at. If we take the example of education, we need to be looking at curricu lum services. Are we on the cutting edge of curriculum here in Manitoba? DOEIS this budget provide for an array of curriculum services here in Manitoba?

Are school divisions, particularly the ones in rural Manitoba who do not have their own curricu lum specialists, going to be able to actu ally provide a reasonable curricu lum to their students? What ab out their tea chers an d staff development? Has this government, by the budg,et where they have actually removed some autonomy from the school division trust ees, and also unfairly divided how the money is going to be spent throughout school divisions because you see hu�;1e inequities across the school divisions, Mr. Speaker, in this province?

How are school divisions going Ito be able to ensure that teachers do receive some type of professional development? That professional development is necessary s:o that in fact teachers can keep up with the curriculum changes that are going on in this province. It is very, very im portant that teachers be al lowed that.

When you look at the government in terms of their own staff, and sending their staff out to courses and ensuring that in fact the Civil Service Commission has a staff training and development branch so that staff training is provided to the civil service, one thi nks that the governmen t does feel that professional development is important in one area, yet on the other hand they seem to be quite willing to allow school divisions to take those professional development days away from teachers.

We would like to see in the education reform some real changes in the area of co-ordination of services, in the area of boundaries, and in the area of the structure of the Department of Education. Is the Department of Education structur ed so that it is the most effective way of delivering the services that it needs to deliver, whether those services are for school divisions, whether those services are for teachers? Is that the best structure within the Department of Education? * (1 530) What about school division boundaries?

We have a number of school divisions out in rural Manitoba, Antler River as an example, which actually looked atthe idea of possibly amal gamating school division boundaries a number of years ago. This was a school division that actu ally went ahead and did some qu estioning and said, this is something we would lik e to look at because of our enrollment which is decreasing, because of the fact that we have such a large geographical area but in fact are not able to provide the same level of services that more urban school divisions provide. They wanted to actually look at the school division boundaries themselves.

We have schools out in Emerson and Domain, and we have some school trustees and some parents out there who are starti ng to say, maybe we should all be part of Frontier School Division, because they feel that the formula and the funding that is available to Frontier School Division would actually meet the needs more of those towns and schools down in the southern part of the province. So there is a need to review. H a governmen t is going to be bold, if a government is going to start showing Man itobans that they are prepared to manage the departments and they are prepared to

April 15 , 19 93 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 1719 move Manitoba into the 21s t Century, they have to start looking at restruc turing and ref orm. One of the areas that they could do that is in the area of education and looking at boundaries and school divisions. This government promised in 19 90 that they would do that. Unfortunately, it is now two years, three years later, and we still have not heard where that is. Now I am not going to stand here and presu ppose that if in fact we look at a review of school division boundaries, what the analysis and the results would be of that?

I think we have to keep in mind that a reason for doing that is to ensure that we get the best quality service for the most reas onable cost. We are concerned about qual ity of education, and we may find out, if there was a review done, that there are many, many ideas. In fact , school division boundaries might not change at all. Perhaps there would be a total restructu ring, a total administrative change.

We have to start changing the paradi gms within which we think, and we have to start, I think, at the grassroots level, and talking to parents, and talking to teachers, talking to school officials, talking to politicians and sayi ng, what type of education system do we want to see here in Manitoba? Let us not think of all the paradigms that we now operate under. Let us try to remove those boundaries and be creative and think, what do we really want to accomplish here in the form of education? What do we want our children to actually learn when they go through a school syste m?

We have hear d in the last few days the ever-increasing concern of violence in schools. Again, here is an example of where government has to take some leadership and ensure that in fact we are addressing the issue of violence in the schools. It may not be leadership in the form of providing the direct services, or it may be in some cases, but they have to take that leadership role.

They have to ensure that in fact the teachers and the school divisions and the schools have the resources and have the tools necessary to work on the prob lem, address the probl em, of children who have behavioural problems, who are very violent, who get expelled from school. Then where do they go? They are out on the streets, and they start to form gangs. I mean, this is becoming very common. What do we do with those situations? There are no easy answe rs, because I think for any politician to stand up and say the answers are simple, they are being very naive. The answers are not simple. They are very complex.

They take a lot of planning. They take a lot of co-ordi nation. They take a lot of consultation with the players involved with the schools, with the probations department, with the Department of Family Services. It takes a lot of co-ordination, and it takes a lot of planning to ensure that there are some services available. I know the Minister of Family Services (Mr.

