Manitoba Hansard — 7 May 1993 (Sitting 58, 35th Legislature, 4th Session)

35-4-58

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Third Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 42 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No. 58 • 10 a.m., FRIDAY, MAY 7, 1993 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CAHSTAIRS, Sharon CEHILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMI NGS, Glen, Hon. DAGQUAY, Louise DEHKACH, Leonar d, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerr y, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis HEL.WER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDE AU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANN ESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Li nda, Hon. MITCHEL SON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER , Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROGAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosema ry, Hon. WA.SYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Welli ngton River Heigh ts Radisson The Maples Kildonan Ste .

Rose Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Bon iface Mi nnedosa Crescentwood Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Ni akwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Ron La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River Rupe rtsland PARTY.

Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liber al NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

2650 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Friday, May 7,1993 The House met at 10 a.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Maloway). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS Manitoba has the highest rate of child poverty in the coun try; and

WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend upon the Children's Dental Program ; and

WHEREAS several studies have pointed out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as the Children's Dental Program ; and

WHEREAS the Children's Dental Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extr emely cost-effective and critical for many families in isolated commu nities; and

WHEREAS the provincial government did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing plans to elimi nate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this service ; and

WHEREAS preve ntative heal th care is an essential component of health care reform . WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legis lative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minis ter of Health (Mr. Orchard) consider restoring the Children's Dental Program to the level it was prior to the 19 93-94 budget. *** Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable memb er (Mr. Lathlin). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petiti on read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS fisheries are a vital resource indus try in rural and northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS ther e are over 800 com mer cial fishermen netting some 12 million pounds of fish each year on Lake Winnipeg alone ; and

WHEREAS the high costs of supplies and shipping fish to market are putting ever more pressures on the comm ercial fishing indu stry in this province; and

WHEREAS the provincial government reduced the Northern Fish ermen' s Freight Su bsidy Assistance Program for commer cial fishing by over $90,000 in 19 91 ; and

WHEREAS this subsi dy is vital to the survival of the comm ercial fishing industry; and

WHEREAS restoring the Freight Subsidy to the level of previous years would make fishing in north ern Manitoba more com petitive and help ensure the survival of the industry. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Leg islative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to re ques t the Mi nister of Natur al Resources (Mr. Enns) to consider restori ng funding of the Northern Fishermen's Freight- Assistance Program to the level it was at in 19 90-91 . Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honour able member (Mr. Clif Evans).

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

WHEREAS fisheries are a vital resource industry in rural and northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS there are over 800 co mmer cial fishermen netting some 12 million pounds of fish each year on Lake Winnipeg alone; and

WHEREAS the high costs of sup plies and shipping fish to market are putting ever more

2651 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 pressures on the commer cial fishing industry in this province ; and

WHEREAS the pro vincial government reduced the Norther n Fishermen's Freight Su bsidy Assistanc e Program for commercial fishing by over $90,000 in 19 91 ; and

WHEREAS this subsidy is vital to the survival of the commercial fishing in dustry; and

WHEREAS restoring the Freight Subsidy to the level of previous years would make fishing in northern Mani toba more competi tive and help ensure the survival of the industry. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legis lative Assembly of Manit oba may be pleas ed to req ues t the Min ister of Natu ral Resources (Mr. Enns) to consider rest oring funding of the Northern Fishermen's Freight Assistance Program to the level it was at in 19 90-91 . * * * Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the ho nc•urable member (Mr. Leonard Evans) .

It complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of thE� province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS Manitoba has the highe st rate of child poverty in the country; and

WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend upon the Children's Dental Program ; and

WHEREAS several studies have pointed out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as the Children's Dental Program; and

WHEREAS the Children's Dental Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extremely cost-effective and critical for many familiies in isolated commu nities; and

WHEREAS the pro vincial government did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing plans to elimi nate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this service; and

WHEREAS preventative health care is an esSEtntial component of health care reform . WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Mi nister of Health (Mr. Orchard) consider restori ng the Children's Dental Program to the level it was prior to the 19 93-94 budget. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I dir ect the attention of honour able members to the gallery, where we have with us this morning from the T eu lon Collegia te sixty-six Grade 11 students under the direction of Mr. Ed Masters.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer). On behalf of all honourable memb ers, I would like to welcome you here this morning. * (1 005) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Asslnlbolne River Diversion Federal Environmental Review Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier (Mr. Rlmon). Today, 30 environm ental organizations are joining together to call on the federal government to have a federal environmental assessment of the Assiniboine River diversion project.

These groups include the Sierra Club, farmer s unions, naturalist organizations, student organizations, uni versity organizations, a wide range of environmental citizens who have a call on the federal gov ernment to have a review. Every tim e we deal with this issu e, we ask the Premier for a joint federal-pro vincial review, and he says it is up to the federal gov ernment.

We are now in receipt of a letter, which I will table in the House, from Jean Charest, the federal Environment min ister, who now says that this decision to have the federal envir onm ental asse ssment will go to the minister responsible for the decision-making authority, the present Minister of Agriculture. Now, the present Min ister of Agriculture is a Manitoba mi nister, but he also represents many of those same communi ties in his federal jurisdiction that are strong proponents of the Pembina Valley project and the diversion of this water. lw ould now like to callon the Prem ie r( Mr.

Filmon) to take a leadership position on behalf of all Manitobans, all Manitobans who are in a dispute on this issue, Mr. Speaker, and call on the federal government to join the pro vincial government so we

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2652 can have a basin-wide federal-provincial review of the Assiniboine diversion proj ect. Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that the federal guidelines and the process under which they make a decision is one where they have a screening process to decide whether or no t federal responsibility is being correctly dealt with. They make a decision based on the guidelines that have been in place for quite some time, and let me tell you, Mr.

Speaker, they have to take the responsibility for whichever way they decide to deal with this program . They will be looking at the process that Manitoba has in place. We believe our process is full and complete , but ultimately whether they decide to join with us or have a separate process, that will be their decision. In fact, a separate process may well be their decision, but they have certainly not indi cated to us that they intend to come in at this point. Asslnlbolne River Diversion Federal Environmental Review Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, it has been docum ented with the federal gov ernment with the Rafferty-Alameda project that initially when Tom McMillan indi cated they would have a federal environm ental assessment, that was cancelled due to political pressure from Grant Devine from the Conse rvative Party, Premier of Saskatchewan . The same suspicions are here now in Manitoba where it goes to the federal Mi nister of Environment, and he moves it over to the federal Mini ster of Agriculture.

He represents some of the very same communities that are proposing this pro ject, and some people in Manitoba are starting to feel that the fix is in. The way to solve this, Mr. Speaker, is for the Premier to take a leadership position and stop the fight between Brandon and Winkler and Portag e and Altona and Winnip eg and some othe r communities, stop the disagreement that is going on now, provide leadership and stewar dship on our water and call in a federal-pro vincial environmen tal process today. A (1 010 ) Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker , I know the member opposite is not clear on the way the process works. He should know that the federal government, in its scre ening process, places the onus on PFRA which is the arm that would be responsible for this kind of work. They are, of course, under the federal Minister of Agriculture. That is why the decision comes under his jurisdictio n. Mr. Speaker, this matter will be handled by the book. From our per spective, we will apply absolutely no political pressure to keep them out. We encou rage them to carry out their process and to ensure that they abide by it to the letter.

We have said that time and time and time again. The entire process will be carried out as it should be in conjunction with our legislation and as it should be in conjunction with federal legislation, to the letter. We will not conduc t ourselves, Mr. Speaker, like the New Dem ocrats did-because they wanted to force through the development of the Limestone Gener ating Stati on-when they did not have any public hearin g proce ss, any comp lete environme ntal assessment or review process. That will never happen under this adminis tration. Mr.

Doer: I find it rather curious for a former Minister of Environment to talk about the lack of environmen tal assessme nts in the '80s. Perhaps if the Premier had passed an environment act when he was mini ster, there would have been the same kinds of assessme nts that are requi red under The Environment Act that the New Democratic Party passed in the '80s. Asslnlbolne River Diversion Federal Environmental Review Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I have a document from the federal Departmen t of Fisheries that talks about an analysis of the proposed Assiniboine diversion project .

It talks about the total lack of information, something that the member for Portage (Mr. Pallister) has raised, the former member for Portage has raised, Brandon has raised, Selkirk has raised, Winnipeg has raised. It also goes on to say that there is a risk in terms of the water flow for this river which is not considered by the present environmental assessm en t of the proj ect. It goes on to talk about the impact on fish, on wate r flows: The degradation of water quality could be an important factor in the future viability of this proposal .

2653 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 It goes on to say that the project will alter, signi ficantly, the water flow in many river systems, and the Department of Fisheries believes that the assessment does not fully identify and assess the potential impacts on fisheries in that river system, and it does not provide the best information in terms of that material . I would like to ask the Premier (Mr.

Rlmon), in light of the fact that Charlie Mayer is now responsible for proposing to have an in dep enden t federal assessment in his own backyard and that we have all 1these com mu nities disagr eein g about the proc:ess right now, will the Premier go further than just encour age the process of a federal-prov incial basi n-wide review? Will he ask the federal gov��rnment directly in writing to join and have a fed er al-pr o vincial review as our prov inc ial legislation allows and as the people of Manitoba, I think, believe would be fair and reasonable under the !Circumstances? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition likes to choose his quo tes rather selectively. Let me read from the letter that he just tabled. It says: "Under the EARP Guidelines Order, the Mi nister with the decision-making authority for a proposal must ensure that the environme ntal imp lications of the proposal have been assessed befor e any irrevocable decisions are made. " The federal government will make that evaluati on.

The•y will decide whether or not they want to come in on a federal EARP or whether they believe, as it says in the third paragraph following that, as to whether or not any potential adverse effects can be mitigated. They will make their decision. They will be responsible for it, and pending that decision, we will make sure that our policy and our assessment is clear, open to the public and, without question, make a decision that is based on the facts. Economic Growth Employment Decline Mr. Leonard Evans (Br andon East ): Mr. Sp��aker, I have a question for the Mini ster of Finance.

It seemed as though the Manitoba economy was finally slowly turning around, but today we have une mployment figures from Ottawa which show that Manitoba's unemp loyment in creased by nearly a full point in April over March from 8.6 percent to 9.5 percent. Mr. Speaker, this is the larges t in crease in the unemp lo yment rate of any of the Canadian provinces. At the same time, our labour force has dropped from March, while the Canadian labour force has increased.

Will this mini ster now acknowledge that Manitoba has not realized an economic recovery, but that we conti nue to have a serious economic recession in this province and that unemployment indeed is the No. 1 prob lem ? • (1 01 5) Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I am del ighted that the memb er for Brandon East was able to move up on the roste r, his Friday morning ros ter. Quite often he is left to the end by the Lea der.

