Manitoba Hansard — 13 May 2013 (Sitting 40, 40th Legislature, 2nd Session)

40-2-40

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Fortieth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Daryl Reid Speaker Vol. LXV No. 40 - 1:30 p.m., Monday, May 13, 2013 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Fortieth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital NDP ALLUM, James Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson NDP BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli NDP BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park NDP BRAUN, Erna Rossmere NDP BRIESE, Stuart Agassiz PC CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East NDP CHIEF, Kevin, Hon. Point Douglas NDP CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan NDP CROTHERS, Deanne St.

James NDP CULLEN, Cliff Spruce Woods PC DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk NDP DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FRIESEN, Cameron Morden-Winkler PC GAUDREAU, Dave St. Norbert NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Liberal GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC HOWARD, Jennifer, Hon. Fort Rouge NDP IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Richmond NDP JHA, Bidhu Radisson NDP KOSTYSHYN, Ron, Hon. Swan River NDP LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. Dawson Trail NDP MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns NDP MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden PC MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor, Hon. Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel NDP MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East PC NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake NDP OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River NDP PALLISTER, Brian Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PETTERSEN, Clarence Flin Flon NDP REID, Daryl, Hon. Transcona NDP ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Kewatinook NDP RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia NDP ROWAT, Leanne Riding Mountain PC SARAN, Mohinder The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron St. Paul PC SELBY, Erin, Hon. Southdale NDP SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo PC STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin NDP SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto NDP WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas NDP WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WIGHT, Melanie Burrows NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC Vacant Morris

1177 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, May 13, 2013 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen. Good afternoon, everyone. Please be seated.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 44–The International Education Act Hon. Erin Selby (Minister of Advanced Education and Literacy): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education (Ms. Allan), that Bill 44, The International Education Act;

Loi sur l'éducation internationale, be now read for a first time. Motion presented. Ms. Selby: Today I am introducing a bill, the proposed International Education Act. This bill will be the first of its kind in Canada and offers greater protection to international students choosing Manitoba as a place to study. It establishes guidelines for educational providers and for those who recruit international students to ensure international students and potential students are treated fairly. And I recommend this bill to all members of the Legislature. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Any further introduction of bills? Seeing none– PETITIONS Municipal Amalgamations–Reversal Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the–this is the background to this petition: The provincial government recently announced plans to amalgamate any municipalities with fewer than 1,000 constituents.

The provincial government did not consult with or notify the affected municipa lities of this decision prior to the Throne Speech announcement on November 19th, 2012, and has further imposed unrealistic deadlines. If the provincial government imposes amalgamations, local democratic representation will be drastically limited while no t providing any real improvements in cost savings. Local governments are further concerned that amalgamation will fail to address the serious issues currently facing municipalities, including an absence of reliable infrastructure funding and timely flood compensation.

Municipalities deserve to be treated with respect. Any amalgamations should be voluntary in nature and led by the municipality themselves. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Local Government afford local governments the respect they deserve and reverse his decision to force municipalities with fewer than 1,000 constituents to amalgamate. Mr. Speaker, this is signed by D. Wutzke, R. Maltaiz, D. Bergson and many other Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to have been received by the House. Mrs.

Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government recently announced plans to amalgamate any municipality with fewer than 1,000 constituents. The provincial government did not consult with or notify the affected municipalities of this decision prior to the Throne Speech announcement on

1178 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 November 19th, 2012, and has further imposed unrealistic deadlines. If the provincial government imposes amalgamations, local democratic representation will be drastically limited while not providing any real improvements in cost savings. Local governments are further concerned that amalgamation will fail to address the serious issues currently facing municipalities, including an absence of reliable infrastructure funding and timely flood compensation. Municipalities deserve to be treated with respect.

All–any amalgamations should be voluntary in nature and led by the municipalities themselves. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Local Government afford local governments the respect they deserve and reverse his decision to force amalgamations with fewer than 1,000 constituents to amalgamate. This petition's signed by R. Goraluk, K. Goraluk, C. Koss and many more Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Hydro Capital Development–NFAT Review Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

These are the reasons for this petition: Manitoba Hydro was mandated by the provincial government to commence a $21- billion capital development plan to service uncertain electricity export markets. In the last five years, competition from alternative energy sources is decreasing the price and demand for Manitoba's hydroelectricity and causing the financial viability of this c apital plan to be questioned. The $21- billion capital plan requires Manitoba Hydro to increase domestic electricity rates by up to 4 per cent annually for the next 20 years and possibly more if export opportunities fail to materialize.

We petition the L egislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge that the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro create a complete and transparent Needs For and Alternatives To review of Manitoba Hydro's total capital development plan to ensure the financial viability of Manitoba Hydro. And this petition is signed by G.A. Rempel, B. Wiens, D. Ronceray and many, many more fine Manitobans. Highway 217 Bridge Repair Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

And these are the reasons for this petition: The bridge over the Red River on Highway 217 outside of St. Jean Baptiste was built in 1947 and provides a vital link for economic opportunities and community development on both sides of the river. The Department of Infrastructure and Transportation closed the bridge after spending significant sums of money and time on rehabilitation efforts in the summer of 2012. Individuals require numerous trips across the river each day to access schools, businesses and health-care facilities.

The bridge closure causes daily undue hardship and inconvenience for residents due to the time requirements and higher transportation costs. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Infrastru cture and Transportation to repair or replace the existing bridge as soon as possible to allow communities on both sides of the river to return to regular activities. And this petition is signed by N. Sabourin, M. Lavallée and M. Sabourin and many, many m ore fine Manitobans. * (13:40) Provincial Trunk Highways 16 and 5 North– Traffic Signals Mr.

Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition: The junction of PTH 16 and PTH 5 north is an increasingly busy intersection which is used by motorists and pedestrians alike. The Town of Neepawa has raised concerns with the Highway Traffic Board about safety levels at this intersection.

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1179 The Town of Neepawa has also passed a resolution requesting that Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation install traffic lights at this intersection in order to increase safety. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Infr astructure and Transportation to consider making the installation of traffic lights at the intersection of PTH 16 and PTH 5 north a priority project in order to help protect the safety of the motorists and pedestrians who use it. This petition is signed b y B. Sumner, J. Fuglsang, N.

Nicholson and many, many other fine Manitobans. Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provinc ial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this is signed by J. Seniuk, C. Longley, D. Longley and many others. Hydro Capital Development–NFAT Review Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

These are the reasons for this petition: Manitoba Hydro was mandated by the provincial government to commence a $21- billion capital development plan to service uncertain electricity export markets. In the last five y ears, competition from alternative energy sources is decreasing the price and demand for Manitoba's hydroelectricity and causing the financial viability of this capital plan to be questioned. The $21- billion capital plan requires Manitoba Hydro to increase domestic electricity rates by up to 4 per cent annually for the next 20 years and possibly more if export opportunities fail to materialize.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro create a complete and transparent Needs For and Alternatives To review of Manitoba Hydro's total capital development plan to ensure the financial viability of Manitoba Hydro. This petition is signed by S. Bjornson, S. Jarvis, C. Tanasichuk and many other fine Manitobans. Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

These are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without a legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine whether major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government not to raise the PST without holding provincial referendum.

Submitted on behalf of S. Warren, A. Hermann, L. Kuryk and thousands of other fine Manitobans. Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition:

1180 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally requir ed referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary.

Therefore, we petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this petition is signed by G. McElroy, A. Steinebel, B. Hodgson and many, many more fine Manitobans. Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine what major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This is signed by T. Stilwell, C. Cameron, D. Conolly and many other Manitobans. Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for the petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation and will harm Manitoba families. And Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this petition's signed by M. Moffit, M. Vust and G. Tully. Thank you very much. Mr.

Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial governme nt to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this petition is signed by D. Smeltz, F. Smeltz, E. Toms and many, many other fine Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition:

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1181 The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government not to raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this petition is signed by R. Palmer, M. Wharton, J. Wharton and many, many other Manitobans. Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye) : I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their d emocratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. * (13:50) We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government not to raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This petition is signed boy –signed by J. Levenec, L. Alexiuk, A. Klassen and many fine Manitobans. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The pr ovincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PS T is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by J. McDonald, M. Spier, L. Hidri and many others. Mr. Speaker: Any further petitions? Seeing none– MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Manitoba Day Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of A boriginal and Northern Affairs): Yes, I have a statement for the House. Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge Manitoba Day, which was this past Sunday, May 12th. It was the 143rd anniversary of the Province of Manitoba. There ar e–there were numerous displays and events that occurred yesterday and over the weekend in recognition of Manitoba Day throughout the province. Three years ago, this Legislature recognized May 12th as Treaty Day. Earlier today, we again honoured the Manitoba treaties numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 10. The day commenced with a sunrise ceremony in Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation.

The festivities continued in the Legislative Rotunda, beginning with an opening prayer by Elder Charlie Nelson, a song by Young Nation Drum Group, an overview of the pipe ceremony and water song by Elder Peter Atkinson and a water ceremony conducted by Sherry Copenance. We heard presentations from Swan Lake Chief Francine Meeches and Treaty Relations Commissioner of Manitoba Jamie Wilson. There was also an exchange of gifts among the three parties, symbolizing the general format of the treaty-making process.

1182 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 The Treaty Advocacy Award was presented to Dennis White Bird, former Treaty Relations Commissioner for Manitoba. Dennis has shown great dedication to the fulfillment of the true spirit and intent of the treaty relationship and the education of both First Nation and non-First Nation youth. Seven of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Council of Elders were presented with the Quee n Diamond Jubilee medals from the treaty commission of Manitoba.

I congratulate these elders: Wayne Scott from Swan Lake, Harry Bone from Keeseekoowenin, James Cote from the Waywayseecappo First Nation, Elder William G. Lathlin from Opaskwayak, D'Arcy Linklater from Nisichawayasihk, Elder Joe Hyslop from Northlands Denesuline, and Doris Pratt from Sioux Valley. Mr. Speaker, this government has previously honoured the Metis, the Inuit and First Nations people in the province of Manitoba.

May 12th is a day w e honour the treaties not only because we recognize that First Nations are the founders of this province but because the treaty relationship between First Nations and Canadians needs to be better understood and acknowledged. The treaties have not become o bsolete. Far from it, they are living documents that all Canadians need to recognize. Without the treaties between the Crown and First Nations, the growth and prosperity of this country would not have been possible. We are all treaty people regardless of status.