Gille shamm er) today spoke of guidance counsellors in the schools, and I know certainly in my conversations with teachers and school trustees, there is a recognition that guidance counsellors are in fact an integral part of the school sys tem, and particu larly in the elem entary schools, as well. More and more is there a need for guidance counsell ors to spend time with children who have special needs, who have behaviour problems or have difficulties within the school syste m. I am not aware though of too many guidance counsello rs who are spending time in the homes with families.

I do not believe that they have the time. They are quite overworked as it is within the school syste m, so how do we co-ordinate between what the guidance counsellor does in the school system and what the parents may need in the home and the community, because certainly Child and Family Services, although they have a mandate accord ing to the legislation to deal with prevention and to look at prevention and quality of life for fam ilies, they are not able to provide that service. They, in fact, are not even able to provide the protection services which are mandated under the legislation.

We know of many instances of children who are 14 , 15 , who have been sexually abused, and Child and Family Services is not able to deal with those particular children. We have seen a growing number of cases where, in fact, we have waiting lists. We have a Family Services Incorpo rated of Winnipeg, a nonprofit organization that as well provides services to families. They have waiting lists. It takes a while to get in to see these particular counsellors, and there are more and more referrals that we are receiving every day.

Families from every socioeconomic background are often times faced with difficult problems with their adolescents and with their children, and they want

17 20 LEG ISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 15 , 19 93 some type of support and some help. They a.re prepared to take the responsibility of looking after their children, but they just need a few resources to assist them to do that. That is where I think governments and where this government needs to take a leadership role. If this government in their budget really wanted to look at restructu ring, I think we could have seon some other changes to be made.

One of the areas, when I look at the Department of Health in terms of restructu ring'-there has been a comm ittee that has been meeting for the last four or five years, and thoy have looked at whether the public health serviens which are provided by the City of Winnipeg and public health services which are provided by the Province of Manitoba, if in fact there should be an amalgamation, or if it should be delivered under one administrative progr am . The Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) sighs at m'e.

He knows very well that this is an ongoing issue and that there have been committees meeting for five and six years . Part of the problem is it has been the burea ucrats who have been meeting, and one ques tions what the objectives are of thes e bur eaucrats, some from the city and some from the province. Do they really want to see a solution? Do thE•Y really want to see an integration of these public health serv ices? We have seen a duplic ation of services. We have seen ove rlap of serv ice. We have seen fragmentation of service.

I think the people of Winnipeg and the people of Manitoba want to see a quality service, and why do we really need two ju risdictions who are providing services iin the area of public health? There needs to be some changes. I would suggest-and I know that the Minister of Health has many, many issues on his plate and on his desk; it is cert ainly a huge portfolio- that the min iste r perhaps take a look at where that comm ittee is at and what progress they have made over the last number of years.

Certainly, when I was a civil servant I had an opportunity to see the odd minutes from some of those meetings and I qu estioned, in fact, what kind of progress they were making. I believe these are some of the stru ctural changes that really need to be looked at. I also think we need to look at the commu nity health services, and maybe the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) is doing this, and look at the services that we are now provid ing in the commu nity. • (1 540) Is it important that government deliver a lot of the mental health services, that government deliver a lot of the services to the handicapped?

We have communi ty nonprofit organizations out there that deliver some of the services. What is the balance that we require? Is there some major restructu ring that needs to occur? Part of the difficulty when you deliver services within a government by the very nature of government is that they are very bu reaucra tic. It is very difficult to get rid of that red tape.

Oftentimes I think what we find ourselves doing when we are in government, rather than actually devoting 80 to 90 percent of our time in actually ensuring that there is a quality service delivered to the client or to the individual out there, we are doing paperwork and we are doing nonsensical work that really has no value. The member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld) spoke about this the other day in his remarks.

He talked about how bureau cracy perpetuates itself and how oftentimes there is time spent on items that have nothing to do with delivering a service to a child out there, a service to a pregnant woman, a service to an individual who is experiencing mental health difficulties. I think we have to look at this bureaucracy and see what in fact we can do to restructure and what the changes are.

When you have people in senior management positions, assistant deputy ministers who spend a lot of their time worrying about which staff have carryover of vacations and what is going on at a regional level, one wonders if for $70,000 or $80,000 a year those people could not be put to better use in terms of actually doing planning and deciding on what services should be delivered out in the c