I would like to indic ate to the memb er that, as last month, he did not bring forward a ques tion at the time when the numb ers, of course , were very encouraging and very supportive of government policy. Today, he, of course, likes to again bring the selec tive numbers forward. I would cite for him, and I know he knows this, that Manit oba' s seasonall y adjusted emplo ymen t growth has averaged 489,000 for the first four months of 19 93, up 1. 4 percent from the same period last year. This is the fifth best in Canada, nearly double the national rate of 0.8 percent.

Now, in the subsequent question, I am sure the member will want to ask about manufacturing, and we will also share some decent news with respect to manufacturing growth, given, Mr. Speaker, the proper time frame. Again, selec tive quo ting of stati stics, mo nth over month, is for the opposition to do, but let us put it over some decent trend of time. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, it seems that the answer is based on very sel ective statis tics, as well. The fact is the economy is stagnati ng. My question to the minister is: Will the minis ter acknowledge that we are again losing jobs in this pro vince?

We lost 8,000 jobs between April and the previous month of March. The fact is we are going backwards . So are you going to cont inue to ignore this matte r, or are you going to take some action? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, the action has been taken in the budget. As the Premier (Mr. Filmon)

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 2654 ind icated the other day, the Conference Board of Canada and other people recognize that through the budgetar y mo ves and the taxation moves in this pro vince, rather than attacking disposable income in the poc kets of peop le, we have chosen delibe rately to leave a greater portion of people's earnings for the area of disposable income. Indeed, we are receiving acclaim for that across the land. So I say to the member, you cannot have it both ways.

I know in oppositio n, he likes to have it both ways, but the reality is you cannot, and we are leav ing, through our taxation measures, a larger proportion of the public ear ning abi lity with Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, that is auguring well. Our reta il sales tax vis-a-vis other pro vinces, although not in creasi ng at sig nificant amou nts , st ill in compar ative terms, it is relatively well positioned. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speak er, this gov ernment -we have fewer people working today than when they were elected. There are fewer jobs today than when they were elected.

Let us talk about the number of unemp loyed. Why is the number of unemp loyed increasing in this provi nce, up from 5,000 from March to April? We are up to 51 ,000 seasonally adjusted. We are up to 55,000 on an actual basis. We have more people unem ployed than we should have. So, again, I ask this government to ask this minister: Will he re-exam ine his policies, take some action and give a little hope to those thousands upon thousands of Manitobans, including young people- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Speaker, I am disappointed, ag ain, that the member reso rts to sel ective stati stics. Why can the me mber not recog nize that Manitob a's recent job growth has been in full-time employment? I know that has been a concern with the mem bers opposite. Why does he not say that for the first four months in '93, there have been 13,000 more Manitobans em ployed than for the same four-month period a year ago? Why does the member not dwell on the positive? Mr. Speaker, the member refuses-he is a doom er and gloom er, and he refuses to dwell on the positive.

He just wants to wallow away in ne gative news, and I say to him, he is doing a disservice indeed to all Manitobans and cert ainly to the youth in our galleries today. •

(1020) James Philip Brldson Investigation Update Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minis ter of Justice. A very serious tragic circum stance has gripped the community of Flin Flon. It continues to in our pro vince, and as we all are aware by this point, it has already claimed the lives of two and threatens another two. There is an ongoing investigation which I know the Mini ster of Justice has been involved in and is aware of.

I am wondering if the Minister of Justice today can tell members the progress of that investigation which has caused very serious concerns throughout that communi ty and indeed the province . I wonder if the minis ter has an update for memb ers of the House at this time. Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): The honou rable member is certainly correct when he refers to the tragic nature of the circum stances in this situation in the Flin Flon area.

Our first thought, of course, is to the grief, the horror and the shock that the families involved and the communit y involved in this tragedy must surely be fe eling, and I am sure the honour able member and all honourable members would join me in extending sympathy to all of those who are so deeply affected by this in cident. In terms of an update, basically the investigation is ongoing. A search is still being conducted, and I have nothing further than that at this point to report. Mr. Edwards: Of course, we look forward to further information and hopefully the successful conclusion of that investiga tion.

James Philip Brldson Education Department Involvement Mr. Paul Edw ards (St. James): My further question is for the Min ister of Education, Mr. Speaker. As I know the mi nister will be aware , and others in this House perhaps, this family, the Bridson family in Flin Flon, has a long history of relations hip with gov ernment off icials and, in particular, the Minister of Education. I know that the minis ter did her best

265!5 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANI TOBA May 7, 1993 over a considerable period of time to deal with this situation. My question for the Minister of Education is: Did she confer with the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) in the cou rse of this investigation and this dealing with this family to determ ine whet heror notthatdepart mentor otherdepartme nts could have taken a more proactive approach? I simply ask that because we have had other tragedies in this prov ince, and oftentimes have had gove rnment involved for a long time, and then it results in a tragic in cident.

I wonder if the mi nister can give us an update as to what was done with this situation and, in particular, in relationship to the Department of Family Services. Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): I join with my colleague the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) and, I know, the memb ers of this House in expressing sympathy to the people of Flin Flon and to the young people who are today trying to deal with the tragedy and the loss in their communi ty and are trying very hard to under stand the issues that are affecting them.

We are looking at the matter, and I will be more prepared to discuss this when some of the issues in the Flin Flon area have been br ought to a concl usion. Government Departments Service Co-ordination Mr. Pau l Ed wards (St. James): We ll, Mr. Speaker, finally, for the Minister of Family Services then: There has been a lot of discussion in these last few years about co-ordinati ng services within gov,e rnment to deal with these types of situations. There has yet to be a report issued, and there is a comm ittee, I bel ieve-Fam ily Services, Education, Jusltice and Health are involved in that.

When can the people of this province expect a repc)rt on the co-ordination of services? We have a lenHthy relati onship with this family. I am wondering if there is some indica tion as to when gove rnment might be able to pull these together in a more effective way which has been promised for some timE� now. Ho1n. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speak er, I think we have an invE�stigation ongoing in this commu nity. I think it is not responsible to specu late and discuss this case at this particular tim e. I would say that on the issue of co-ordination, our work on that is ongoing.

Flln Flon, Manitoba Community Trauma Support Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying I apprecia te the commen ts of the Attorney Gener al and the expressions of sympathy from both himself and the Minister of Education with regard to the in cident in Flin Aon early Thursday morning. Members in this Chamber, I think, apprec iate the difficult circumstances that exist in Flin Flon and the surrounding commu nities as a result of economic circu mstances and economic difficulties, as well as the pressure that this brings to bear on families. Mr.

Speaker, this tragedy is just that, a tragedy, and no one may ever know the exact determi nants, the root causes of this tragedy. Mr. Speaker, we have to look forward, and it is not the time to begin making recrimi nations with respect to this incident. However, we do know that the community of Flin Flon is in crisis. The mayor and other community leaders have been asking for assistance in dealing with the nex t 12 to 18 months. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Mini ster of Family Services (Mr. Gil lesham mer) .

Will the mini ster now agree to co-ordina te the activities within his department, within the Me ntal Health Division of the Minis ter of Health's (Mr. Orchard) department, perhap s bring other resources to bear, to ensure that existing personnel in the school division in Flin Flon, in the commu nity, are prepared to deal with what is going to be a traumatic afte rmath to this event, but also to deal with the next 18 months of trauma for the commu nity as it adjusts to the new reality of fewer jobs and difficult circums tances? * (1 025) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, if I might assist my honourable friend with the legitima te concerns he expresses on behalf of the communi ty of Flin Flon facing such an obvious tragic set of circums tances, I might ind icate that within my mini stry, we are preparing and making efforts to assist the community through my Men tal Health Division. Unfortu nately, this is not the first time my minis try has been involved in such a co mmunity event, and

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 2656 we will atte mpt to provide the kind of support to the community, to the school system in Flin Flon, so that the difficulties faced by that community will not be faced alone , that we will provide them with support from within the Men tal Health Division. Flln Flon, Manitoba Community Trauma Support Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, my subsequent que stion is to the Mini ster of Education. I know-and I want to thank the min ister's staff for already responding to the incident in Flin Flon and allocating a staff person to the commu nity.

My question would be, however: Will the min ister also consider the trauma that has been inflic ted on the elem entary school and the junior high school which is adjacent to this family housing complex, as well as the stude nts who are affected in the collegiate, who knew the victims? Mr. Speaker, will the minis ter be prepared to send a team of couns ellors and child psychologists, early childhood specialists, to Flin Flon to deal with what will be several months of trauma and adjustment for the students, the staff and the families in the communi ty of Flin Flon? Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I have spoken with the principals of both schools this morning and have had an opportu nity to talk with them about the needs of some of the young people in the school , and also the staff. We have already sent, as the member has said, a member of our Child Care Branch into Rin Flon, who is currently now working with both schools. I did speak with the principals who also spoke about the communit y supp ort team which they are currently working with.

We will most certainly have a look at the needs of the young people in those schools in the coming months. Flln Flon, Manitoba Family Dispute Services Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): My final question is to the Minister of Family Services with respect to the issue of maintaining some services to the families and the community with respect to abuse and potential abuse, sexual abuse, other abuse that appears to be a con tinuing problem in the region. Will the Mi nister of Family Services be allocating additional support through the de partment's Family Dispute Services to the community of Flin Flon, as well? Hon.

Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): My senior staff have been in touch with the regional office there and will be lending any support that we can to assist in the situation along with staff from the Men tal Health Division and the Department of Educa tion. * (1 030) Ostomy Program User Fees Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr. Speaker, last year in a letter the Mini ster of Health sent to the Osto my Associati on, he stated , and I quote: This program is unique in Canada and is justifiably envied outside and beyond the borders of Manitoba. No t anymor e , Mr.

Speaker, not since this gove rnment introduced user fees on the ostomy program . Will this minister reconsider his decision to charge user fees on the ostomy and the other supply program ?- because these people have no choice in their illness, and they have no choice but to have these supplies. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the decision, as I have explained earlier to my honour able frien d , was to have those Manitobans who have been availing themselves of ostomy supplies internally to now contribute half the cost of their supplies up to a maximum of $300 per year.

In arriving at that decision, as I have explained earlier to my honour able friend, it ma�es us quite consistent and probably at least as supportive as other provinces with which we made comparisons. I think we are favourably positioned. Although it is requiring a contribution from these individuals, it still positions us as having one of the more generous programs in this area of supp ort in western Canada and possibly all of the nation. Mr. Chomlak: My supplemen tary to the minister: Mr. Speaker, we have user fees on northern transporta tion. We have user fees on supplies. We have user fees.