Many of the promises centre–to the treaties have yet to be fulfilled or widely understood. It is for that reason that we have been working with the treaty commission to have treaties as part of the education curriculum, just as we have put the residential school legacy in the school curriculum. In the recent budget speech we also pledged to work with First Nations and the federal government on a new model to build and improve schools on reserves. Personally, I have been–I've had the honour to repre sent the east -side communities of Lake Winnipeg for nearly 20 years now.

I have seen first-hand the poverty and other challenges many face in our province. The spirit and determination of our citizens despite these obstacles is what makes our province a great place to live. That's why our government developed the east - side transportation initiative in partnership with 13 First Nations to build an all-weather road network on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. Similarly, we have partnered with the Pimachiowin Aki First Nations to protect the largest intact boreal forest on the planet and are working with them on the UNESCO declaration as a World Heritage Site for that region.

Working in partnership with First Nations on hydro developments are a recognition tha t future developments will only occur with the participation of First Nations. We cannot go backwards to the paternalism of the past. The Wuskwatim partnership with Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation was the first partnership in Canada and is the model for the Keeyask and Conawapa projects. First Nations across this country are rightly growing impatient waiting for the implementation of the treaties as was promised when they were signed over a hundred years ago.

It is not acceptable in 2013 to accept the widespre ad poverty and lack of basic infrastructure to so many First Nation residents and what they have to live with. Our government recognizes the value and importance of northern Manitoba and pledges itself to see the north truly achieve its dreams.

That's why we've worked with First Nations on implementing TLE on partnerships, on hydro development, addressing the damages caused by past developments that excluded First Nations, the establishment and expansion of the University College of the North, putting dialysis renal units on reserves, the creation of the First People's Economic Growth Fund, building northern infrastructure and protecting the boreal forest by investing in a UNESCO World Heritage Site amongst other northern initiatives. Fundamentally, Mr.

Speaker, we are all treaty people, and we must work together to recognize and implement the treaties that are the foundation of this province and country. Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark Manitoba Day, which took place yest erday. This year it coincided with another very important day, that of Mother's Day. Mr. Speaker, as you are well aware, Manitoba has a rich history that is deserving of an occasion such as this.

We know that Manitoba's history is dynamic, our generosity unmatched and our spirit as Manitobans truly remarkable, but the true treasure of Manitoba lies in its people. The people of Manitoba were the first to admit women fully into the franchise. Winnipeg was the first city in Canada to establish a United Way c hapter, and Manitoba's arts

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1183 and cultural scene is unmatched. These are just a few of the reasons why I'm proud to help mark Manitoba's 143rd birthday. Mr. Speaker, people from all around the world come to Manitoba to experience the beauty, character and r ichness of our province. The Winnipeg Folk Festival is one of North America's largest outdoor folk music festivals. The Fringe Festival draws thousands of Manitobans and folks from around the world to the Exchange District every summer. The Royal Winnipeg Ballet is a truly unmatched ballet company not only in Canada but around the world.

The Royal Canadian Mint mints coins for more than 60 countries as well. Spruce Woods Provincial Park is an international gem located right in our own backyard. * (14:00) Mr. Speaker, we have come a long way since the Manitoba Act was given royal assent on May 12th, 1870, and we have much to be proud of. On behalf of all the members in this House, I would like to join in marking Manitoba's 143rd birthday, Manitoba Day. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to speak to the minister's statement. Mr.

Speaker: Does the honourable member for River Heights have leave to speak to the ministerial statement? [Agreed] Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I join others in the Legislature to celebrate the 143rd anniversary of Manitoba becoming a province. It is –we've come a long way since 1870 and a tremendous amount has been accomplished. We have a province with wonderful lakes like Lake Winnipeg. We have a city which is gr owing and a economic base which is diversified. And we need as Manitobans to sit back and just think carefully about who we are and what we as Manitobans have accomplished.

But Manitoba Day is also a day to recognize the partnership we have with people in the First Nations community. The Treaty Day treaties were very important when they were signed and they still are very, very important today. It was good to have the ceremonies over the noon hour. And even as we look at what has been accomplished, it is important that we look at what we still have to do. As the minister has said –and I echo– that it is not acceptable in 2013 to accept that widespread poverty and lack of basic infrastructure that so many First Nations have. The poverty rates are still far too high.

We have 10,000 children in care. We have more than a thousand homes in northern Manitoba with no running water. We have our wonderful lake currently the most threatened lake in the planet. And it is important that even as we remember how much has been done that we dedicate ourselves to address these tasks which still have to be accomplished. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Honourable Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation, on a ministerial statement. Flood Update–Ochre River Hon. Steve Ashton (Mi nister responsible for Emergency Measures ): A ministerial statement, yes.

I rise in the House today to provide an update on the extraordinary event that took place in the community of Ochre River over the weekend. Strong winds caused a massive ice shift e arly Friday evening on Dauphin Lake resulting in ice pushing up upon Ochre Beach along the southwest shore of the lake in the rural municipality of Ochre River. A total of 27 properties were impacted by the ice rush. The municipality needs to be commended for its role in managing the evacuation, securing the properties and preventing injuries. They continue to work today to clear ice away from the structures.

As we saw over the weekend, high winds can move broken or weakened ice around the lake. With much of the ice still in place on Manitoba's large lakes, there is the risk of ice pileup on windward shores. The current weather forecast calls for a moderate southeasterly wind for this afternoon for much of southern Manitoba. This could result in a low ris k of shoreline ice pileup on the windward shores of major lakes, including Lake Winnipeg, Lake Manitoba, lake–pardon me, Dauphin Lake and Lake Winnipegosis.

Tomorrow afternoon, there is the probability of strong southwest winds which could shift to the northwest, creating a high risk of shoreline ice pileup on the windward shore of Lake Manitoba. There is moderate to high risk of shoreline ice pileup on windward shores of Lake Winnipeg and Dauphin Lake. And there is a moderate risk of shoreline ice pileup on the windward shores Lake St. Martin and Lake Winnipegosis.

1184 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 Residents are reminded to remain alert to weather conditions and to monitor news media for warnings. Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I thank the minister for the update. We're pleased to hear t he impact of the spring flooding has subsided, of course, and the devastation on Dauphin Lake and Ochre Beach where the fast -moving ice floes damaged cottages and homes along the lake. And, of course, also the folks on the east side of Lake Manitoba had some ice damage as well, and we certainly want to be watching that closely.

And those that are still in repair of the damage from the flood of 2011, this is yet another frustration. We hope the victims and the damage will be dealt with in a very quick manne r. We'll also be watching the threat of ice and high winds on the shorelines of all Manitoba lakes and beaches as it continues to melt this spring, and certainly we want to commend those RMs has been impacted and those that are responsible for the quick assessment on these properties to be done in a very efficient manner as well. So with that, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Yes, I ask leave to speak to the minister's statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for River H eights have leave to speak to speak to the ministerial statement? [Agreed] Mr. Gerrard: I thank the minister for his statement. Like many other Manitobans, I was surprised and very concerned when I heard about the events on Dauphin Lake Friday night. It w as a huge pileup of ice and damage to 27 homes, a number of them pretty much destroyed from what I can see.

I think we're very fortunate there was no loss of life, and certainly I'd like to, along with others in the Legislature, extend concerns to those who have been so severely affected by this turn of events. It is a caution in terms of what could still happen because there's a lot of ice yet to break up and quite substantial amounts of it, and so we clearly need to be on the lookout. That ice can be am azingly powerful when it gets moving and the huge chunks get blown by the wind, and this was really a demonstration of what can happen. So, Mr.

Speaker, thanks to the minister once again for his statement and update, and we hope this is the last big ice p ileup, but we have a little bit let– yet to go and hope that things aren't any worse. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today David Kaisaris, chair of the St. Norbert BIZ, Bob Roehle of St. Norbert BIZ and Judy Roehle, who are the guests of the honourabl e member for St. Norbert (Mr. Gaudreau). On behalf of honourable members, we welcome you here this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTIONS PST Increase NDP Election Promise Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on CJOB radio last week, the Premier admitted that he regretted making his no- tax-increase promise in the election of 2011. He went on to rationalize that he absolutely had to raise taxes, both last year and this year, by a record amount because things changed. So let's examine t hat. What really changed? Mr. Speaker, the flood was long over. The costs had been estimated. The federal government covers 90 per cent of most of the claims. Not much unknown there: strike one.

Global economic downturn, three years in and the diverse Manitoba economy is chugging along doing better than predicted. No excuse there: strike two. Premier was Finance minister for almost a decade, so he can't blame inexperience. That would, to me, Mr. Speaker, be strike three. So what has really changed, apart from the Premier's position on his promise? Not much, except the change in his position. So if he really wants forgiveness, Mr. Speaker, why not start off by making an apology to Manitobans for breaking his word? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): I appreciate the question from the member opposite because, once again, it allows us to underline the difference between his approach to government –a thousand jobs lost, $287 million cut, not to mention another equivalent amount of money in tax reductions. His approach is one that would put more Manitobans on the unemployment rolls at a time of great economic uncertainty.

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1185 Our approach, Mr. Speaker, is to find a way forward that grows the economy, provides infrastructure investments, including roads, including flood protection, including hospitals, including personal care homes and schools, those things that will allow Manitobans to take their place in our economy and prosper for many generations to come. * (14:10) Mr. Pallister: I didn't hear an apology there, Mr. Speaker. I think Manitobans realize that the Premier had a choice and he chose wrong and now he's asking Manitobans to accept his promise breaking.

But on the PST, quite frankly, he hasn't broken his promise quite yet. He's like an errant husband seeking advanced approval from his spouse for an affair that he's going to have later on. He's saying, forgive me, dear, I plan to break my vows in six weeks' time. So the MLA intends to break his word and in so doing break the laws of our Province in six weeks on July 1st. Maybe he could save us the misrepresentation about our position and give us his position.

Maybe he could save us the sanctimonious prattle about regret too, and maybe he could just do this: Maybe he could back off on a PST hike and just keep his word to the people of Manitoba. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the commitment we made to Manitobans was we would continue to provide opportunities for young people to get an education in Manit oba, and we have done that. And we know the members opposite would've slashed all the education budgets by at least 1 per cent and shut down the building of schools.

The commitment we made to the people of Manitoba was to continue to invest in health care, which is why we've expanded the nursing program, which is why we've announced QuickCare clinics, which is why we've announced access centres and which is why we've provided rapid treatment for people with cancer and free cancer drugs. Members opposite would've cut all those programs, Mr. Speaker. They would've cut all their – all those programs with their indiscriminate across - the-board cuts. That was not a promise they made in the election. They promised to run deficits to 2017-18 and to invest in healt h care.