Even the association wrote back to the minister indicating that these are user fees. Will the min ister not reconsider his tax on the sick? Will he not reconsider that these people have no choice? The money could easily come from Connie Curran's $3.9 million.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, from the luxury of opposition, New Democr ats decry decisions that gov•Hn me nts make when they are not New Dem ocratic governments. Howeve r, from the realit y of go vernment, New Dem oc rats in Sasl\atchewan and New Democrats in Ontario who are faced with the challenges of governing are makiing decisions consistent with this. They are charging for services in the same areas that we are charging in.

Nc>w my honourable friend is wanti ng, of course, to make out that New Dem ocrats in opposition in Manitoba would be different, yet I have never heard my honour able friend commit that he would reins tate any ·Of these programs beforehand. All he is doing is holding out the promis e that this is wrong and will mis l•�ad the people into believing they would do bett•�r should they be gover nment. The example of that, Sir, is evident in Saskatchewan and Ontario, and I reject the narrow politics with which this foolish man is making a mockery of demo cracy. Mr. Chomlak: Mr.

Speaker, will the minis ter commit to reins tate this program if we commit that we will fire Connie Curran and her $3.9-million contract to pay for the min ister's tax on the sick? Mr. Orchard: Well, again, Mr.

Speaker, when my hom>urable friend has the luxury from opposition of findiing fault with every single decision of this gov•�rnment, would my honoura ble friend care to consider at some point in time as the new critic for Hea lth, set ting out the policies of the New Dem ocrats should they ever, God forbid, govern this pro vince, would my honourable friend, in one simple sen1tenc e at one simple time in the next six months, caret to tell us what he is in favour of in stead of always what he is against?-because what he is agai nst in this pro vince, Sir, New Democr ats in Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Ontario are doing as govern men t policy and I reject his hypocrisy.

Emergency Room Physicians Patient Safety Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Mini ster of Health. We are into the 1Ot h day of the strike by EMOs, Mr. Speaker, and patients are very concerned and we are all very concerned that the quality of health care may have been compromised over the past 10 days. I will ask the minister: Can the Minis ter of Health tell us if there has been a major disaster for the last 10 days? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, no.

As I have indicated to my honour able friend, that despite the constraints of emergency services not being available for a three-day period of time at Grace while they were moving to the newly opened emergency area and that Seven Oaks had not provided services, the 24-hour service available at Mise ricordia Hospital plus the two teaching hospitals have been coping with the circums tance. I have not been advised as of nine this morning of any tragedies, as my honourable friend is asking about.

The syste m, clearly, is coping but one has to under sta nd, as I have said before , that in cir cums tances wher e you have a strike and withdr awal of services, those remaining who are providing services naturally are under inc reased demand and level of service requirement, and some of the less urgent in di viduals presenting at emergencies may have to wait a longer period of ti me. That is less than opti mal. That is why we hoped to have this circums tance resolved. That is why we have called in a media tor to try and bring a resol ution. Negotiations Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr.

Speaker, can the Mini ster of Health give us an update about the negotiations between the EMOs and the government of Manitoba? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): I think probably as we speak, the hospitals and the MMA are using the skills of Mr. Wally Fox- Decent to try to resolve the issue. I unde rstand that they are still in the process of discussion, and I have no progress reports. They have decided, as part of the process, that they would not engage in any state ments, and I think that would be an appropriate thing for me to likewis e comply with. Patient Safety Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr.

Speaker, we are approaching another weekend. Can the Mi nister of Health tell the people of Manitoba that there will not be any major difficulties and what kinds

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2658 of plans they have put in place to ensure that quality care is being provided? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that the planning and the con tingencies that are being put in place for the weekend may well not be required. In other words, I am hopeful that we can achieve a resolution even today. In the event that may not be achievable, Sir, I indicated in an earlier answer that Grace Hospital had closed their emer gency for three days at the first of the week, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, to move to their new facility.

To assist in a weekend of potential continuation of the strike, Grace Hospital will be having their emergency department open from 8 p.m. to 8 a.m., Friday, Saturday and Sunday, in an attempt to take evening pres sure. The ambulance services, in co-ordination between the hospitals, will advise as to any other contingency plan changes from the other com munity hospitals. Repap Manitoba Inc. Negotiations Mr. Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, my ques tion will be di rected to the First Mi nister. Mr.

Speaker, four years ago, the Premier and his government annou nced a takeover of Manfor, promising some 500 new jobs for The Pas and a billion dollars of new investment. Neither of those promises have yet to materialize. A year ago, the Minis ter of Finance (Mr. Man ness) announced that the original development plan was going to have to be restructured, and a deadl ine of summer and then September of 19 92 was then struck. That deadline passed, as did others, Mr. Speaker.

Last Octo ber, the Minis ter of Finance annou nced again that negotiations were not proceeding on sche dule, and he was getting frustrated but he was now going to get very aggressive on thes e negotia tions. Since then we have heard less on those negotiations. Mr. Speaker, could I ask the First Mi nister to again advise the House today as to the status of those negotia tions? * (1 040) Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the member for The Pas, who has never really taken a position as to whether or not he wants to have the ownership of that pulp and paper mill and lumber operation under the hands of Repap-1 might say that his predecessor did support that, the former New Dem ocratic member for The Pas. Mr.

Speaker, I might say that the me mber opp osite , I kno w , may take a very narr ow perspective on this, but members on this side of the House have to be able to watch what is happening in the pulp and paper indus try throughout North America to find that every company that is in pulp and paper throughout North America is in difficulty. They are losing billions of dollars. In fact, they are closing down pulp and paper operations right across Canada. Many of them have been closed down in Ontario.

Now, if the memb er opposite is sugge sting that we move precipitously and close down that operation and put hundreds of people out of work, I disagree with him, Mr. Speaker. I disagree with him. If he is su gges ting alte rnatively that the gove rnment of Manitoba take over own ership again and run it as they did in the last reces sion, when it cost as much as $30 million a year to the taxpayer, I disagree with that, Mr. Speaker. If he wants to have the jobs preserved for The Pas- Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, Beauchesne is very clear that answers to questions should relate to the matter raised and be brief. All I am hearing from the Premier is: if the member is saying this, if the member is saying that. The member is asking a very straightforw ard question. What is the status of the negotiations? I would ask you to bring the Premier to or der. * •• Mr. Speaker: The honour able First Minister, to finish his response . Mr. Fllmon: If it had been a straightforward question, it would not have requi red three minutes of

preamble. The fact of the matter is if he is suggesting that we take it back and own it and operate it as the New Demo crats did, it cost the taxpayer as much as $30 million a year to run it when the New Dem ocrats were owning and operating that. We do not- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

2659 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 Redevelo pment Mr. ·Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I know the Premier is a little bit sensitive on the issue of Repap because it represe nts a lot of broke n prom is es- Mr. Speaker: Orde r, please. I will remind the honour able member this is not a time for debate . The honour able member for The Pas, with his question, please. Mr. Lathlln: Mr. Speaker, my last question to the First Minister is: The mill manager, Paul Richards, it is his last day in The Pas today. He is going to New Brunswick.

How much longer will the reside nts of The Pas and the surrounding areas have to wait before they star1tseeing some resu lts ofthis rede velopment plan and that stab ilit y he instille d in the minds of those people who are Jiving in The Pas? How much longer do we have to wait? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I am not at all sensitive about this issue. I just want to ensure that the member for The Pas has a lesson in what is going on in the pulp and paper industry in Canada, because he obviously has no idea of what is going on in pulp and paper in Canada.

I think it would help him in his discussions with his constitu ent s if he had a little underst anding of what is g<>ing on in the pulp and paper indus try in Canada. I can assure him that this government will con tinue to work with Repap to ensure that not only do we have the things there that we do have , but that Repap has invested in the total cleanup of the environm ental pollution and damage that was done under the New Democrats. That has been cleane d up. Millions have been invested in that. Not only have they improved the operations and made them safer, and made them, in fact, more productive, Mr.

Speaker, but we know that in the future, if we continue to have negotiation with them, with the turnaround of the pulp and paper prices in North America, that indeed they will make the further invE�stment that will improve that even further for the constitue nts of The Pas. Intertribal Christian Communications PST Collection Mr .. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, I have a que stion to the Premier. I would like to table a lett er from a Mr. Tim Nielsen, who is the gen eral di rector of a non pr ofit organi zation called Intertribal Christian Communi cations at 18 8 Hende rson Highway.

Now, this nonprofit mails 25,0 00 magazines a month to subscribers, and they received circular 9353 from the Taxation de partment on April 28, giving them only three days notice of the 7 percent PST that had to be collected on their subscriptions. Also, this amou nts to a $1 0,000 tax in crease- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honour able member, with his que stion . Time is extremely short. Mr. Maloway: In addition to that, they had to pay PST- Mr. Speaker: Question, please. Mr.

Maloway: Could the minis ter tell the House why circular 9353 was not even printed until April 19 and was not received by this busin ess until April 28, three days before? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to take that as notice on behalf of the Minis ter of Rnance (Mr. Manness). Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speak er, since most periodicals need at least a mon th's notice about tax changes in order to raise their rates , why did the mini ster make the tax effective May 1 ? Why did he force them to absorb the 7 percent for the first month? Mr. Fllmon: Mr.

Speaker, I will take that as notice, as well, on behalf of the Mi nister of Finance. Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, my final supplemen tary is that on May 1, le ases of aircraft are now exempt, while baby bottles- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I have half a minute left. The honourable member for Elmwood, kindly put your question now, plea se . Question. Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask the minister: How fair is this? How many new small busi nesses will now have to fill out these new tax forms? Mr. Fllmon: I will take that, as well, as notice on behalf of the Mini ster of Finance. Mr.

Speaker: The time for Oral Ques tions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Darren Praznlk (Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I woul d ask if you could please call for continua tion of debate on second reading, Bill 28, and then the bills for deba te

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 2660 on second reading as they appear on the Order Paper. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 28- The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honou rable Min ister of Culture, He ritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Mitchelson) , Bill 28, The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act; Loi abrogeant Ia

Loi sur le Conseil int ercu ltural du Manitoba, standing in the name of the honou rable member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) . An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that that matter remain standing? [agreed] Prior to recognizing the honourable member for Wellington, I must advise the House that I have been informed the honour able member for Wellington will be the desi gnated speaker on behalf of the honou rable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), who has unlimited time. Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Mr.

Speaker, I have been given by my Leader the privilege of being given unlimi ted time to speak on The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act, and I will be taking advantage of that unlimi ted time to put a fair number of commen ts on the record about this act. Mr. Speaker, I would like to briefly summarize the order of my commen ts and then get straight into the meat of the discussion, or the deba te, I should say.

I would like to speak first on the background of The Man itoba Intercultural Council Act as it relates to the history of Canada and the history of Manitoba and the mor e recent history that led to The Manitoba Intercultural Council Act being implemen ted in 1 983, the act that this current piece of legis lation will repeal, should it be passed. Then I am going to spend a fair bit of time on the accomplishmen ts of the Manitoba Intercultural Council in its 1 0-year history.

I think it is very im portant that those accom plishments be put on the record in some det ail, because it puts a background and a framework around the de bate about the repeal of The Manitoba Intercultural Council Act. I wou ld lik e then to ta lk about the accom plishmen ts of the Manitoba Intercultural Council in two main sections. The Manit oba Intercultural Council Act has been in existence for 1 0 years. It sort of nicely divides itself into five years under the New Dem ocratic Party and five years under the Conservative Party.

In researching the accomplishments and the achievemen ts of the Manitoba Intercultural Council in its 1 0-year history, it was very interest ing, Mr. Speaker, to see thatthere is a major difference in the calibre and the quali ty of the co-operation between the government and the MIC, in the first five years as related to the second five years. I will be spending a bit of time on that, because I think it also reflects very much on the background and the discussions about Bill 28. * (1 050) Then, Mr.

Speaker, I will be spending time on the current situation that we are dealing with, a more recent history, in particular, the Blair report, and how it has had an im pact on the Manitoba Intercultural Council, ethnocultur al relations between groups and the government in this province and how it has led dir ectly to Bill 28. Then I will be concluding my remar ks at some point in the future with, where do we go from here and what our recommen dations would be in this context. Mr. Sp eaker, with those br '1ef introd uctory remarks, I will begin my speech on The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act, Bill 28. Mr.

Speaker, I do not think it is any surprise to any member in this House, nor should it be to actually any Manitoban, that Manitoba is a multicultural community. It, like Canada as a whole, has been built on immi gration and on the contributions that people and groups have made who have come to Canada from around the world. They have come to Canada from around the world for very legitima te reas ons. They have come to Canada for a range of reasons.

They have come to Canada, beginning, I should say, historical ly, with the aboriginal peoples, who, by definition, are the first people of the province of Manitoba and of Canada as well. The aborigi nal peop les, to the best of our knowled ge-and reg retta bly, our history of the abor iginal settlement and time in Canada, in Manitoba in particular, is much less complete than it should be, due in no small part to the reprehensible conduct of the second nations, if you will, the settlers who have come afte r the aboriginal people. Mr.

Speaker, Manitoba has had a very long history with not only aboriginal peoples but with new

2661 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANI TOBA May 7, 1993 Canadians, as all of us except the aboriginal peoples are, in Manitoba and Canada. It is in many ways not a very positive history. I started off by saying that many people have come to this province and this country for good and suffic�ient reasons. That is correct, but I think that we need to take a step back and look originally at the earlier history of the contact between the aborigi nal peoples in Manitoba and with the first groups that have come to this cou ntry and to this pro v'ince. I have stated, Mr. Speaker, it is not in many ways a very pretty story.

It also, though, frames our discussion in our hist01ry about the whole concept of multiculturalism. In effect, and I guess in as succinct a terms as possible, Bill 50, The Manitoba lntercuitural Council Act, which was brought forward by the NDP Government in 19 83 esta blishing the Manitoba In tercultu ral Council, is one vis ion of multi1culturalism in this pro vince. It is one vision of ho w the gove rnmen t and the ethnocultu ral communi ties deal with each other in this pro vince.

At the other end, 10 years later, we have Bill 28, The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act which we on this side of the House and many groups in the communi ty feel is almost an antithetica l vision of multiculturalism in our society in Manitoba today . Thre�ughout my comme nts, I will be referring to those different visions of what multiculturalism is. I would like to begin again, Mr.

Speaker, by commenting fairly extensively from the green paper for discussion put forward by the task force on multiculturalism in Manitoba in Oct ober of 19 87, en titled : Towar ds a Meani ngful Policy on Multiculturalism for Manitoba. The reason I am going to comment qui te extensively from this repor t is that I think it encapsu lates much of the history and much of the background and framework that will provide the basiis for our debate on this bill.

In the introduction of the green paper, it says, and I quote: Multiculturalism meaning that Canada always had numerous ethnic groups is a fact, but multicultur alism meaning a policy that offi cially acknowledged Canada's multiethnic reality was a long time com ing. In effect, that discusses the history of Manitoba up until fairly recent times. Before the settlers or the first wave of immigr ants came over to Canada, the abc•riginal peoples in the province of Manitoba were not just one group of aboriginal peoples. They were many aboriginal peoples, many distinct societies and many distinct linguistic groups.

I would like to state again, Mr. Speaker, that I think it is a tragedy for all of us that so much of that rich history has been lost. I think it is a remarkable feat that so many of the aboriginal people in our society today are doing all that they can to recapture their history. We welcome that and wish them all the best.

Back to multiculturalism as a polic y, an offi cially acknowledged policy rather than the reality, the report goes on to say that atte mpts to formu late multicultural policy, which parenthetically is very recent in our history, was preceded by a history of of ficial eth nocentrism, pre judi ce, racism and discrimi nation, especially towards people who are perceived to be incapable of being assim ilated. Now this is the sad part of our history, Mr. Speaker, and it is cert ainly not a history that has not been shared by all of North Ameri ca, but in the context of Manitoba we are dealing with it now.

European migration to Canada commenc ed in the 16 th Century, almost 500 years ago, with the arrival first of the French and then the English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish. The Germans and Dutch follo wed then, although in lesser numbers than the British Isles immigr ants, and that northern European influx of imm igrants preceded the arrival of large groups from the rest of Europe and parts of Asia. In the last 25 years, we have seen a major change in the cou ntry of birth of immigr ants to Canada and to Manitoba.

We continue to have immigration from the British Isles and the European continent, but we are also now expanding and receive people from all of Asia, South and Central Amer ica, the West Indies and Africa. As a matter of fact, the latest immigr ation statistics show that the new Canadians and new Manitobans are mostly now from southeast Asia and Cen tral and South America with a goodly number from the continent of Africa.

The reality is that Canada has been settled over its several-hu ndred-year history by immi grants, resettled by immigr ants who in virtually all cases displa ced the aboriginal peoples-as I have stated before, a history of which none of us can be proud. The reality has been, throughout all of our history, that we are a multicultural society, whether we are from the aboriginal multicultu ral society or the later multicu ltural society as brought forward by the European and the rest of the immigr ation that has taken place in the last 1 00 years.

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2662 * (1 10 0) Up until the last 25 years, howeve r, our official policy on immig ration has been very biased. It has not been a policy that accurately or adequately reflected the nature of the immi gration waves that have come in to our country; nor was it a policy that acknowledged the positive benefits of the new Canadians to our commu nities; nor was it a policy that welcomed them with open arms. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, our official immigr ation policy up until the last few years has been exactly the opposite.

As stated before , it has been full of prejudice, racism and discrimination. Until about 25 years ago, gove rnment policy was clearly biased to favour those who were seen to be more easily assimil ated into the domi nant British and French groups. I do not think there is any-or there should not be any quarrel with that state ment.

In the late '50s -and I parenthetically was asto nished to read this, and horrified, but not surprised I gue ss- immi gration officials-now this is Canadian immi gration officials-were still defending exclusionary measures against visible peoples on "scientific grounds." It was seriously argued, for example, that blacks must be excluded because it was scientifically proven that they were unable to survive in cold climates. I do believe it is an example of how far we have come in the last 25 years, Mr.

Speaker, that virtually all Manitobans woul d see that state men t for the racist and discrimina tory comment that it is. I would say virtually all Manitobans, because there do remain individuals and groups in our province who are unable or unwilling to allow all peoples to live in harmony or attempt to have all peoples to live in harmony in ou r province and in our country. Simil ar scientific argumen ts were offered to exclude Chinese, Japanese, South Asians and even Jew�.

As I have spoken of before , our treatm ent of the aboriginal peoples is something that is repugnant and disgusting and something of which we must all be very ashamed. The whole concept of assimi latio n, which is another way of saying the melting pot concept, is one that has led to major problems in the Un ited State s. We all have examples in very recent times of major difficulties arising, not exclusively but at least partially because of the concept of assimilation in the Un ited States. The way that plays itself out is that you assim ilate to the dominant culture.

Because of the nature of the waves of immi gration in Canada and the political and social and economic history of Canada, that dominant culture, up until very recently, in numbers as well as in power and influence, has been driven by the British and the French experience, not even equally the British and French experience in the country of Canada, as we all know the problems that have faced bilingualism and two founding nations and two solitudes, all the concerns that we have and issues that we have gone through as a cou ntry and are continuing to grapple with.

Basically, the dominant culture in every aspect of Canadian history until very recently has been generally based on the British and, in Quebec, the French experience. Our laws, ou r politics, our social mores, our religions, our economic and financial institutions have all been framed by the British and the common law and the northern European experience. That is reality, Mr. Speaker, and it is one that has had problems over the centuries. Another major group that has been horrendously affected by this whole concept of assimi lation is the aboriginal com muni ty.

Our trea tment of the aboriginal community sort of covers the range of nega tive behaviours that we as dominant-culture Canadians have visited upon our minorities. It has been, in smaller instances perhaps, the kinds of behaviours that have been outlined and have taken place with other visible mino rities as they have come through.

Denial of citize nship, denial of voting rights, denial of legal redress, denial of land ownership, denial of parental rights and mechanisms of pro test are the kinds of things that we as a domin ant society and culture have visited upon our aboriginal peoples and, in some ways, we have not allowed those basic rights of natural justice to be held and to be exercised by our other immigrant groups as they have come into Canada. It is not just physical and racial characteristics that have, up until the very recent past, framed our discrimi natory practices when it comes to the multicultural reality of our society.

Treatment of central , easte rn and southern Europeans also has shown that lingu istic and cultural characteristics were also of concern to Canadian immi gration of ficials and also have led to, in the past, discrimination.

2663: LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 There was legisla tion in the 18 90s that was put forward to "manage" the new arrivals who were coming from the Ukraine and southern Europe and other non-British countries. The ultimate goal of these pieces of legislation and these policies were lingu istic and cultur al assimil ation to the two dominant groups in Canadian history, that being the English and the French.

Up until very recently our official policies and certainly our uno fficial attitudes and behaviours have denied the multicultural reality that Canadians have lived with since the aboriginal people first set foot ,on Canadian soil. We have always been a multi•cultural society. However, that was defined and ilt has changed its

definitions over the centuries and the mil le nnia. We have always been a multk:ultural society, and we have always reflected that multicultural reali ty in our laws and our attitudes, but up until recently, it was a society of assi milation and a society that stated very clearly that only the British or French experience was to be valued and all others were to be subsumed or assimilated into the domi nant cultures. We all know the history of our aboriginal problems in the province of Manitoba.

I will not go into that because that is really tangential, although imp ortant, to the discussion of our multicultural backg round. Late in the 19 th Cen tury and certainly into the early 20th Century and into the 19 20s afte r the First World War, Manitoba, and all of Canada, was the recipient of an enormous wave of immigrat ion. Hundreds of thousands of people came to this cou ntry to settle it, to live here and to try and find a new and better life.