Why is the Leader of the Opposition retreating from his election promises? Mr. Pallister: Mr. Speaker, the taxpayer protection act represents a form of marriage contract. It says to Manitobans that they have a say. They get a say in the relationship they have with their government partner, and the Premier is saying he doesn't respect that partnership. He's saying he's willing to break his word. He's willing to tear up the contract. The Premier is saying that his partner's feelings don't matter. He's saying that he can do whatever he wants.

He wants to stay in the marriage, but he wants to be a bachelor at the same time. He wants it both ways. He wants a relationship with people he disrespects, disenfranchises with his actions. His old vows don't seem to matter much to him. Now, on July 1st he says he wants to begin an affair, an affair with a new 8 per cent PST. He says it's only going to go on for 10 years, this affair, Mr. Speaker. But in two or three years when he comes back to his betrayed partner, the people of Manitoba, doesn't he realize that the locks may well be changed? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, such a tortured analogy.

It's–I am proud of the fact that we were the government that brought in equal benefits for people regardless of their se xual orientation when it comes to marriage, Mr. Speaker, and I'm glad we treated all couples equally in the province of Manitoba when it comes to property rights. And I only hope the members opposite recognize the importance of ensuring people in Manitoba, regardless of their background, are treated fairly when they're in schools and they're not being bullied. Mr.

Speaker, at a time of economic uncertainty, at a time when we've received a report that says we need to invest another billion dollars on top of the $1.2 billion we've already spent on flood protection in Manitoba, we owe Manitobans a program that will move the economy forward, that will protect Manitoba communities, that will educate young people to have opportunities in the economy for jobs that will attract and bring more people to Manitoba– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The First Minister's time has expired. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. VLTs Additional Terminals Mr.

Brian Pallister (Leader of the Offici al Opposition): Yes, Sir, yes. He owes Manitobans

1186 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 more, Mr. Speaker. He owes them the truth about the reason he broke his promise, and that's something they have yet to hear from him. I think the biggest addict to gambling in this province is the provinc ial government. That was a quote from the Minister of Water Stewardship (Mr. Mackintosh) a few years ago while he was in opposition, but things have changed. Apparently the government is now planning to introduce 500 new VLTs. That's a –that brings to the total increase of 30 per cent, Mr. Speaker.

In August of 2007 the Manitoba gaming market study was tabled, and Manitoba has the greatest number of larger VLT sites in Canada, two thirds of them on First Nations. VLTs and casinos are 80 per cent of our gam bling industry. The report concluded, Mr. Speaker, that we do not believe that the Winnipeg market area would be better served by the addition of more gambling sites. The report said that the market was saturated. So my question for the Premier is simple : If that report was worth commissioning, it must be worth listening to. Why, then, is the NDP adding 500 more VLTs to this province? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question. The proposals put forward are going to modify the tiered commission structure in order to give more benefits to smaller sites, in rural Manitoba in particular, Mr. Speaker. No new sites will be added. Sites that are busy will have the opportunity to apply for additional machines and they will be judged on their merits. We now have a full commitment to 2 per cent of net profits for responsible gaming activities, research, addictions treatment programs, those things that will protect Manitobans.

So we are restructuring our VLT program in order to protect Manitobans, allow for safe opportunities, and to ensure that rural Manitoba gets some additional benefits that the members opposite would not make available to them, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Pallister: Mr. Speaker, I realize that the government's despe rate, and I realize that they are caught up now in the scourge of ribbon cuttings they have to do. But this is a new low. This is taking the ribbons off the gifts that kids should receive from their gambling addicted parents. That's what it's doing.

Other provinces across this country are reducing the scourge of what former Premier Doer called the crack cocaine of gambling. This Province goes in the wrong direction. Ontario prohibits VLTs totally outside of casinos. Maritime provinces are reducing the hours or the numbers or both. But the Manitoba spenDP, addicted to revenue hunting but not spending intelligently, thinks that they're winning, doesn't realize that their win, Mr. Speaker, comes at the expense of Manitobans and Manitoba children. Now, they'v e set maximum loss limits.

I understand $3,000 a day can be lost, 168 hours a week maximum play, 720 hours a month. I've asked the Premier if he'd stop taking advantage of Manitoba gambling addicts by at least committing to lowering the 720– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The member's time has expired. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the changes that we're making in VLT policy increase the support to 2 per cent of net profits for all those programs that will assist people that may have any challenging difficulties with addictions related to gaming.

That is a commitment that has never been made before by any government on behalf of its Crown corporation. And those resources will be invested in programs that will help people that want to reduce their interaction with any kind of gaming activity in Manitoba. In addition, Mr. Speaker, the commission structure will be modified to allow a higher commission structure to smaller site holders, primarily benefiting rural Manitoba. Mr. Pallister: Let's get this clear here, Mr. Speaker. The government allows the maximum limit for gambling to be 720 hours a month. That's every hour, 24 hours a day, for a month.

That's t he maximum amount. Now, the Province paid $182,000 for a gaming study. The study said expanding gambling in Winnipeg was a bad idea. The government ignores the study, opens up and expands gambling. And we already had, before this, the highest number of VLTs and slots per capita in Canada and a 30 per cent increase under this government. Three times the use of BC, four times the use of Ontario. I'll read you another quote, Mr. Speaker: Let us not kid ourselves. There are kids who are going hungry in this province. There are families breaking

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1187 up, marriages breaking up because of gambling addiction. I agree. I agree with the Minister of Water Stewardship (Mr. Mackintosh). This is a serious concern. It deserves to be dealt with intelligently, thoughtfully. And I'm asking the Premier of the spenDP party here, who is also the Premier of Manitoba, if he would stop preying on the addictions of our most vulnerable people. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite should know that when he was in office, hi s commitment to addictions funding in '98- 99, the last time he was in office, was $14.4 million.

Our commitment to addictions funding of treatment programs this year is $34.6 million. It has gone up more than double. When the member opposite who is concerned about the negative impacts of gaming was in office, he actually was part of a government that cut funding to the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba. * (14:20) We've increased our support to regional health authorities. We've increased our support to front -line services such as the Main Street Project. We've increased our support to the Health Sciences Centre. We've increased our support to the Rosaire addiction centre. We are working with the St.

Raphael Wellness Centre. We have increased our support to Two Ten Recovery program. These are all things that were never done before in Manitoba when the members opposite were in office and they want– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The First Minister's time has expired. VLTs Additional Terminals Mrs. Myrna Dried ger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, we don't need any lessons from a government that lied to the people in the last election. Mr. Speaker, Manitobans keep having to pay for NDP spending and mismanagement.

Not only did this NDP government lie about not raising the PST, they're now sinking to another low and adding more VLT machines to try to siphon even more money away from Manitobans. So I'd like to ask this Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) to tell Manitobans: Why are they getting stuck having to pay for his overspending and his spending addiction? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): Well, Mr.

Speaker, you know, it is rather interesting that the party of the 1990s that brought VLTs to the province without social responsibility–and that member was a part of that government, along with the Leader of the Opposition–that they would raise issues of this nature today. I want to point out that there will be no new sites. This will be the first change, really, since 1996, Mr. Speaker. We put in a 2 per cent commitment to social responsibility. And I could say, if Manitobans do not want video lottery terminals, I question why they're playing them, but I don't have to, Mr.

Speaker, because that's what the member for River East (Mrs. Mitchelson) said when she was a minister in government and brought in VLTs. Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to quote back to this Minister of Water Stewardship, who said, let us not kid ourselves, there are kids who are going hungry in the –in this province. There are families that are breaking up, marriages that are breaking up because of gambling addiction. That was then, Mr. Speaker. It seems that this minister seems to have a different view nowadays, but he d oesn't seem to get it.

Raising the PST is going to hurt everybody in this province, and adding VLTs is going to hurt the most vulnerable. So I'd like to ask the Minister of Finance to now admit that his spending addiction is going to cause a lot more pain for Manitobans. Mr. Ashton: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, there are no new sites. We put in a historic change, a 2 per cent commitment to social responsibility. And, Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that the VLT site holders throughout the province, particularly in smaller facilities, will actually be benefiting from changes in the commission structure.

And, again, this will only be put in place in the sites where there is the demand for it. And, of course, Mr. Speaker, I could say that people do ultimately make these decisions; no one is forcing any Manitoban to gamble in any way. But,

1188 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 once again, I don't have to because that's what the member for River East sai d when she was minister and brought in VLTs in the 1990s. PST Increase Referendum Request Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I would remind this government that they promised a moratorium on the expansion of VLTs, and yet we've seen a 30 per cent increase in the number of machines while they had their moratorium. Mr. Speaker, this NDP government is so desperate for more money that they don't care who they hurt in their money grabs.

They're even going to break the law in order to get that money. We've seen that this Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) has already broken the law and he won't resign because of it. So I'd like to ask the Minister of Finance whether he would do the right thing today, obey the taxpayer protection law that is in p lace and hold a referendum on his PH –PST hike that is coming. Mr. Speaker, I would ask if he'd obey the law this time around. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member's time has expired. Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitob a Lotteries Corporation Act): Well, I want to point out again that when the members opposite brought in VLTs, it was no significant commitment to social responsibility, no requirement of 2 per cent, no requirement of anything. And it's a bit rich from the party that brought VLTs, Mr. Speaker, that didn't have a commitment to social responsibility to be talking about anything to do with the social side of gaming. Because you know what they did when they were in government?

As the Premier just pointed out a few minutes ago, they brought in VLTs and they cut funding for AFM. Ochre Beach Flood Compensation Plans Mr. Ralp h Eichler (Lakeside): As most of us are aware, this past weekend the folks in Ochre Beach got hit by an ice storm. Homes and cottages were damaged, and some that were totally damaged will not be repaired. Besides a photo op for the member from Dauphin, many lives have been devastated. Mr. Speaker, what is this government's plans for the folks at Ochre Beach? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member for Dauphin was in attendance at the community.

He spent time with the reeve and local councillors and talked to people who were impacted by it. We've had the opportunity to go up there again this morning and listen again to Reeve Clinton Cleave and his good job that he has done out there, and he should be commended for that. The people have had a very serious shock in that community. The ice, literally in a matter of minutes, came up from the lake with 60 -kilometre-an-hour wind and literally moved right through the front door of some of these homes and the French doors and the windows right out the back door and destroyed some of these properties.