Many of them were from central and �eastern Europe and many of them , particularly in Manitoba, came because of the pote ntial for ag ri,cultural gr owth and development in this province. The agricultural possibilities in Manitoba were• extensive, and the people who came here came from an agricultural background, often from central and eastern Europe.

They quickly settled in this province and provided the basis upon which our strong agricultu ral sector has grown. * (1 "11 0) The downside to that whole process was, again, that because the dominant culture in Manitoba was British, was English speaking and was based on, largely in the economic sphere, the impo rtance and the influen ce and the power of the railroa ds, the way that the province was settled and the way that we handled our aboriginal peoples and our later immigrants was framed by the economic demands of the railroads rather than the sociocultural considerations that we feel should have had more expression and more play.

It was not just the financial and economic domina nce of the British system in Manitoba that the British system domina ted in Manitoba, but the domi nant cultures played a

part in the rest of our society. Again, these kinds of areas are areas that continue to play a very im portant role as we try and deal with our multicultural reality. Education, the schools, had an enormous impact on the cultural and socio and economic fabric of Manitoba. Perhaps they had a more im portant im pact or more domi nant im pact 60 or 70 or 80 years ago than they do today, because they were one of the central compone nts of small-town Manitoba.

The demographic reality of Manitoba is that while Winnipeg has from almost the beginning been the central locus of influence and power in the pro vince, and certainly popula tion, up until very recently, the smaller communi ties in the provi nce, in the rural areas and in the North, were vital and vibrant centres of the regional centres. We have seen a depopu lation of our rural and northern parts of our province that is as a direct result of Conser vative ideology and actions, but that is another topic that we will get into in another foru m. But school s, Mr.

Speaker, have played an im portant and almost dominant role in our culture in Manitoba. The schools, certainly in the earlier part of our history, reflec ted the dominant culture, reflected the domi nant language. The schools were taught by memb ers of the mainstream culture with the aim of civ ilizing, Christi anizing and Canadianizing. The earlier parts of our history in Manitoba had the mo st negative ef fect on the aboriginal commu nity, but the imp ortance of the church and the edu cational system in the province of Manitoba had the same effect on all of the people who came to the pro vince of Manitoba.

The aim of our policies, whether they were stated or not, and in many cases they were not openly stated, it was just an attitude and an assumption, was to assimi late not only aboriginal peoples in the province but all other peoples who came to Manitoba int o the mainstream, i.e., in most cases in Manitoba, British culture. That, Mr. Speaker, was sort of the first phase of our

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2664 multicultural history in the province of Manitoba, and it lasted, as I stated, up until the 19 20s. We all in western civil ization went through a dreadful period in the 19 30s with the Depressi on. Our immi gration figures went down, but then after World War II we started into a new phase of multiculturalism and immi gration and thinking about how we dealt with the peoples who made up our country. Actu ally, afte r World War II there were some positive changes that took place.

There were some more positive elemen ts in our environment that would allow for the preservation and maybe even the enhancement of ethnocultural concerns, a bit of a movement away from assimi lation and towards an official recognition that Canada really was a multicultural society that should be preserved and protec ted. One of these things was the UN Declaration of Human Rights, which I believe took place in 19 48.

Now, many of the UN declar ations are wonderful principles and, if we Jived by the major tenets of any one of these declarations from the Uni ted Nations our world would be a far better place to live in. Unfortuna te ly, we can judge our actual Jives and policies and Jaws and cultures mo re in the absence of following these decla rati ons than in the observance of them. At any rate, there was a UN declar ation on human rights in the late '40s which did make statemen ts about the rights of individuals and the rig hts of individuals to maintain their cultural her itages.

I am referring to the green paper for discussion from the task force on multiculturalism in Manitoba, which also me ntions another positive factor which I found very interesting for this particular factor to be seen as a positive factor in bringing Manitobans to an under standing of the multicultural reality of our provi nce, and that was the Holocaust, Mr. Speaker.

I cannot imagine seeing any positive things come out of that unbelie vable twelve years, but it did have as a slig ht positive im pact bringing home the realization to people that other people could be completely destroyed only because of where they lived, what their religion was or what their cultural or ethnic backgro und was. No other individual component entered into it.

So I think the eno rmity of the Holocaus t brought forward to some of us the need to make sure that our laws, our policies, and our society reflected the ability of individuals to protect and cherish what makes them an individ ual, that being in many cases their cultural history. A third component was the indepe ndenc e moveme nts following the breakup of the British Empire, and this took place a great deal in the continent of Africa. It also had an im pact in Manitoba where we started to hear about these things happe ning. There were changes taking place in the world, geographical and political boun darie s.

Pol itical boundaries were being changed based not on the needs of the British or the French or the Dutch or the Portuguese empires, but based on more legitima te social, cultural, tribal , if you will, natural boundaries, natural groupings. So this was another recognition of the importance of being able to maintain and be aware of your cultural backg round. (Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) * (1 12 0) A couple of other elemen ts that were closer to home, Mr.

Acting Speak er, in this postwar period leading up to the late '60s were the civil rig hts movement in the Un ited State s and the re-e mergence of feminism. Now, again, things that may not on first blush have as much im pact on multiculturalism as we might think, but the civil rig hts movement in the United States again focused very clearly and very sharply on the issues that face peoples who are defined by the domi nant culture as different and thereby less accept able.

In the Uni ted States in the civil rights movement in the '50s and '60s, the dominant culture was the white culture, and the subservient culture that was fighting against this were blacks. The same principles apply across the board. No matte r what the dominant culture is and no matter how many or how dispirit the subservient cultures are, the same principles apply. The blacks in the United States were saying, excuse me, we are individuals; we are Americans; we are citizens of this country who have every single right that you the domin ant culture have as well.

The only distinction that should be made, and this is an Amer ican frame and I think is not seen as much in Canada, Americ a being a nation that was born out of individualism and has cert ainly in its 250 years le arned to regr et some of that rel ia nce on indivi dualism, is the concept that people should be taken for their inherent quali ties not for their superficial characteristics, not for the colour of their skin, not for their country of origin, not for the

2665 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 language that they speak, not for the dialect that they speak. This was something that was very difficult for the United States and has been very difficult for other domina nt cultures to be able to accept. It was not just that blacks or other mino rity groups or visible minorities or people from Poland or Ireland or the Ukraine are "different." It goes further than that.

It has enormous political and economic repercussions as welll because, if a dominant group starts to open itself up and it becomes more inclusive, that me ans that there are more people in that group that can partici pate in the life of the com munity, and perhaps the power differentials that have fueled our various societies for virtually the entire history of humankind would be lessened if not elim inated. So there are a large number of elem ents that go into all of these discussions. At any rate , the civil rights moveme nts started to break down some of these barriers and attitudes. Laws were changed.

The civil rights legisla tion of 19 64 in the United States was an absolutely seminal piece 10f legislation which, for the first time, stated that people have civil rights just by definition of their being a citizen, not by any other characteristic.

It was the responsibility of those groups and people who had power and influence and author ity in the financial, economic, social and political spheres to enc ou rage and enable everyone to have access to those rights and privileges, something that 25 years later we are at least paying lip service to, although in many of our actual daily lives we are still fighting those same struggles. The re-emergence, Mr. Acting Speaker, another ele me·nt of feminism, and I say re-emergence because there was a strong feminist movement in North America in and around the early part of this century.

Certainly in Manitoba, with the women getting the right to vote in 19 16 , the women becom ing memb ers of Parliament in the '30s for the first tirne, that was one kind of part of feminism, the suffra!�ette movement in the Uni ted States, the same kind of thing happening. Acknowled gment of labour issues by the workers, particularly in New York-' this kind of feminis m was in a sense a first wave. In the '60s and the '70s in North America there was a. second wave of feminism, which in a way paralleled the civil rights movement.

It said that it is not jwst colour, language, cou ntry of origin, but the most lbasic characteristic of all, gender, that has to be looked at and has to be seen as something that is inherent and should not be the basis for any kind of discrimination. We have made some progress in that regard, but certainly there are new challenges that face us in this area every day.

At least, again, as in the civil rights movement and as in some of the other stateme nts that I made earlier, these kinds of movements started people thinking about the whole issue of racism, of prej udice, of sexism, of all of these kinds of negative things. It started people thinking about their own att itudes. It started people thinking about the im pact that these negative attit udes had not only on their personal lives, on others' lives, but on the social and economic fabric of our country.

I think we are starti ng to realize, at least we pay lip service to, the im portance of not having these kinds of negative attitudes to our society. Also in the last 25 years we have seen an increased political activity among ethnocultur al groups. Increased political activity-! know that there have been some comments, particularly in light of the fact that Stephen Juba just passed away recently. In the discussion of his life and the imp act he had on the city of Winnipeg and the province of Manitoba was a revisiting of the fact that in 19 56, when Mr.

Juba was first ele cted mayor, he was seen as an ou tsider who made good. He was seen as an immigrant from the north end of Winnipeg who had leaped that barrier. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) I think that is a very interesting juxtapositi on of what 30 years can do in that 30 years ago someone of Ukrainian background could be seen as an outsider, and today that has changed so that one of the most powerful ethnocultural commu nities in this province are those from the Ukrainian commu nity. It is an evolving situation. I would like to remind, particularly the member for Rossmere (Mr.

Neufeld) , that I have unlimi ted time. This is an im portant issue that we are debating and the-{interjection] Well, if the Mi nister of Rnance (Mr. Manness) would like to make a motion that the Rules of the House be changed so that there is no such thing as unlimited time, then let him get up and say that. It is one of the major tenets of our parliamen tary syste m that one person in a debate on issues has unlimited time. I know what I am saying is not going to be re ce ived ver y positi vely by memb ers of the

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANI TOBA 2666 gove rnment benches, because what I am going to say, not only in my introductory rem arks but all the way throu gh my commen ts, is not going to reflect very positively on the actio ns, the atti tudes and the behaviour of the government. But that is the choice that you as a government have made.

The other side of making difficult choices, as the gov ernment keeps talking about, is that you have to listen to the im pact of those difficult choices on the people of Manitoba, and on all the people of Manitoba, not just the focus groups that you are basing your policies and decisions on. * (1 13 0) Mr.

Speak er, as I stated in my opening introduc tory remarks, the reason I am taking more than 40 minutes to debate and discuss Bill28 is that I believe it is important to put on the record, in one place, some of the background, some of the history not only of the Manitoba Intercultural Council itself but the background and the history that led to the MIC Act being put in place in 19 83, the history that has gone on in this last decade and the imp lications that is going to have for the multicultur al com munity of this province.

I am not putting these commen ts on record and I am not speaking longer than 40 mi nutes because I like hearing myself speak. I am doing it because the issues are important to all Manitobans, and I will ask that the Mi nister of Finance , if he is uninteres ted in this issue, has certainly options that he can use to deal with this disinterest. Mr. Speaker, in the last 25 years much has happened that has been framed by our history that has led to our current situation in the province of Man itoba.

In 19 69, the feder al gov ernment legis lated bi lingualism, and I know that that legislation of official bilingualism has had a long and stormy history in not only Canada but cert ainly in the province of Manitoba, as any policy which impacts on people as di rectly and as viscerally as bilingualism will have on peop le. I do not think that discussion, debate, differences of opinion are a nega tive thing in our society and I think they are healthy and that we should listen to a range of views, particularly those that may make us think or may make us a little uncomfortabl e.

In 19 71 , the federal government announced a policy on multiculturalism. As I stated at the beginning of my remarks, we have always been a multicultural country and province but, until 19 71 , we did not offi cially reflect that fact in our policies, parti cularly the federal government. That offi cial recognition of Canada as a multicultural society has had an enormous imp act on all of the people in Canada and particularly in Manitoba, those who were here before 19 71 and those who have come since 19 71 . It is also one of the major differences between our country and the Un ited States.

The United States does not recognize itself as a multicultural society and Canada does. We have been in some ways suc cess ful in im plemen ting that policy of multicu lturalism and in many ways less than successfu l, but at least it frames our thinking and our legislation in the last 20 to 25 years. (Mr. Jack Reimer, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) In the 19 60s, as well, Mr. Acting Speaker, Canada federally liberalized or opened the immi gration policies.

I do not pretend to be an expert on imm igr atio n, cer tainly not on the his tory of immi gration policies in this country, but I do know that up until the last 25 years or 30 years the immi gration policies of the country of Canada were very reflective of the idea that groups who came to Canada or individuals who came to Canada would be looked at mor e favourably if they were easier to assimilate, as I said earlier, so eleme nts, whether it was openly or overtly or covertly, were looked at such as language, such as skin colour, country of origin, religion, cultural compatibility with a domina nt society.

The fact that Canada offi cially became a multicu ltural society, a bilingual society and had more open imm igration policies in the late '60s and early '70s has had a very important impact on all of us. The third phase in effect-and since then, since the late '60s, the early '70s , we have been dealing in the cou ntry and in the prov inc e with the multicu ltural fact, with the fact that immi gration has been expanded and opened more. I will go into the specifics of that kind of thing and the im pact it has had on Manitoba in a few moments. But I think, Mr.

Acting Speaker, it is im portant that we know that right now in Manitoba and Canada we are in what could be a third phase. We have gone through the assimila tion phase. We have acknowledged for the last 20 years that Canada is a multicultural society. We have made some beginning attempts to implem en t that

2667 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 philosophy and that principle in our laws and our society to a greater or lesser extent successfu lly. Now we are faced with enormous challenges as we try and bring that multicultural fact that was evolved and developed in an expansionary society into phase with a society and an economy that is becom ing, on the one hand, mo re global and, on the other hand, much smaller. We need to make sure that the philo sophies and principles of multiculturalism are flexible enough to be abie to deal with the realities of the 199 0s.

That is something that is a challenge that faces governments and societies always, to make sure that the philosophies and the policies are flexible, are living and breathing organisms rather than something that is stati c. I think, frankly, to a large extent cert ainly the debates over multicu lturalism have been lively, and the issues that have been raised by policies on multic:ulturalism have had the positive effect of bringing into public and into the open the range of opini o>ns and views on this issue as we as a society and as a government try to grapple with the new realities.

So I think that is a very positive thing. It is a challenge, and it is very difficult. We are trying to deal with this concept of multiculturalism in very difficult times, so I think it is good that we are at least bringing the issues up front. We are not putti ng them under the carpet, and we are attempting to open a dialogue or maintain a dialogue that needs to be ongoing. Mr. Acting Speaker, the multicu ltural concept has not only been dealt with in a Canadian context but certainly as well in a Manitoba context.

One of the many, many publi cations and documen ts and pieces of information that have been produced by the Manitoba Intercultural Council over its 1 0-year history is the document entitled, Multicultural Policy and Initiatives of the Gover nment of Manitoba, 19 70 to 19 87. I w�:mld like to spend a bit of time discussing this document because it puts into more of a Manitoba context the issues that led up to the tabling and the passage of Bill 50 in 19 83, The Manit ob a Intercultural Council Act.

So I will speak fairly extensively from this document. * (1 1 40) As I stated earlier, the comment that el icited some negative response from members opposite was the fact that in 19 56, Stephen Juba was seen as a foreigner, was seen as not of us, was seen as an outsider and had a stunning vic tory in 19 56 when he became mayor of the city of Winnipeg. How far we have come . How our attitudes about who is included, who is exclud ed have changed. In 19 69, another pivotal mo me ntous event occurred in the province of Manitoba.

It was the el ec tion of the fi rst New Democr atic Party government in the province of Manitoba. Now, Mr. Acting Speaker, I am not saying this was a momen tous occasion because it was an NDP election. I would like to make that clear. What I am saying is that the government that was elec ted in 19 69 included some members who again reflected the changing of the guard, if you will, as far as ethnic background in the political power of the province of Mani toba.

Names lik e Schr eyer, Uru ski , Hanuschak, Saul Miller, Saul Cherniak reflected a new expanded role for individuals who were from other than the historically domin ant northern European community. Not only that, Mr. Acti ng Speaker, but in the first throne speech or the throne speech of March 19 70, the government of the day for the first time iterated these multicultural concepts.

The throne speech in 19 70 said, and I quote: In enhancing the character of Canadian citizenship and nationhood, it is my gove rnment's intention to assist the different mi nority parties in the Manitoba cultural mosaic in holding a congress. This will, no doubt, provide a forum where the different cultural groups in the province may express their views on me asures needed to nour ish and sustain their lingu istic and cultural heritage.

My minis ters express the hope that these measures will receive the support of all as being consistent with our desire to maintain the Canadian cultural mosaic in a free, plural and open society. This was 23 years ago. It was prior to the federal governme nt's state men t that Ca nada is a multicu ltural society. The federal government followed the pro vincial government of Manitoba in acknowledging the importance of a plural, free, multicultural society. Now, I happen to think, Mr. Acting Speaker, that this is an im portant state ment, an imp ortant milestone in the history of Manitoba.

It was not the only time that the Schreyer government made those state me nts and made pu blic comm itment s to the conc ep t and the implemen tati on of multiculturalism.

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2668 In 19 71 , the throne speech no ted the go ve rnmen t's " . . . policy of respect and encouragement for the rich cultural he ritage of Manitoba's peoples ... . " In 19 72, in the Speech from the Throne, the Lieut ena nt-Governor stated , quote, we established a policy last year which aims to preserve the he ritage of the diverse communities of the province, end quote. Similar declarations have appeared in virtually every other Speech from the Throne since 19 70, at least the Speeches from the Throne of the New Democr atic Party governments.

I would cert ainly be the first to admit that Speeches from the Throne and the state ments co ntai ned therein do not ne cessarily mean anything. They are statements of principle, but they are only state ments of principle and state ments of attit ude. They are nothing if they are not follo wed up and implemen ted with leg islative and policy action. The government of the day, the government that was in power from 19 69 to 19 77, did follow up those state me nts of principle, those statements of attitu de, those statements of ideology with acti on .

I am going to outline for the me mbers opposite and for the people of Manitob a some of thos e accomplishmen ts. Following the throne speech of March of 19 70, the government did enact or did bring forward a Manitoba Mosaic Congress , which was held in Octo ber of 19 70. Knowing the time frame of how long things take to actually be implemen ted in government of whatever political stripe, I think it is remarkable that this congress took place in such a short period of time afte r its first state ment in March of '70.

It was the first gathering of its kind in Canada, not in Manitoba but in Canada, and it brought together represe ntatives of many ethnocultur al communities including the Franco-Manitoban group, the native organizations and community and the Metis. It was brought together to discuss the cultural future of Manitoba. It was a recognition of the fact that we were in a multicu ltural society.

We needed to reflect, we needed to acknowledge that fact and get together to talk about how we implemen ted that reality in our cultural lives, in our educational lives, in our health care, in our social service prov isions, in our financial workings, in all aspects of our working as a society and as a province together. The Manitoba cultural mosaic of 19 70 was designed to begin to address those issues. The principles that under lay this mosaic, I think, are worthy of reflection and of sharing with the memb ers today.

First was the pri nciple that government action shoul d proceed only after commu nity consu ltation. You cannot imp ose , particularly when you are deal ing with issues that are as broad and as deep and as diverse as those that are involved in multicu ltural issues. No government, no one single group should be able to impose actions upon this community. That principle has been -it has either been honoured or not honoured, but it has certainly been reflective in the delib erations that have gone on in the last 23 years.

Secondly, the 1 970 Mosaic Congr ess recognized and asserted the oblig ation of all governments to support multicultural endeavours as an appropr iate social expenditure . Now this also was a brand new idea, cert ainly as it relates to the multicultur al community in our province and in our country. We have evolved over the centuries as a society understand ing that we have the responsibil ity to provide for the basic necessities of life for our citizens. Those include health, the right to decent housing, hope fully the right to be able to hold a job, and food, those kinds of things.

Those basic rights have been in some cases expanded and in some cases contract ed, but society has recognized that we do have as a society a responsi bili ty to ensure that basic needs of all of our constituents are met. This second principle out of the Mosaic Congress in October of 19 70 expands that basic.principle to include the fact that multicultural endeavours, however they are going to be defined, are also an appropriate use of social expenditure.

By social expenditure, I am ta king that to mean that governme nts at municipal levels, pro vincial levels and federal levels have an obligation to ensure that ther e are resour ces available so that the continu ation of the cultural herita ge, the concept, the principle of multicultur alism can find actualization. This is an enormously important principle that had never been articu lated before. • (1 15 0} These two principles, that government acti on must only proceed from community consu ltation and that government has an obligation to provide resources and assistance to enhance the concept

2669 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 of mUIIticu lturalism, have rem ained the basic underpinnings of the ethnocultural communi ties' expectations of government and, as well, have been either honoured in the observance or in the breach by succeeding governments. So there are two very im portant things that came out of this 19 70 Mosaic Congress. Not only were these two principles eluci dated in 19 70, but there were some recom men dations that were made out of this Mosaic Congress which were also very impor tant and which also have implic ations for our deliber ations today.

The first one that I would like to speak to was reques ts for various ini tiatives by the government to add a mu lticu ltural component to several existing programs. This is the beginning of the implem entation of the principle that multiculturalism is im portant and should be assisted wherever possi ble.