And we're very grateful that people were alert enough –nobody lost their life, nobody was injured. And, of course, we are supporting the people in the recovery effort and the disaster financial assistance people will be there tomorrow to meet with local residents to identify how the program can serve them. Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, Mother Nature is unpredictable. The ice event at Ochre Beach happened in a few minutes. Folks were caught off guard and had no way of preparing for such an event. In fact, thankfully it happened in the evening so we had no loss of lives. Mr.

Speaker, I ask the minister: Will this government be taking action for these folks at Ochre Beach? Mr. Selinger: I thank the member for accurately characterizing what happened. It was a unprecedented weather event that took place very rapidly over a couple of minutes. One of the residents that I talked to this morning indicated to me that he went outside of his house, went up to look at the lake, saw the ice coming, and he just barely had enough time to get back into the house and ask his wife to get out of there as quickly as possible.

And as they were leaving the house through the back door, the ice was coming through the front door. That's how quickly it happened, and you can still see ice out there, in some cases at a higher level than the housing itself, which has in many cases been destroyed.

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1189 So, of course, we will be there with disaster financial assistance and there will be a meeting tomorrow of the officials to meet with local residents. The local MLA has done a good job being in touch with them. I have to say that the reeve and his emergency measures committee have done an outstanding job again this year, as they did– Mr. Speake r: Order, please. The First Minister's time has expired. Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, we have seen this government make promises before. In fact, the very Minister of Finance made many of those promises that were broken.

In fact, this very minister in the flood of 2011 made promises that he had no intentions of keeping, giving false hope to hard- working Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, will the minister put on the record today that his government cannot be trusted no matter what they say? Mr. Selinger: The disast er financial assistance guidelines in Manitoba are the most generous in Canada. A person can recover up to $300,000 on the damage to their home, and over 95 per cent of those claims have been paid out from the 2011 experience.

In addition to that, resources were made available for a range of programs for producers and other people that were on the lakes around Manitoba, programs that have never been cost -shared by the federal government. The members opposite, what would their approach be? They were planni ng to make cuts to every budget in Manitoba this year. They were going to reduce the amount of disaster financial assistance available. That was their program. Tough love, that's what they're all about. We're about providing support to people when they need it, Mr. Speaker. St. Boniface Hospital Patient Wait Time Mr.

Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, shortly after lunch, a Winnipeg woman began to suffer symptoms of a stroke. Her husband recognized the signs and got her to St. B emergency room right away. She was initially assessed and then she proceeded to wait in the ER unattended to for the next five and a half hours even though she was suffering a stroke. I ask this NDP Minister of Health: How could such a situation have been allowed to happen? Hon. T heresa Oswald (Minister of Health): I thank the member for the question.

As is always the case, if he would be willing to, with the consent of the parties, to share particulars about a case, he has my commitment that I will inv estigate what happened. Mr. Speaker, c ertainly, we do know at St. Boniface Hospital, we have a Cardiac Centre of Excellence. We have a variety of individuals that are working on cardiac issues and stroke in ways that have been considered the envy of the nation. Triage happens by medical professionals and is done expertly. If, indeed something has gone wrong in this case, the member has my commitment to investigate and make remedy where possible. * (14:30) Mr.

Friesen: I wonder if the minister's stateme nt about this being the envy of the nation is of any consolation for the husband of this woman, who joins us today in the gallery. This woman was exhibiting all the signs of a stroke: drooping face, slurred speech, throbbing headache. Her husband knew the signs. He saw the signs. He got her to ER and he shared the information with the triage nurse. Yet this woman was forced to wait and wait and wait five and a half hours without receiving treatment, missing the critical four -and-a-half-hour window for trea tment for stroke.

When the woman's daughter finally came to the ER five and a half hours later to check on Mom, she was shocked at the lapse in care. The physician attending said someone clearly dropped the ball. I ask this NDP minister: How could this woman who was clearly exhibiting stoke symptoms fall through the cracks and been made to wait five and half hours without receiving treatment? Ms. Oswald: Again, I thank the member for more details.

I will, of course, seek from him or from the family further details, because we want all of our individuals who are presenting to emergency rooms in whatever circumstances to get the best possible care. If indeed we, through exploration with the regional health authority and St. Boniface Hospital, discover th at the process was insufficient, we have entrenched in legislation in Manitoba a critical incident review procedure. This not only will serve as providing information to the family about why

1190 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 this happened but will also serve to provide education for those that are working in the ER and in the hospital. Certainly, as explained to me by the member now, it's clear that this was– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired. Mr. Friesen: I want to assure the minister that those details have been provided to her office by the family in way of a letter two weeks ago. Mr. Speaker, Dorothy Madden's death in ER in 2003 was supposed to make changes to the ER procedures.

Brian Sinclair's death in 2008 was supposed to result in changes to ER procedures, but it is clear that no change has been made and the minister once again has dropped the ball. This woman is now at home facing uncertainty, but her husband is here with us today in the public gallery, and I thank him for being here. This family wants answers. They want to know how the minister could allow this situation to occur yet again, and why has the minister not responded yet to family's letter asking her for the answers that they so desperately seek? Ms. Oswald: Yes, Mr.

Speak er, and again the member has my commitment that I will follow up with the family, to be sure. What I can say to the member, however, is that following the cardiac review, our cardiac program was consolidated to St. Boniface Hospital following the tragic circumstances of Brian Sinclair's death. There have been substantial changes made into our emergency room in terms of decreasing wait time, improving triage, but we know that this is an ongoing dynamic process that requires continuous investment. Mr. Spe aker, the member has my commitment, as does the family in the gallery today, that we will work with St.

Boniface Hospital to discover what happened, why it happened and, indeed, to provide the family all the support that's possible. Rural Health Services Obstetrics Closures Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): Mr. Speaker, this family expected results and expected care when they attended the hospital, and they were failed. It has been reported that the obstetric ward at the Portage la Prairie hospital has been forced to close due to shortage of nurses. Right now reports indicate that the obstetrics ward has been closed for a week.

This issue is widespread, is occurring in many regions of the province, and the hospital of Portage la Prairie serves 50,000 regional residents. Because of this minister's inability to properly staff rural hospitals, should local residents –and more specifically, expectant moms–in the region anticipate a permanent closure? Hon. T heresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Yes, Mr. Speaker, certainly, we do know that the situation in Portage is in a temporary suspension, as the member cited.

And I would want to be clear, so that she's not putting misinformation on the record, that the obstetrical unit, in concert with the nurses and the doctors at the hospital, are working on a temporary suspension–one week on, one week off –and they're working with their expectant moms to ensure that there's a birth plan in place. I would agree with the member that we don't believe it's acceptable for there to be a suspension of obstetrics at the Portage hospital.

That's why we're working with the hospital and the regional health authority to ensure that we can rebuild the obstetrical nurse complement so it can go back to full service, Mr. Speaker. Mrs. Ro wat: Mr. Speaker, in rural Manitoba we have over 20 hospitals, personal –or ERs that are temporarily closed at this time, so I don't think that's any consolation to the people of Portage la Prairie. Just last week I raised with this minister an occurrence of a woman being denied obstetrics at the Russell hospital. She was subsequently sent to Saskatchewan and was forced to deliver a baby on the highway.

The minister said at that time, and I quote: If this case is as she has presented, that's not acceptable and we will do better than that. End quote. Well, Mr. Speaker, one week later we realize that she continues to provide shallow words of commitment. Will this Minister of Health admit today that obstetric services in Manitoba is facing serious problems and is widespread? Ms. Oswald: And again, I thank the member for the question and I can let the member know that in the circumstance of Portage we're working with the regional health authority on recruitment.

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1191 I did have an opportunity to speak with the mom in question concerning the Russell case and was able to learn facts from that case that, indeed, did not bear an exact resemblance to–as presented in the House. And I would hasten to add, Mr. Speaker, that the Russell hospital obstetrical unit was close d by the Conservative government. Mrs. Rowat: I believe that the minister has more than apology to make to this mom. She has apologies to make to a number of moms throughout the province who have been turned away by hospitals and have had babies on the highway. Mr.

Speaker, in Swan River intermittent closures of their obstetrics ward have been off –occurring since July 2010 due to a sortage of qualified health professionals. At least 10 times to date, expectant mothers have been forced to travel to Saskatchewan to deliver their babies. This minister has failed to address this serious problem.

This chatter about hiring more means absolutely nothing to the mom who delivered on a highway from Russell, and it means nothing to the moms in Portage who must now plan to travel to Winnipeg to deliver or the families in Swan River who don't know week to week whether obstetrics will even be available. This minister has failed Manitoba families. Ms. Oswald: Certainly, we know the regional health authority in Swan Ri ver is rebuilding a surgical program. We know that the obstetrics in Portage is temporarily suspending and we're working very hard to reopen it. But, Mr.

Speaker, this is the fundamental difference: We are fighting to keep obstetrical services open, while the members opposite closed 30 obstetrical services across Manitoba, including – and I hope I can get leave to get them all on the record–Russell, Boissevain, Grandview, Gladstone, Reston, Rock Lake, Crystal City, Pinawa, Rossburn, Wawanesa, Beausejour, Riv erdale, Killarney, Birtle, Stonewall, Souris, Virden, Melita and Morris, every one closed permanently by the Conservatives. We're fighting to get them back open. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order.

The honourable member for River Heights has the floor. Infant Mortality Rates Provincial Comparisons Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, the infant mortality rate is generally considered a good marker of the overall health of chi ldren. Sadly, Manitoba's infant mortality rates are extremely high. The Canadian average is about five deaths per 1,000, but in northern Manitoba it is much higher at 9.2 deaths per 1,000 live births. In inner -city neighbourhoods, it is also high.

I ask t he Minister of Health: Can she give specific reasons why, after the NDP's 13 years in power, the health of children and the infant mortality rates in Manitoba are among the worst in Canada? Hon. T heresa Oswald (Minister of Health): We know that we want all moms and families and babies to have access to good care here in Manitoba, and we certainly know that part of our investment in ensuring that moms get the best possible attention during their pregnancy is that we've invested in the Prenatal Benefit, Mr.

S peaker, to ensure that we can provide additional financial assistance for healthy nutrition during pregnancy. We offer nutrition programs to expectant moms through Healthy Baby and our community support programs, and we also know that we have indeed seen, through the Public Health Agency of Canada study, improved access to midwives, improved access to family doctors, and we're going to continue on that journey. * (14:40) Mr. Gerrard: Mr.