If you assume that, if you take that as a given, as a principle that you are going to live by, then you need to actually implement it if you are going to follow through, so you have to have the gov ernment accepting the fact that they need to make sure that their existing programs have a multicultural focus to them. We are still, Mr. Acting Speake r, dealing with that particular issue today. We are still dealin g with and grappHng with how we actually make sure that our health care system, our social services syste m, our educ ation system , our justice syste m reflect the multicultur al reality of our pro vince.

The only way we can actually do that is by the service deliver y system reflecting that. We have been discussing in this House in a number of areas for decades now how we implement that principle. Another recomm endation that came out of the cultural mos aic of 19 70 that goes back to both the prin ciiple of co mmuni ty consu ltation and the principle of multicult ural endeavours being in and of themselves supportable is that there be financial and/or other forms of support to the ethnic volu ntary organizations which sponsor and maintain cultural projec:ts and programs of activity .

Again, it is the implement ation of the principles that were agreed to. If you are going to sup port a concept of multiculturalism , you have to support it not just verbally, not just with state ments in the House or that fdnd of thing, but you have to actually put in place programs or assist the communi ty to work with the government and with each other to implement programs. That goes back to the principle of consu ltation. The multicultural communi ty and its component parts know what it is that they need.

The elemen ts of the multicultural co mmuni ty may not always agree one way or the other, but together, as individual groups, as individual people and as a multicultural component of our society. those needs have to be reflected and have to be listened to and responded to, to the best ofthe government's ability. The third gener al recomme ndation, and one which in the context of the delib erations in Bill 28 is perhaps the most important today, is that there be a cultural council of Manitoba established by the pro vincia l go vernmen t to ser ve the whole communi ty.

This again goes back to the principles of com muni ty consu ltation and government obligation, that there be a council established to ser ve the co mmu nity and to work with the government, an incredibly important principle that came out of the October 19 70 Mosaic Congress. The government of the day listened to the Cultural Mosaic Congress and impleme nted and acted on many of those recomme ndati ons.

I will not for a moment suggest that they or any other government then or since then has comple tely or totally satisfact orily responded to or implemen ted rec ommen dati ons coming from the multicultu ral community. Some very im portant things did come out of that congress. It did not just sit as a report on the shelf and gather dust. In 19 72, the min isterial advisory comm ittee on multiculturalism was establ ished. Again, we are talking over 20 years ago, at the very beginning of governme ntal recognition of the im portance of multiculturalism. So these are seminal historic things that took place.

There were 15 memb ers of this comm ittee appointed by Order-in- Council. Its role was to take an active role in developing multicultural programs for government. So again it goes back to the principle that you cannot impose programs on the commu nity. You have to work co-operatively with the community and act on, to the best of your ability, advice and sugges tions from the community. That was the role of this advisory committee. Largely as a result of this committee, several im portant things happened. There was a program of project and operati ng grants for ethnocu ltural organizations introd uced.

For the first time there

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2670 was a recognition, not only in principle but through grants and actual money being flowed, of the princip le that cu ltural organ iz ations needed gov ernment assistance and help in order to survive and expand and become more robust. A second element that the gove rnment followed as far as recomme ndations from the Ministerial Advisory Comm ittee on Multiculturalism was that lingu istic support grants for heritage language suppleme ntary schools were established. Again, this is 21 -22 years ago.

We still have programs that deal with heritage language support in our school syste m. Parenthetically, Mr.

Acting Speaker, we will, when we get into Estimates, discuss the extent of those grants and whether we think it is a satisfactory level or not, but the principle is still being main tained that you not only have support, financial and otherwise, to eth nocu ltural organi zati ons, but you also recogn ize as we have also recognized as a gove rnment for over 20 years the im portance of maintaining heri tage language programs in the school system and in the commu nity as a whole as a resource to enable the individuals and second- , and third- and fourth-gener ation individuals to mai ntai n the connec tion wit h their he ritage languages.

This goes back again to the fact that we are a multicultur al society. We are not an assimi lative society, as the Uni ted States is. You do not find anywhere near the extent of programs for heritage reten tion, he ritage language programs in the Uni ted State s, because they believe that you should become an American and that means you should be speaking English.

You can have your lit tle cele brations on one day of the year, but that is a very small component of the activity of citizens in the United State s. • (1 200) The large cultural events, the large cross-country events that are cele brated in the United States are things like the 4th of July and Thanksgiving and other events that do not have a cultural background to them. We in Manitoba and in Canada as well have a much more richly diversified cultural heritage and we maintain it largely through programs such as the li ngu istic suppor t grants for her itage language in the school s.

The Department of Education during the 19 70s established the Bureau de !'education Francaise- excuse my acce nt-and the Native Education branch, agai n, as a recognition that in order to foster and strengthen our multicultural heritage, we needed to put in place programs and recognize through programs and financial support our bilingua l her itage with the French and English languages and also our aboriginal he ritage which, as I have stated in my earlier remarks, was sadly lacking prior to that. In 19 72, there was

an act which established the Franco-Manitoban Cultural Centre, something that has been of vast importance in enriching our cultural he ritage and our cultural understanding in Canada. In 19 7 4, and this reflects back on the sort of extension of the UN Declaration of Human Rights that I have spoken of earlier, a Human Rights Act was introduced in the province of Manitoba which was conside red at the time to be one of the most progressive statutes in all of Canada. This Human Rights Act which-1 was surprised we had not had one earlier than 19 74-has not been in effect for very long.

It is less than 20 years, although it is getting closer to 20 years. This also, The Human Rights Act of 19 74, was a reflection of the need for government to codify the concepts of multicu lturalism, to have in place standards of behaviour and standards of performance and standards by which we could measure our positive progress and our nega tive actions as they relate to human rights, of which multiculturalism is the basic component. Mr. Acting Speaker, I would like to inject at this point a small partisan aside, if I may.

After having spent a fair bit of time discussing the actions of the Schreyer government in four years, the first four years of the Schreyer governme- nt saw an enormous amoun t of activit y as reg ard the establishment of the principle and programs of multiculturalism. When this government says that New Dem ocrat governments have done virtually nothing or very little for multiculturalism, they are not sharing with the people of Manitoba the full accuracy of what history shows us.

There was much that was done, and I think one of the remarkable things about what took place in that four-year period or five-year period is that it was new. It was not building on a base; it was creating the base. It was creating the base that successiv e go ve rnm ents have used as a benc hmark, sometimes suc cess fully, many times not successfully. But it is remarkable the amount of work that was done in a very short period of time,

2671 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 creating something that has served us as a guide since then and has also served the rest of Canada as being the first components of a multiculturalism policy in many areas. Accord ing to the Manitoba Intercultural Council report which I have been quoting from , Policy and Init iatives of the Government of Manitoba from 19 70 to 19 87, things did not remain as positive as they had started out in the early and mid -70s. I am going to quo te a whole paragraph from this document.

It starts by saying: Between 19 78 and 19 81 , mu lticu lturalism as an organized activity of government seemed to be grinding slowly to a halt. After '1977, the minis terial advisory committee on mu lti cu lturalism lapsed in to ina ctivity as appointme nts expired and were not renewed. At a time of concerted budget reduction, multicultural and linguistic support grants were syste matically reduei�d to a mere fraction of the levels in 19 77.

There developed a sense among ethnocultural communi ties that multiculturalism had ceased to be im portant to the government and perhaps even that the government had grown antithetical to the very notion of a multicultu ral societ y-end quote. Mr. Acting Speaker, I quo ted that paragraph dir ectly from that MIC document because I did not want to be accused of being overtly partisan in my comments.

But it is in teresti ng that the years from 19 77 to 19 81 , where this document is talking about the dim inution of multicultural programs and policies in the province of Manitoba, correspond exactly to the Tory government. Now, I do not for a moment believe that that is coincidence , and I think by the time my comments have been thoroughly read into the record, no one in the province of Manitoba can legitima tely believe that the acti ons of the ConsE�rvative gove rnment between 19 77 and 19 81 were a coincidence, that these things happened just becaUise of some external events. No, Mr.

Acting Speaker, these events of 1 977 to 19 81 were a result of de'libe rate policy changes on the part of the gov ernment of the day. I am going to show by the end of my remarks that the changes that have taken place in the last five years are a continuation of the policy that was begun in 19 77 and 19 81 by the then-Premier of the pro vince, Mr. Sterling Lyon. A change in gove rnment took place again in 19 81 , and again, not coincidentally, there was a change in the attitude and the focus of multiculturalism in this province.

The MIC paper says that there was a resurgence of the ethnic communi ty in the elec toral process in the el ection of 19 81 , and I will take that state ment from this document.

I myself am not personally familiar enough with the voting patte rns in that election to either agree or disagree with it, but the Manitoba Intercultur al Council firmly believed that part of the resu lts of the 19 81 elec tion were as a dir ect result of the ethnocu ltur al commu ni ty in the province of Manitoba saying we do not like the focus that the Sterling Lyon government was taki ng, we do not like the fact that they are appearing to put less emphasis on multicultur alism, and we are going to try and ensure that a government is put in place which will respond to the multicultural needs of the commun ity in Manitoba.

Mr. Acting Speaker, due to whatever causes, and there were many causes for the government change in 19 81 , the effect of that government change was to change the multicultural policy back to what it had been from 19 69 to 19 77, with the under standing that-when the 19 81 election occurred, we were in the midst of a very serious recession, a very short, in comparison to the current recession, recession, but a very deep, serious reces sion.

So there were many, many fi nancial constraints on the go ve rnment of the time, but, un lik e other gove rnments, that government, to the best of its ability, put its money where its mouth was. They made policies, they consulted and they changed the face of the multicultural policy in the Province of Manitoba yet again.

Right after the 19 81 election, the two principles that had framed the Manitoba Mosaic Congress of 19 70 were reasserted again over a decade later, and that was funding levels for multicultural and lingu istic grants were soon restored to the levels that they had been in 19 77, and the government commit ted itself to commu nity consultation through the estab lishmen t of a co mmun ity-e lec ted multicu ltural council. We are now getting closer to the estab lishment of the Manit oba Intercultural Council.

The basic principles of the Manitoba Mosaic Congress in 1 970 had been implem ented, or at least they had begun to be implemen ted, in the Schreyer years. They were put on the back shelf, on the back burner. They were ignored during the Sterling Lyon years, and when the Howard Pawley government

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANI TOBA 2672 came back into power in 19 81 , they began again to reassert the principles of the Manitoba multicu ltural mosaic. * (1 21 0) I guess a ques tion could be asked, Mr. Acting Speaker, as to where we might be as a society and wher e the province of Manitoba might be in regards to multiculturalism had we not lost those four years. Later on in my re marks I will ask the same question about the current situation in the province of Manitoba.

So we have now come to the election in 19 81 , when the New Dem ocrati c Party was returned to power and reaff irmed its com mitmen t to the concep ts of multiculturalism as they had been established by the Man itoba Multicultu ral Mosaic Conference of 19 70.