Speaker, when you average infant mortality rates across the country over the last three years, Manitoba has the worst infant mortality rate in Canada at 6.7 out of a hundred births. I've called upon the NDP on numerous occasions to raise shelter rate s for low -income Manitobans for years, and yet they've refused. They simply continue with ineffective policies, leaving children with poor nutrition and mothers with inadequate prenatal care.

I ask the Minister of Health: What new specific measures that are actually effective will she ensure that the NDP take this year to lower the infant mortality rates, particularly in northern communities and in inner Winnipeg? Ms. Oswald: In addition to our investments in the Prenatal Benefit, our investments in the Healthy Baby program, the Public Health Agency indeed does report that, contrary to sounds from the members opposite, Manitoba actually has the lowest

1192 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 proportion of mothers who do indeed have to travel to give birth at 22.2 per cent, below the national average of 25. And more mothers, Mr. Speaker, are contacted at home by a health -care provider after the birth, 98.5 per cent in Manitoba versus 93 nationally, and this was sooner after discharge than the rest of Canada. So we're providing more follow -up fas ter and more prenatal care. We have work to do. I concede this point, Mr. Speaker, but we're committed to do it. Access to Clean Water Northern Manitoba Communities Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, one of the reasons for a high infant mort ality rate, you know, is clearly because of poor housing conditions available with the meagre shelter rates this NDP government provides. One of the reasons is the fact that we've got more than a thousand homes in northern Manitoba without clean running water. I ask the Minister of Health: What efforts has she made to ensure that the Premier (Mr. Selinger) allocated in this year's budget enough funds to retrofit homes in northern Manitoba so that more families can have clean running water? Hon.

T heresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Without a doubt, the member, as a pediatrician himself, knows that the social determinates of health play a hugely important role in the development of our children and, indeed, the health of our expectant moms. It's why we're investing in our Healthy Baby programs.

It's why we have a committee like the Healthy Child Committee of Cabinet that's looking not only at the nutrition but at physical fitness, at access to a family doctor, and ensuring that we provide even more health c are through midwives, through physician assistants, through community mental health workers, a variety of circumstances in the north and, indeed, throughout Winnipeg. As a nation, Mr. Speaker, we have more work to do. We just need to be committed to do it and not making–and not decide to make indiscriminate cuts to try to balance a budget.

Doctor Recruitment and Training Rural and Northern Manitoba Mr. Frank Whitehead (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, you know, I am proud to be part of a government that is hiring m ore family doctors and specialists and is committed that all Manitobans will have access to a family doctor by 2015 in all corners of the province, including the north. To hire more doctors, you have to train more doctors, not cut medical school training as was done in 1990s. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Health what steps this government has taken to train more doctors, especially in rural and northern Manitoba. Hon.

Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): It was my great privilege to join the Premier last week to announce that we're making even more investments in our medical education program in Manitoba by supporting 15 more medical residencies and expanding our doctor recruitment initiatives. And, Mr. Speaker, these 15 residencies will include seven family medical residencies in rural Manitoba and eight specialist residencies, which will include emergency medicine, adolescent psychiatry, vascular surgery, internal medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology. Indeed, Mr.

Speaker, we know that when you make a decision to cut medical schools, it's a decision that hurts people for well beyond a decade, but we're investing. Kind of different from some other people in this House that I know. Municipal Amalgamation Request to Withdraw Bill 33 Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland): And you should– the government should know that spin doctors don't count in that tally. Mr. Speaker, the bullying continues. First, this NDP government avoided dealing with infrastructure needs and flood claims by demanding amalgamation of smaller municipalities.

The minister called municipalities dysfunctional and misrepresented current legislation. All the while, he single -handedly destroyed a long- standing working relationship with the municipalities. Will this minister finally show some respect to local governments, withdraw Bill 33 and begin to repair the damage this NDP government has done to municipalities? Hon.

Ron Lemieux (Minister of Local Government): Again, was evident today the Premier and, certainly on the weekend, the MLA for Dauphin, stood side by side by municipalities when they were faced with a tremendous challenge before them, with the ice coming forward and destroying many of their homes.

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1193 And, Mr. Speaker, this is just one e xample where this government stands beside municipal leaders and we're proud to do so. Mr. Pedersen: Mr. Speaker, those municipalities face a real crisis. Amalgamation is not a crisis they should have to be facing right now. Municipalities across this p rovince speak of the arrogance and lack of respect shown by this NDP government. The minister says, don't worry about the details prior to signing amalgamation agreement.

Now the minister threatens consequences should municipalities not meet the extremel y tight timelines set out by this NDP government. Will the minister please explain what his definition of consequences is? Mr. Lemieux : Mr. Speaker, you know, we're pleased this year to provide 8.5 per cent increase in funding and one of the most generous across Canada. [inaudible] municipalities we believe in and we work hard with them and consult with them on a daily basis, Mr.

Speaker, and our government provides one of the most funding–most generous funding formulas in all of Canada, where you see right across Canada other provinces are cutting funding in municipalities. And we're certainly proud to this budget which members opposite didn't support, but yet they think nothing of standing up and so- called professing to stand up for municipalities. So we're very concerned about municipalities missing economic development opportunities in rural Manitoba, and there is a danger that they will miss those opportunities unless we work with them and side by– Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

The minister's time has expired. Mr. Pedersen: Mr. Speaker, disrespect, bullying, hidden agendas, now consequences. Local municipal governments deserve to be treated with respect. No one, including municipalities, should be bullied the wa y this NDP government is doing. The minister's never really shown his real agenda to local governments and now this minister threatens consequences. When municipalities are facing real crisis out there, all he wants to talk about is consequences.

Will this incompetent minister withdraw his bill and try to repair the damage his arrogant government has created with local governments? Mr. Lemieux : Municipalities I've talked to are extremely nervous about the Leader of the Opposition, about the indiscriminate cuts. That's what they're concerned about and that's what they're worried about, because there really is a vision in Manitoba, the vision from the Leader of the Opposition, their vision of cutting teachers, cutting health-care workers. Mr.

Speaker, we believe in building Manitoba, building hydro, working with municipalities, building the infrastructure in this province that's needed. That's the vision we believe in. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Time for oral questions has expired. * (14:50) Speaker's Rulings Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Prior to routine proceedings on April 30, 2013, the honourable Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Ashton) raised a matter of privilege regarding the actions of the honourable member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Wishart) and the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr.

Pallister) in relation to a protest that had occurred the previous day a t the site of the Portage Diversion water control structure on the Assiniboine River. The minister claimed that these actions significantly interfered with his ability as a member of the Legislature and as a minister to provide clear direction to his sta ff. He concluded his remarks by moving, in quotations: That the House direct the member of–for Portage la Prairie and the Leader of the Official Opposition to apologize for their role in this serious incident. End of quotations. The honourable Official O pposition House Leader (Mr.

Goertzen), the honourable Government House Leader (Ms. Howard) and the honourable member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) also offered

1194 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 advice to the Chair. I took this matter under advisement in order to consult with the procedur al authorities. As members know, there are two conditions that must be satisfied in order for the matter raised to be ruled in order as a prima facie case of privilege. First, the issue –was the issue raised at the earliest opportunity? Second, has it been demonstrated that the member's privileges have been breached in order to warrant putting the matter to the House?

Regarding the issue of timeliness, I am unsure whether or not the minister raised this matter in the House at the earliest opportunity. As I have stated in previous rulings, including one made May 8th, 2012, when raising such matters I would encourage members to clearly explain how they have met their requirement to timeliness, as this would greatly assist the Chair. On the second issue of whe ther sufficient advice–evidence has been provided, there are a number of considerations that must be taken into account.

I would first like to remind the House that when dealing with privilege the Speaker is only considering the procedural aspects of the situation raised. On page 224 of Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, second edition, Joseph Maingot advises that parliamentary privilege is concerned with the special rights of members not in their capacity as ministers, party leaders or whips, but strictl y in their capacity as members in their parliamentary work. Claims that privilege has been violated relating to a member's role as a minister of the Crown are therefore not the basis for a prima facie case of privilege.

This perspective has been supported in numerous Speakers' rulings in this House, including rulings from Speaker Rocan in 1988, 1992 and 1994; rulings from Speaker Hickes in 2000, 2003, 2004 and 2005; and also in rulings I have delivered to this House in 2012. On page 222 of the same edition, Maingot also advises that in order for privileges of the House to have been breached, the activity in question must involve a proceeding of Parliament. This concept is supported by rulings from Speaker Rocan in 1998 and 1991, as well as rulings from Speaker Hickes in 2003 and 2008.

While debate in the Legislative Chamber does constitute a proceeding of Parliament, events such as a protest do not fall within that purview. Additionally, Beauchesne citation 31(3) advises that statements made outside the House by a member may not be used as the basis for a question of privilege. Along the same lines, O'Brien and Bosc, on page 614 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, state that the Speaker has no authority to rule on statements made outside the House by one member against another.

Rulings from five previous Manitoba Speakers consistently support the authorities on this point, confirming that comments made outside the Chamber cannot form the basis for a prima facie case of privilege. Speaker Walding ruled this way in 1983, as did Speaker Phillips in 1986 and 1987. Speaker Rocan made six–made similar rulings six times between 1988 and 1995, Speaker Dacquay once in 1995. Finally, Speaker Hickes delivered a dozen rulings affirming this principle during his time in the Chair.

I believe it is also worth quoting for the House comments made by Speaker Parent in 1997 in a ruling on a case of privilege in the House –Canadian House of Commons, as I concur with his sentiment. Speaker Parent stated, quotations: The Ch air is mindful of the multiple responsibilities, duties and constituency-related activities of all members and of the importance they play in the work of every Member of Parliament. However, my role as your Speaker is to consider only those matters that af fect the parliamentary work of members. End of quotations.

In consideration of these facts, I would respectfully rule that a prima facie case of privilege has not been demonstrated and that the matter raised is not in order as a matter of privilege. I have another ruling for the House. Order, please. During oral questions on April 30th, 2013, the honourable member for Riding Mountain (Mrs. Rowat) raised a point of order regarding floor comments she attributed to the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell). She stated the comments were saying a particular issue under discussion was politics and it would–that it would win opportunities in south Winnipeg.