I would like now to go into what happened bet ween October 19 81 and 19 83 when The Manitoba Intercultural Act, Bill 50, was enacted, in the manner of go vernments, very qu ickly, comparatively speaking, particularly, as I have stated, when the government was dealing with a very deep recession a nd was also dealing with four years of inactivity and decline in the concepts of mu lticu ltur alism and the programs of multiculturalism. I am going to back up just a bit, Mr. Acting Speaker. We have come to 19 81 in our deliber ations as far as the background of the MIG act.

I think we need to go back again and look a little more globally as to what is going on in our society today, what was happening in the late '70s and the early '80s, in this context, not just the economic but some of the political and social and cultural things that were framing o ur society and framing the government's actions when it came into power again in 19 81 . In 19 69 there was expansion in the immigration pol icies. There was the recognition of official bilingualism and official multiculturalism on the part of the federal govern ment.

So the '70s were not only economically but socially and culturally an expansionary time, and that was seen no more effectively than in the prov ince of Manitoba. The late '70s and the early '80s start to get at a different kind of a situation, and we are again today in an even different, a third kind of larger context. We are today in Manitoba, cert ainly in the '70s and conti nuing on, dealing not only in Manitoba and Canada with what multicu lturalism is. We have established that we are a multicu ltural society, but what does that mean? How is it defined? What are the programs that we need to put into place?

How do we a ctualize the concep t of multiculturalism? You have to look at it in a different context in every year and certainly in every decade or every half decade-ch anges. How do we shape a nation which has an overarch ing set of values, goals and attitudes that all of its components can agree to, and how do we structure that so that it is not just words but it is actuality?

How do you have on the one hand a set of overarching goals and objectives that everyone can agree to, on the other hand recognizing and ackno wledging the fact that we are a multicul tural societ y with all the diversity that that entails? It is far easier to agree on things if everyone comes from the same viewpoint. Just a more localized example, any government is elec ted and the majority or all of the peo ple who are elected in that government come from basically the same philosophical viewpoint, with enormous differences wi thin that context .

The current government, for example, has a philosophical approach and a way of looking at the world and a way of looking at the government's role in the world whic h is ver y different from our discussion, from our way of looking at the world. So gen erally speak ing, the people on the government side, whichever government is in power, generally agree one with another. Their ability to set goals and objecti ves is far e�sier among themselves than it is to have the two bookends, if you will, of the political ideology in the province of Manitoba today to agree on anything.

We are very much narrower in the items that we can agree with, gove rnment and oppositi on, Conse rvative and New Demo crat, than we are within each political party. That is in agreement, that is accepted, that is understood. Even within our own com munity, if you want to call the government a communi ty and the opposition a communit y, there are differences of opinion. You may all agree on an overarc hing goal, but how you reach that goal may not be completely unde rstood or accepted with in your gro up. So it is easier if you come from the same background to

2673: LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 1993 come· up with overar ching philosophies. It is less easy if you come from different backgrounds. What I am trying to say in a very long-winded and cir cu itous manner is th at Cana dians and Manitobans have setthem selves a very difficult task and, parenthetically, my task may just have gotten slightly more difficult too.

What Canadians and Manitobans are struggling with and all parties are struggling with is how you put together an overarch ing set of principles and guidelines that can encom pass everybody in the countr y or the province while, at the same tim e, reco! �nizing the enormous diversity of our multicultural mosaic. This is something that we have been dealing with for the last 500 years, but it is really coming to the fore in these days. It is not only tensions between different groups, but it is tensions, as I have stated earlier, intergrou p.

The multicultural community is just as diffuse and diverse as any other part of our society. I think what tends to be forgotten is that it is as diverse as it is. We have multicu ltural communi ty groups that have been her e for hundreds of years. The Franco-Manitoban cultural groups have been in the province of Manitoba for hundreds of years. The abori�Jinal cultural groups have been in the province of Manitoba for tens of thousands of years. There are ethnocu ltural groups that have been in the province of Manitoba for 10 0 years, 25 years.

There are ethnocultur al groups that are just starting in the province of Manitoba. We have a small but very active and alive cultural group from the new country of Eritrea. This is a very new communi ty group and cultural group that needs to fit itself into the multicultu ral community and the larger communi ty as a whole. So these tensions are tensions tha t are challenging for us but also provide an enormous amount of creativity. We need, Mr. Acting Speaker, to learn to live with that tension.

I know we have talked a lot about creative tension and challenges and opportunities, but the reality is, as long as we agree that we are a country that is multicultu ral in scope• , we are going to have to learn to live with those differences and use those differences and buil d on those differe nces. That is where an organiz ation such as the Manitoba Intercultu ral Coun cil is so im portant.

We have seen in many instances in our country and in our province the fact that we sometimes are successful in this creative tension and often we are not. • (1 220) With those brief comments on the sort of general problems and challenges that are facing us today , and faced us all the way throu gh, and faced us certainly in 19 81 , 19 82 and 19 83, we are now coming to the point of the implemen tation of the introduc tion and passage of Bill 50, The Manitoba Intercultural Council Act, which was presented and introduced for second reading on April 21 , 19 83. Mr.

Acting Speaker, it is again very interesting that in a year and half from the elec tion-actu ally less than a year and a half from the elec tion-of 19 81 , November 17 , 19 81 , to the introduction of Bill 50- this is a very short period of time to do such an enormous amount of work.

I would like now to briefly go through what the Mi nister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation at the time, the Honou rable Eugene Kostyra, stated in his opening rem arks about Bill 50, The MIC Act, and the process that was undertaken by the gove rnment of the day leading up to that introduction of that legislation, that landmark piece of legis lation . Again, Mr. Acting Speaker, later in my comments, I will be comparing that process with the process that has gone on, or not gone on , preceding the introduc tion of Bill 28, The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act. I would like to read from Mr.

Kostyra's comme nts · as he outlines the principles and role of the Manitoba In tercu ltu ral Council: The purpose of The Intercultural Council Act is to create an arm's-length agency to make rec ommen dations and to provide information and advice to the Man itoba government on all ethnocultural matters relating to the pro vince, not just narrowly defined ethnocultural matters, but all ethnocultural matters relating to the pro vince, including edu cati on, human rights, imm igrant sett lem ent, media co mmunica tion and cultural heritage.

The council memb ership will include Manitobans from ethnocultural groups throughout the pro vince. Now, this introdu ctory paragraph goes back to the principles of the Manitoba Mosaic Congress of October 19 70 which says that policies cannot be impleme nted without prior consu ltation with the people affected, with the communities. This is reflected in the make-up of the Intercultural Council and its terms of refe rence, that it shall advise and

May 7, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 2674 provide information to the government so that the government is not im plementing policies, is not putting forward or taking away programs based on their ideas, but that the government will reflect the input from the intercultural community. Bill 50 was a result of a year's worth of consul tation. Mr. Acting Speak er, the wor d "consultation" has been demeaned by this current govern ment. This current government has talked about its constant communic ation and consu ltation.

We could go through a number of examples where this government in effect has not consulted, but focusing more narrowly on the consu ltation process that was undertaken by the Pawley government in the year and a half between their election and the introduction of this bill, this was true public consultation. The government of the day should pay atte ntion to this, becaus e this is the kind of consu ltative process that should be undertaken by this government, and it virtually has never been the case. Mr.

Acting Speaker, the MIC bill is a result of the repor t of the in terim li ai son comm ittee on multiculturalism appointed in May of 19 82. So less than six mo nths afte r the election of the Pawley gov ernment, there was in place an interim liaison commi ttee on multiculturalism. After nine months of consu ltation, extensive study of the practices in other provinces and commu nity consu ltation-! mean, this govern ment does not even know what other governments are doing in multiculturalism or any other area. They do not consult with their colleagues in other provinc es.

They do not have any idea what is going on in the rest of the country. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) In 19 82 the Pawley government consu lted not only extensively throughout the pro vince, but with other jurisdictions. Do you know why they did that, Mr. Speaker? Because they knew that they did not have all the answers. They knew that they had the principles that had framed the Schreyer government policies on multiculturalism as enshrined in the Manitoba Mosaic Conference of 19 70. They knew that the four years of the Sterling Lyon government had decim ated those princip les and those programs.

They knew that they wanted to, they were comm itted on principle to re-est ablishing multiculturalism in this prov ince, and they knew that they needed to consult, and meaningfully consult. So they went to other pro vinces, and they went throughout this pro vince. They did not consult through focus groups. As a matter of fact, they had 37 written and 55 oral presentations from rural and urban Manitoba that framed the recommendations that led to the creation of the Manitoba Intercultural Council.

Later in my comments, I will be comparing the consult ative process that led to The Manitoba Intercultural Council Act with the lack of consu ltative process that has led to Bill 28, The Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act. I think it is important that we juxtapose those two processes. The two major objectives and functions of the Manitoba Intercultural Council, I will be dealing with as time permits. Mr. Speak er, I think at this point it is not inappropria te to sort of recapitulate my comm ents to date.

What I have atte mpted to do is to put in context the Canadian and Mani toba historical perspective and backgro und that was in place when The Manitoba Intercultural Council Act was first introduced in April of 19 83, and not only to put it into context, but to show objectively the difference in philosophy, principle and implemen tation between the New Democrat governments of Mr. Schreyer and Mr. Pawley, and the Tory governments, first, of Sterling Lyon and, in my later comments, the government of Mr. Filmon. So I have set the stage and look forward to continuation of this process and this discussion.

I look forward to expanding on this process. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The hour being 12 :30, when this matter is again before the House, this matter will remain standing in the name of the honou rable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) and also, as previously agreed, in the name of the honou rable member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) . The hour being 12: 30, this Hous e is now adjourned and stands adjourned until 1 :30 p.m. Monday.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Reading and Receiving Petitions Children's Dental Program Maloway L. Evans Northern Fishermen's Freight Assistance Program Lathlin C. Evans Oral Questions Assiniboine River Diversion Doer; Cummings; Rlmon Economic Growth L. Evans; Manness James Philip Bridson Edwards; McCrae ; Vodrey Government Departments Edwards; Gilleshammer Friday, May 7, 1993 CONTENTS 2650 2651 2650 2650 2651 2653 2654 2655 Flin Flon, Manitoba Stor ie; Orchard; Vodrey; Gilleshammmer Ost omy Program Chomiak; Orchard Emergency Room Physicians Cheema; Orchard Repap Manitoba Inc.

Lat hlin; Filmon Intertribal Christian Commun ications Maloway; Filmon ORDERS OF THE DAY Debate on Second Readings Bill 28, Manitoba Intercultural Council Repeal Act Barrett 2655 2656 2657 2658 2659 2660

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-4-58
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 4th hansardpdf 58.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e3fca5ca2433fde1f6215fa5edbd17ee5c568c4d

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