The honourable Government House Leader (Ms. Howard) also spoke to the same point of order, and I took the comments under advisement in order to peruse Hansard. I thank both honourable members for their advice to the Chair. I have reviewed Hansard for the words complained of on April 30th. However, they do not appear in Hansard. I would note, however, in speaking to the point of order, both the honourable member for Riding Mountain and the honourable Government House Leader debated the substance of

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1195 the issue in question rather than addressing procedure or a breach of the rules. I would remind the House that a point of order is to be used to draw the Speaker's attention–to the Speaker's attention any departures from the rules or practices of the House or to raise concerns about unparliamentary language.

A point of order should not be used to gai n the floor to participate in the debate, as advised by O'Brien and Bosc in House of Commons Procedure and Practice on page 632; or to dispute the accuracy of facts, according to our rule 40; or, as our rule 58 advises, to clarify remarks which have been misquoted or misunderstood. I would therefore respectfully rule that the remarks in question did not appear in Hansard and I am unable to rule on them. Member statements. The honourable member for Portage la Prairie. MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, on a matter of privilege. Mr.

Speaker: The honourable member for Portage la Prairie, on a matter of privilege. Mr. Wishart: I rise on a matter of privilege as this is my earliest opportunity following your earlier ruling on the matter of privilege from the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton). As is the custom of this House, matters that touch on the ruling you just rendered must be held until that time, and that has been done. But, Mr. Speaker, my ability to do my job as MLA for Portage la Prairie has been impaired.

As simple a matter as attending a legal protest to discuss the concerns of constituents now generates a reaction so extreme as to become completely out of proportion to the event. I do not deny that I attended the protest. I would argue that I would be not doing my job had I not. Many of the people attending were my constituents, and most of them had been treated poor ly by the compensation programs developed and delivered by this government.

The member for Thompson is no stranger to attending protests, several of which are a matter of public record and which did not end in peaceful manner, but rather deteriorated into violence and resulted in criminal charges. This protest is not –did– has no result in criminal charges, and although charges have been considered, none have been laid. The minister continues to pursue the victims of the 2011 flood yet again. He continues to revictimize the victims.

But this over -the-top reaction of this government–of this minister and this government has put all our abilities to meet with such groups of protestors at risk. Other groups have already expressed concern to me that meeting with their MLA on issues at odds with this government's policies may lead to further overreaction by this government and more aggressive pursuit of victims. The member for Thompson has been free with his accusations, both inside the House and out, that I or m y party was involved with organizing this protest. There is no truth to this whatsoever.

No evidence has been produced other than a few Twitter notes during the day of the event stating that it was happening–hardly burning evidence. In fact, on the day of protest I had driven into Winnipeg in the morning to attend to issues in the Legislature. However, I received a call from an organizer of the protest while en route, informing me of what would be happening that day.

Once I attended to my business in the Le gislature, I returned to my constituency early to speak to the protesters, as I had planned to return by 3 o'clock anyway to attend a funeral in the community. * (15:00) The member for Thompson has willingly continued his vendetta against these protestors , speaking out to the media, accusing them repeatedly of irresponsibility, recklessness and dangerous actions. I believe it is this minister who has been irresponsible and reckless.

These protestors repeatedly stated that the minister–that if the minister would agree to meet and discuss their concerns, they would be gone –he refused. This was a simple, very reasonable request, and yet has –and, as yet, he has not met with them. Now, Mr. Speaker, the member for Thompson stated there was a clear indication that this was promoting a political agenda. This is absolutely 'asurd' and leaves us wondering if any group of protestors should be expecting this type of vindictive pursuit. Mr.

Speaker, I believe my ability to meet with groups in my constituency or with those that express a different view from this government has been

1196 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 impaired. In fact, I believe that the member's action reflects badly on all MLAs and will do much to make people wary to speak openly and honestly with their duly elected representative. For these reasons, I move, seconded by the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen), that the House direct the member for Thompson to apologize to all victims of the 2011 flood and particularly to this group of protestors of my –protestors that are my constituents. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on the same matter of privilege. Hon.

Jennifer Howard (Government House Leader): Yes, on the same matter of privilege. First of all, I want to take the opportunity to speak about the timeliness of this matter of privilege. Clearly, this isn't the first opportunity the member's had to speak about this. The member chose not to speak about this when the original matter of privilege was raised. He had the opportunity then to put his arguments on the rec ord–he didn't take that opportunity. This is clearly weeks after that opportunity. Secondly, I want to say that I don't believe that you will find there's a prima facie case for this matter of privilege.

I think what we are perhaps talking about is the ma tter of poor judgment of the member for Portage la Prairie. I think that we have been clear in our statements on this situation that what was in question is not people's right to protest. People have that right to protest, they avail themselves of that right frequently. But I think what we have been clear about is that the right to protest doesn't extend to the right to put other people's lives at risk in doing so, and that was the statement on this side of the House. And I think, frankly, Mr.

Speaker, in a ny democratic country in the world, the principle that protesting to make a point should not equal hurting other people, is a well -accepted principle. The only people that don't seem to accept that principle are the opposition. So, clearly, you know, we heard not only from the minister after this event, but people with expertise in the flood -control structure and in these issues that the actions of blocking that diversion, of stopping it from operating put the property and lives of communities downstream at risk and put the actual flood -control structures at risk –that is well documented.

The member for Portage may have exercised poor judgment on that day in the way that he chose to represent his constituents, and we submit that he should still apologize for that. But I believe the minister, in this case, has been exercising his full responsibilities and duties. This is not about people's right to protest, this is a be –this is about all of our rights to live in a community, in a province where we can expect each other to take care of each other, even when we fundamentally disagree. Thank you. Mr.

Speaker: On the matter of privilege raised by the honourable member for Portage la Prairie–and I thank all honourable members for their advice on this matter of privilege –I'm going to take this matter under advisement, consult with the procedural authorities and I will bring back a ruling for the House. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Treaty Day Mr. Frank Whitehead (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, this morning and throughout the day we have come together at the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba on Treaty 1 land to celebrate treaties day in Manitoba.

Today we honour treaties 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and 10, which were signed by our ancestors between 1871 and 1906. In 2010, the Legislature was united in the Chamber to celebrate treaty days for the first time. While treaties were nation-to-nation agreements with the Crown, the land which we shared is the very basis of this province, and I, for one, commend this government for recognizing this fact. Treaties day is about education and building a deep understanding of our history and each of our roles within the treaty relationship.

It is a time to remember and to thank all those who went before us who signed the treaties in the spirit of coexistence. It is also a time to think about the seven generations who will come after us and the importance of working together to ensure that all of our voices, teachings and rights are respected. As the former chief of Opaskwayak Cree Nation, I know first -hand the importance of upholding our treaties. Our First Nation has become very successful over the past thirty years because we have stood together and worked to protect our r ights and traditions.

This coming July, OCN will host a Cree gathering to discuss protecting and upholding the treaties.

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1197 Mr. Speaker, we are all treaty people. For as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the rivers flow, we are all treaty people, and we must continue to work together towards a great future for our children. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask all the members of the Legislative Assembly to join me in thanking the elders, chiefs, drummers and presenters, and all those who joined in to celebrate the treaties in Manitoba. Ekosani, miigwech, mahseecho, thank you. Women's Resource Centre (Brandon) Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): Mr.

Speaker, and I –the Women's Resource Centre in Brandon provides valuable resources to families in the Brandon and Westman area. The centre's two counsellors provide counselling services to women and children that have been victims of domestic violence, as well as advocating for them in the community and assisting with legal issues. Each month, an average of 500 women and children visit the centre for daily breakfast programs, counselling, free access to computers, job hunting assistance, free legal clinics and to get information about finding housing and daycare.

They also run wellness programs for women, including yoga, stress management and health seminars. The most basic of services have been well used, such as the information and referral service helping over 1,200 clients and the child play area seeing 347 uses. The Women's Resource Centre receives an d appreciates the generous donations from their local citizens, volunteer organizations and businesses. The centre is a busy place and has recognized that there are many other families that could be helped, with additional funding for counsellors and other resources.

Last year, they provided counselling services for close to 100 women, plus several to many children. They are particularly looking to expand their children's counselling services, as they are receiving more referrals than they have capacity for. Furthermore, Brandon's populations –increases and becomes more diverse through immigration. More resources are needed to assistant clients in other languages. The centre does respond to many families throughout the Westman region, and would like to enhance their service delivery to ensure more families receive the supports they need.

The Women's Resource Centre recently moved to 731 Princess Avenue in Brandon. Their new space is bright, welcoming and easy to access. So I'd like to, at this time, congra tulate the Women's Resource Centre in Brandon for the work that they do and encourage them to continue to provide the services within the region. Thank you. St. Norbert BIZ Mr. Dave Gaudreau (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, there are numerous reasons why St.

Norbert is one of the greatest places to live in Manitoba. 'Intregal' to the strength of our community is its successful business sector, and I'm pleased to inform the House that entrepreneurs in St. Norbert are now members of a business improvement zone. T he St. Norbert BIZ, initiated by Brob–Bob Roehle almost 10 years ago in the making, the St. Norbert BIZ held its first meeting in January of 2012, where a board of directors was chosen, and Dave Kaisaris of the St. Norbert Hotel was elected president and chair. The BIZ is supported by a slate of diverse, ambitious and dedicated people from all over St.

Norbert. The board of directors includes treasurer Jean Guy Talbot of Talbot & Associates, secretary Sandy Charette of Assiniboine Credit Union, Sean O'Connell of Z –JZK Sales and Service Limited, and Ward Bruner of St. Norbert Marketplace. Also assisting the executive are the City of Winnipeg BIZ co-ordinator Martin Pasieczka; city councillor Justin Swandel; Norm Gousseau of Enterprises Riel; Janice Lukes, t he special projects assistant of the sort –St. Norbert BIZ; and Bob Roehle, the not -for-profit community liaison president for the St. Norbert Foundation and chair –co-chair of the Group'Action St. Norbert.

I am proud to assist this group as a representative from Manitoba. The BIZ has undertaken many notable initiatives to benefit the entire community. By representing 20 business enterprises, it seeks to create cohesion and a sense of unity between members and to support one another in promoting culture, he ritage and the history of St. Norbert. Last summer, the BIZ hired a Green Team to help develop an attractive physical environment for the neighbourhood. It was staffed by high school and university students, much to the benefit of entire community. * (15:10) Mr.

Speaker, I want to thank the BIZ for contributing so much to our community. Organizations like this help us work to create more

1198 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 opportunities, preserve our shared heritage and make St. Norbert an even better place to live. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Keystone Cup Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Hockey is a sport that dominates the prairie way of life, from small towns to big cities and everywhere in between. The community of St. Malo only has around a thousand people living in town, but from Apr il 18th to the 21st the community became the centre of the Junior B hockey world.

Six teams from across the country made the trek to–for the 2013 Junior B western Canadian championship, otherwise known as the Keystone Cup. The Thunder Bay Northern Hawks, the Peguis Juniors, the Saskatoon Royals, the Okotoks Bisons, and the Richmond Sockeyes and the hometown St. Malo Warriors gave the community a tournament to remember and the fans something to cheers about all weekend long. In the end, it was the Richmond Sockeyes of British Columbia who captured the Keystone Cup, defeating Saskatoon in the final score of 5 to 2.

While the host team did not reach the medal round, they proved that they belonged in a tournament and the entire community turned out to support them. Around 2,000 volunteers were required to pull this tournament off and the community did not disappoint. Whether it was cleaning up litter, selling advertising or running the hospitality suite, everything was accomplished without a hitch and the community was able to show why it deserved to host this tournament. For a town of a thousand, getting 200 volunteers requires a massive effort, but the entire community pulled together and got it done. Mr.

Speaker, I wanted to commend the community of St. Ma lo for an excellent job hosting the Keystone Cup. They have proved that small towns are capable of everything the big cities are and a whole lot more. Regardless of what you're trying to plan, volunteers are the most useful tool an event can have, and all of these volunteers should be congratulated on a job well done. I would ask that all members of this House join me in congratulating the community of St. Malo and the St. Malo Warriors on a job well done. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. James Ehnes Mr. Drew Cald well (Brandon East): Mr.

Speaker, Brandon is privileged to be home to a vibrant cultural community. I'm proud to rise in the House today and recognize a distinguished born and raised Brandonite who has done us proud on the world stage. This past month, vio linist James Ehnes was awarded a 2013 Juno Award for Classical Album of the Year, Large Ensemble or Soloist with Large Ensemble Accompaniment. This is only the most recent of a long list of achievements, Mr. Speaker. James began studying violin at the age of 4 and was the youngest musician ever to win the first prize in strings at the Canadian Music Festival.

Since then, he has performed in 30 countries on five continents. James has received many international awards, including a Grammy, a Gramophone, and seven Junos. He is a member of the Order of Canada and an honorary doctor of music and guest professor of violin at Brandon University's School of Music. I am proud to know James's mother and father, Barbara and Alan, and pleased to add that it was a pleasure to watch Jimmy grow up in our downtown Rosser ward neighbourhood. Thanks in no small part to our provincial investments in arts and culture, we are putting Manitoba on the map in the international music scene.

I invite all honourable members to join me in commending James Ehnes, a suburb–superb musician and a role model for young musicians across the world. Mr. Speaker: Grievances. Any grievances? Seeing none– ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon. Jennifer Howard (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you please resume debate on Bill 20. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 20–The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act (Various Acts Amended) Mr. Speaker: The government business will now resume debate on Bill 20 on the proposed motion of

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1199 the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers), The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act (Various Acts Amended), and the amendment thereto, standing in name of the honourable member for Agassiz, who has 23 minutes remaining. Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): This is indeed one of the longest speeches I ever made. I started on May the 8th and it's now the, whatever, the 13th, I think. It's been more words than I ever thought I would put on the record in this House So, as I started to say the other day – [interjection] Don't help me.

As I started to say the other day, the –one of the excuses given for this 1 per cent increase on the provincial sales tax has been the excuse of providing infrastructure. And as I said before, there's been infrastructure programs, Canada-Manitoba infrastructure programs for many, many years–never required an extra tax put in place to meet their commitments. So I don't really see why that's required now, but there's been a little sle igh of hand go into this. They've inflated the infrastructure spending budget or made it look like it was quite a bit more than it actually is.

What they've done is take the capital budget out of Health and the capital budget out of Education, moved them i nto Infrastructure and said the infrastructure's that much higher and they need this tax to fund it. But what they're doing is leaving a fund–a lot of funds –in Health and Education that haven't got a claim to them now. They say they'll justify every expend iture out of that account, but they're not justifying the money they left behind in those two departments.

Now, you know, there's been any number of things going on since this House sat and we heard the budget and they proposed the 1 per cent increase in the provincial sales tax –an increase that I don't think is necessary at all. It's a government that's out of control on their spending, actually have a spending addiction and actually need to maybe look at the spending side of things a little bit too. And it may not be on the largest of things, but there's an awful lot of money being spent by this government that goes to absolutely non- common-sense sorts of places.

And the one that comes to mind is our military attaché or military liaison, a former MLA who carried the job into civilian life and the funding for it. It's a job that was always done by a government backbencher, probably could still very easily be done by a government backbencher, probably save a hundred thousand dollars just on that one item alo ne–probably more than a hundred thousand dollars. The second one is the size of Cabinet. When this government was formed, it was quite a bit smaller Cabinet.

It seemed to function not too badly–as well as an NDP Cabinet ever does –but there's absolutely no need for 19 ministers of the Crown in this Province. And if you drop off the size of Cabinet, you drop off the extra salary, you drop off the –a lot of other expensive staff and so on– office expenses. So that's a place where there can be some considerable savings. There's so many ways that this government has chose to waste money.

My own hometown, there was a personal care home–there is a new personal care home there a couple of years –three years ago, but the old personal care home was built in the '60s – wonderful brick building. It just was not suitable for personal care anymore, so the town entertained –we do have some housing shortages, and they entertained a plan to try and turn–get a developer to turn this into housing. The Province, the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald), through the Health Department, actually stood in the way of this process happening.

The RHA agreed, but then, when the opportunity arose, the Province felt they had a valuable building there that they could put out for tender. And I did at the time say to the minister, I don't think you'll get any tenders on it. But what it did was it slowed down the process to the point where we lost the developer.

And after spending close to a million dollars over three and a half years on maintenance of the building or having the building sitting there, when we could have possibly spent that same kind of money and had it turned as an investment and had it turned into something that would be ongoing. * (15:20) Now, it's–I drive by and they're in the process of starting to tear it down, and I –it hurts a little bit. It bothers me to see that building. It was a good building, it's only 50 years old, you know. In lots of areas of the world they have buildings that are a thousand years old or 400 years old.

Here's a 50-year-old building going into the dump, is basically what it's doing, and there's a lot of history in my family with that building. My dad was on the board when the building was built. My mom worked there when it first opened, and my dad later became the chair of that board. And I think he was maybe the chair of the board when the second part of that building was constructed in the early '70s.

1200 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 Mr. Tom Nevakshonoff, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair So it's going to be gone. It's been a bit of a milestone on the side of the hill there in Neepawa, first building you see when you come in, but it's going to be gone and maybe we can get something there. But it's definitely a case where it's going to cost over a million dollars to tear it down, and the government, basically, in my view, wasted $2 million there when if they were going to spend $2 million, it would have enhanced that building and been able to turn it into something else.

You know, hear quite a bit these days about municipal amalgamation, and I've been contacted by a lot of municipalities because of my municipal background as a former president of the Association of Manitoba Municipalities. And it's a case where I think the carrot would work better than the stick, and, unfortunately, this government, at this time, has seen fit to roll out the stick and say to the municipalities, you must do this, and then talk about penalties to the municipalities if they don't do it–it's pretty heavy-handed.

These municipalities been around, many, for a hundred to a hundred and twenty-five years, and they functioned very, very well. They –there are the odd ones that have some problems from time to time, but as a rule, they function very, very well. And now we have a government saying, you must –you must amalgamate or we'll force it and we'll put penalties in place if you don't do it. Now, Lord knows what those penalties are because nobody will tell us. I don't think you can cut grants to certain municipalities because that simply creates an unlevel playing fie ld, although who knows?

That's what they're trying with the Jockey Club, so, once again, another heavy -handed approach to something that's probably negotiable and could be solved a lot easier than coming down with the big stick. You know, the municipaliti es–and as I said, I've heard from many of them, and it's creating anxiety on councils internally, but it's creating anxiety between different councils because some of them do have some disputes with some of their neighbours and not the best of working relationships.

But, overall, out across the province–and I know my own small municipality, the RM of Langford, has about 16 working agreements –16, 17 working agreements with Town of Neepawa and other municipalities, and those are out there all over the province–they're there. It seems like the minister was surprised to find out that those are there, but that's just a fact of life. They're out there and these municipalities do co - operate with each other in many, many ways. Some share machinery, some share offices–there's so many different ways that they do it, so.

You know, it's –and we've seen it now with the Jockey Club, too, where the Province goes in, says, we're going to make this happen. It doesn't matter –doesn't matter that you create $50 million wo rth of economic activity in this province. Doesn't matter that you employ 500 people. We want your property and we're going to figure out a way to take it. And the minister is quoted as saying: I will fight this on the basis of schools and hospitals. And he said: I will win. You know, that's the common argument they make, and it's starting to wear just a little bit thin.

We've seen so many things happening, especially in rural Manitoba, but –that are just unacceptable in a lot of ways, but they're going to happen, I guess, because that's what this government's doing and they have the power to do it. Back in the '90s, that bad old Filmon government that the opposition likes to refer to, that I think was one of the finest governments this Province has ever h ad, did a thing called 'decentralizlation' of government offices.

They decentralized a lot of government offices that are specific to rural Manitoba–for instance, conservation, agriculture, Crown lands –and it was a process that worked very well. Some of the people –some of the employees were not particularly happy at the time, but once they got moved–once they got settled in rural areas, they embraced the communities and were very comfortable with it. And now we've–on top of it all, it was more of an economi c benefit for the province. And now that decentralization has almost been totally recentralized.

We have an Ag office– Neepawa is a thriving community, over 4,000 people, the hub of a fairly large trading centre. We have an Ag office that's closed, literally. Staff's been moved out of there, like MAFRI office that–there's been one there all my life and well before it, because I remember my dad talking about going into the ag office at one time, so way back. So, you know, the Conservation office –I don't know who makes these decisions, but Conservation office there has a–had an office set up and they have a yard with all their equipment and all their various paraphernalia that Conservation officers are

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1201 responsible for. They've now decided to move them down the road half a mile to a different building. It appears that they're going to leave that office building sitting empty. And now, instead of being able to just walk out into their equipment yard, their compound, now they have to climb into a vehicle and drive there every time they need to get something from that compound. And it just doesn't make any sense; takes more time and it's more costly. So those are the types of things that are going on.

You know, another thing that worries me somewhat out in rural Manitoba and probably should, in my case, because I've been watching how operations like Hutterite colonies are being treated and I'm really not very impressed. There's about –in my own constituency, there a re about 20 Hutterite colonies; there's 19 or 20 right now. And some of the things that the provincial government has done for – this NDP government have done just really are fairly nonsensical.

They should have picked up through the hog barn moratorium debate that the hog manure was not getting dumped into waterways as they so gleefully thought it was. And it's a valuable commodity that's been applied to fields at the right rates and so on, but a lot of the Hutterite colonies do have large hog barns, and the moratorium pretty well curtailed their hog business. * (15:30) Then–and now the next move that was made was the burning of coal was going to be banned. Quite a few of the colonies burn coal for their heat in the colony.

So they're going to have to get a lternative–as a fact, the colony just north of Neepawa spent over a quarter of a million dollars to put in natural gas and I didn't see the Province picking up any of those costs, but it was a cost that was forced by regulation in this province. Now, we s ee the school tax rebate on farm property have a cap put on it which will also affect the colonies and, you know, the colonies don't ask for a lot from the Province. They actually prefer to be left alone and do their own thing and they don't ask for a lot, but this Province has given them a lot.

It's given them a lot of headaches. And what's happened with the hog industry in this province is almost criminal. With the suggestion that they're saving Lake Winnipeg they pretty well closed down the hog industry in this province with moratoriums on barns and with regulations on smaller operations. And the hog industry was a huge industry in the province and it's now– An Honourable Member: Bigger than Manitoba Hydro at one point. Mr. Briese: Bigger than Manitoba Hydro at one point, the member for Lakeside (Mr. Eichler) tells me. And he's right.

It was about, I think, 15 to 17 thousand jobs and somewhere around two billion dollars' worth of economy. That economic activity is now about half of that, about one billion dollars a year and sliding. Very critical, very important to my town, once again, we have HyLife Foods plant in Neepawa. It employs a– I was told just the other day just around 900 people now in a –at a town that has about 4,200 people population. So absol utely a significant employer in my community and they're starting to have problems sourcing hogs.

All this was done and a number of other things, supposedly, to improve Lake Winnipeg and we're seeing Lake Winnipeg continuing to deteriorate. They didn't put the emphasis on the actual things that were causing the problems in Lake Winnipeg, and still haven't and probably never will because the things that are really causing the problems are too expensive to fix and they're too expensive to government at the present time to fix. They want to do things, band-aid things that look good that people think they're doing something, but it has to be at the cost of someone else.

You know, the idea that they need this extra 1 per cent of provincial sales tax, it just b eyond belief. They –when I talked earlier about the infrastructure, the infrastructure programs from the federal government aren't even going to roll until next year, but, obviously, they want to have a nest egg put away somewhere just in case it happens. B ut that's not what is going to happen. It'll be next year, for sure, before they're set up.

And another thing I should just mention while I'm talking about that is I had the opportunity to be involved in the Canada -Manitoba infrastructure programs for si x years, and the last infrastructure program that came down the pipes, municipalities weren't allowed to sit on the selection committee and they weren't allowed to sit on the selection committee supposedly because of short time frames and they had to get t his rolling and all that kind of stuff.

But, you know, now there are going to be 10 year–there's going to be a 10- year program coming down the pipe and I think it's critical that at least for the community portion that municipalities

1202 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 13, 2013 do be included. The AM M should be included in the selection process. They–excuse me–they should have never been taken out of it. You know, another thing that was touched in the budget a little bit was the university funding. And I know what I'm going to be told is that we didn't cut our university funding as much as other provinces, but in reality there was a 5 per cent increase promised to the universities for three years– universities and post -secondary–and it was cut in half.

So, once again, I don't expect you need an increase in the sales tax to pick up something that you're cutting in half. You're probably saving some money there. But they talk about big–larger cuts in other provinces, but we put the restrictions –or the NDP government put the restrictions on the university funding over the last 10 years by freezing tuitions. The –our universities began to fall behind, and that's why they came along finally and promised a 5 per cent increase for three years to try and catch our universities up to universities in other parts of Canada–universities and post -secondary.

And that was what it was designed for, and now they came along again –the NDP came along –cut that in half, and kept them behind the eight ball and probably slipping further all the time. I know there's many others that want to speak to this, so with those few words I think I'll pass it on to the next one. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I do rise to put a few things on the record in regards to the amendment proposed by the member from Charle swood on the record in regards to Bill 20.

And, as other members of this House have made it very clear, this bill is a bill that certainly is not something we're prepared to support, and thus the amendment brought forward by the member from Charleswood cer tainly is in order. And we certainly want to tell you the reasons why and–even though I'm not surprised the members opposite don't want to get up and have the debate on–in regards to this amendment. And I know that they feel that their bill is perfect. The y've made it very clear that they're not going to be looking at amendments on anything; the bill the way it stands is a perfect bill.

Every bill they bring forward in this House seems to be the perfect bill. However, as I've also said in this House –and I stand to have it repeated back to me one day when we're in government and we bring legislation forward–there's not a monopoly on good ideas and never should be a monopoly on good ideas. And, whenever governments bring forward legislation, whether it be on finances, on transportation, on agriculture, on a whole host of different ideas that come forward, consultation is something I speak about quite often in this House and something I believe in very, very dearly.

And the best way to do that, of course, is to make sure that in fact that we do reach out to those folks and share ideas, share feedback that comes back as a result. In fact, that leads me into the first part of consultation. I know that members opposite were invited out to the front steps here just a week ago Thursday and–about calling for a referendum on the PST hike. Unfortunately, members opposite decided not to partake in that and that's disappointing. I know the First Minister was 'inspited'–or invited to speak at that particular rally.

There was–I don't know, I heard numbers from 300 to 500 to 700 people at that particular rally; I think there was well over 500. Being an auctioneer in the past, I have a pretty good indication for numbers, and I can tell you that it was pretty close to 500.

So whether or not it's 499 or 550 or whatever, but I can tell you those people –in fact, the Speaker has ruled in this House that petitions that we read we can't use the word angry, and I totally agree the way the petitions are written they need to be followed to the rule, and I support the Speaker on that a hundred per cent, but I can tell you the fact of the matter is people are angry. People are very angry about the PST increase and not being able to have a referendum on it.

In fact, the latest poll done by CFIB in regards to a referendum –in– 500 Manitobans–done by Angus Reid, here they are, 74 per cent agreed the provincial government should hold a referendum before increasing the PST from 7 to 8 per cent. Out of the CFIB members surveyed, 93 per cent of the businesses, the active members felt there should've been a referendum or should be a referendum. * (15:40) There's still lots of time for this, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In fact, out of the –members that also were surveyed, there was four members–four member s– that said there shouldn't be.

So maybe there is some support out there for this PST increase. The clearest way for that to be very clear is to hold a referendum that's been called for by members opposite –us–and we feel that that decision is a decision th at should have. In fact, there's legislation in place very clearly that states that before a PST tax increase is brought into this province that, in fact, it will be by

May 13, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1203 referendum. So we have to be very clear into that fact. In fact, what Bill 20 does is does away with that opportunity for a referendum. But we have made it very clear in this House we're going to stay here. We're going to use every tool in our toolbox to ensure the fact that Bill 20 does not see the light of day before July 1st, and we thi nk it's also very important to the fact that the Province not break the law. We are lawmakers in this building. We make decisions that affect each and every member in this House and all residents of Manitoba.

So why are we –why are we as legislatures and th e members from the government taking the opportunity to ram this down the throats of every Manitoban and not give them the opportunity –not give them the opportunity to put an X against or for a referendum? I think that speaks volume. And I know that we'v e asked many times in this House–several members of this House have asked in this House–whether or not the First Minister is going to be at those hearings when Bill 20 does come up for debate, and we've yet to get a commitment out of the First Minister.

If he truly wants to have those voices heard and him be able to respond to each of those presenters, and I believe now there's well over 170 of them that–I think last count was 175–but they want to make sure that the First Minister does, in fact, hear what t hey have to say. In fact, it was this very government back in 2011 during the election and they were asking about the PST hike increase and they said: nonsense –nonsense, Mr. Deputy Speaker. No, we're not going to raise tax. We're going to keep our word. We 're going to make sure that we balance the books. More power to them. More power to them.

But what do we see? No, the government reneged on that promise, and they made it very clear in the last budget that, in fact, that they were going to bring forward changes in the sales tax and raise it from 7 per cent to 8 per cent. In fact, AMM, the Winnipeg chamber, Manitoba business chambers all thought it was a great idea. In fact, they supported it. They supported it. Thought it was a novel idea. But where would the money go? That was the thing that they wanted to make very clear. So now, once they've been blindsided, they don't want it. They're saying, you misled us once again.

Even I know the member from Gimli brought in –it was asked questions last Thursday on–in regards to new businesses come into Manitoba and some that didn't come, and the member stood up and said he's so proud of the fact that those businesses came here. Well, you know what? Those businesses came here under faith and the goodness that they thought that this government actually was going to present to them was no PST increase. They made that commitment. They made that commitment, 2011. Those same businesses feel misled. I talked to a lot of those businesses.

In fact, I can tell you –I can tell you very clearly, on the weekend I had a number of places I was at and every conversation –every conversation –came back is, why did the government renege on their commitment not to raise the PST? And we've been reading out these statements and literally there is thousands upon thousands upon thousands. So, you know, every individual that signs those petitions are going to make sure that they don't forget–they won't forget. In fact, what they're telling us very clearly is that if this government truly want s to hear from Manitobans, then we will have a referendum.

Call the referendum. We'll have a clear understanding about whether or not we have a mandate to go forward on this, or whether or not we don't, and that is the true and honest way to make sure. And now since the –I started a little bit ago on the Winnipeg chamber, the Manitoba Business Council and the Manitoba chamber –all those organizations that were asking in good faith for an increase in infrastructure financing to make sure we fix a number of those roads, a number of those projects that comes under infrastructure. But what did we see? What did we see when we looked at the budget?

Actually, in infrastructure the line-by-line breakdown by this Province in their own budget was only increased by $28 million. When you drill down a little more, there's actually $80 million, but the rest of it is not there. So this becomes, now, a slush fund. So the Manitoba chamber, Winnipeg chamber, the business council –these fine organizations th

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-2-40
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 2nd hansardpdf 40.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	df51cf7c3412bba2f80d2bc0f9c823f5cfe64394

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