Manitoba Hansard — 1 December 1999 (Sitting 6, 37th Legislature, 1st Session)

37-1-6

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. L No.6- 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, December 1, 1999

Member AGLUGUB, Cris ALLAN, Nancy ASHTON, Steve, Hon. ASPER, Linda BARRETT, Becky, Hon. CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. CUMMINGS, Glen DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary, Hon. DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. GILLESHAMMER, Harold HELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. LAURENDEAU, Marcel LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. LOEWEN, John MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. MAGUIRE, Larry MALOWAY,Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn, Hon.

MITCHELSON, Bonnie NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom PENNER, Jack PENNER, Jim PITURA, frank PRAZNIK, Darren REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. ROCAN, Denis RONDEAU, Jim SALE, Tim, Hon. SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry SCHULER, Ron SELINGER, Greg, Hon. SMITH, Joy SMITH, Scott STEFANSON, Eric STRUTHERS, Stan TWEED, Mervin WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Constituency The Maples St. Vital Thompson Riel Inkster Brandon East Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Russell Selkirk Concordia Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Wolseley River Heights Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas flin flon St. James The Pas St. Norbert La Verendrye fort Whyte St. Johns Arthur-Virden Elmwood Burrows Lord Roberts Minto River East Interlake Emerson Steinbach Morris Lac du Bonnet Transcona Southdale Rupertsland Carman Assiniboia fort Rouge Wellington Rossmere Springfield St. Boniface fort Garry Brandon West Kirkfield Park Dauphin-Roblin Turtle Mountain Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P.

137 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, December 1, 1999 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table today the Annual Report for 1998-99 for the Child and Youth Secretariat; the Annual Report for the Department of Family Services for 1998-99; and the Annual Report for the Department of Housing, the Housing and Renewal Corporation and the Housing Authority for 1998-99. Hon. Jean Friesen (Minister of Inter governmental Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I have some reports to present.

I beg leave to present the Annual Report of the Department of Rural Development; the Annual Report of the Manitoba Water Services Board; the Annual Report of the Surface Rights Board; the Annual Report of the Municipal Board; the Annual Report of the Conservation Districts of Manitoba; and the Annual Report of the Food Development Centre. Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conser vation): Mr.

Speaker, I am also pleased to table the '98-99 Annual Reports for the Department of Natural Resources; the Department of Environ ment; the Sustainable Development Innovations Fund; The Manitoba Habitat Heritage Cor poration; Pineland Forest Nursery; Venture Manitoba Tours Limited, copies of which have been previously distributed. Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Highways and Government Services): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the 1998-99 Annual Report of Government Services and Emergency Expendi tures.

I am also pleased to table the 1998-99 annual reports for the special operating agencies under my jurisdiction, including the Fleet Vehicles Agency, Materials Distribution Agency, Land Management Services Agency, Mail Management Agency. All of the 1998-99 annual reports were released prior to September 30 ofthis year, in accordance with intersessional procedures. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS World AIDS Day Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have a ministerial statement. Mr. Speaker, today is World AIDS Day, and I am pleased to have an opportunity to make a statement in the House.

In 1998, when the province launched an education strategy, I was present and attended sessions where the tragedy of the disease was explained to all of us. At that time we were made aware that we were in the middle of an epidemic. In 1994, when I was an MLA, we again participated as a Legislature and as a society in a rededication of our efforts to deal with this disease and the effect it was having on our community. Today, we come together again to reflect on both the tragedy and some of the heroic efforts that have been undertaken by individuals and groups to fight this epidemic that we are all facing.

In 1999, the last year of the millennium, every Manitoban has been touched in some way by the effects of this terrible disease. Many sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters have lost their lives in this disease and many thousands of others are desperately working together to try to combat the effects. We have come together as a province to fight floods and to fight to save the economic collapse of our farms. We have come together as a province to fight breast cancer. Recently, we came together as a province to launch a program to deal with prostate cancer. *

(1335) 138 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 To fight this disease and to join with our fellow Manitobans, we should do no less on this World AIDS Day to recognize both the accomplishments and the tremendous obstacles we face. It is a time to reflect on this tragic disease the way it has af fected our world. Available statistics tell us that there are over 33 million on this planet currently living with HIV AIDS. Last year alone nearly 14 million died of this disease and approximately 6 million more people were infected.

While only a fraction of those numbers represent Manitobans, our share of that special population is still terrifyingly high. Recently a study conducted in our very own city found that HIV infection prevalence amongst injection drug users in Winnipeg has increased from 2.3 percent in 1986-90 to 12.6 percent in 1998. The study is called the Winnipeg Injection Drug Epidemiology study or the WIDE Study. Copies of the study are available to all members of this House. In Winnipeg, we have the Street Con nections program for needle exchange.

How ever, this study has shown that injection drug use is a problem across the city. This afternoon, I will have the honour of officially assisting in the opening of a centre based on our community-based health care system to combat AIDS. The Nine Circles Community Health Centre will go a long way towards bringing together the services we offer in our society in a variety of means under one roof and one centre.

I would like to commend all those involved in the development of the Nine Circles Community Health Centre and all the participating groups such as Village Clinic, Kali Shiva AIDS Services, AIDS Coalition of Manitoba, the Manitoba aboriginal AIDS Task Force and the WCA Public Health Sexually Transmitted Disease Team. I would also like to pay my respects to the former government for its involvement in and commitment to providing for this centre.

As we go forward today, I look forward to a renewed commitment from all of us to work together on the implementation of the many strategies and plans that have been circulated over the years. Many worthwhile projects have been undertaken and many more must be launched in a renewed spirit of a preventative health care and caring commitment. I would like to close my comments by commending all of those in the community, both those who are infected with HIV AIDS and those who work, help and love them, for all their work and caring commitment.

I believe I carry with me the commitment and pledge of every single member of the Legislature that we renew our commitment to fight for the eradication of this disease and for a brighter future where the HIV AIDS menace will no longer threaten our children and loved ones. Thank you very much. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Mr. Speaker, I would like to join with the Minister of Health and thank him for his statement today on World AIDS Day and indicate that the issue of AIDS and HIV has been an issue that I think all of us in this Legislature have taken very seriously over the last number of years.

I know that the community out there that works so tirelessly on behalf of supporting those that are either inflicted with this disease or those that are there as the support circles for those that are infected with HIV or AIDS all have to take some comfort in knowing that there is significant concern.

I know that very often it is really necessary for the community to come together, and I have always said that, in fact, when the community comes up with the ideas and the suggestions on how we can best work together to implement programs and policies that can improve the lives of those who are affected through disease, it is important that government facilitates those community efforts. So I think we, as a govern ment in the past, have taken the recommen dations from the community very seriously, and the result of the centre opening today is the result of those efforts by the community.

So I have to say to the community thank you for a job well done. I know there is much, much more to do, and I think it is important that all of us together work in a co-operative approach to try to ensure that those families and those individuals that are involved with HIV or AIDS have the opportunity to benefit from continuing joint efforts for all Manitobans. Thank you.

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 139 Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [agreed] Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I rise also to support those who have AIDS and those who are working very hard in our community and in others to improve the treatment and the care and the compassion for patients who have this very debilitating condition. I think that this should be an all-party effort, because it is an important concern. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today fifty Grade 5 students from Linden Christian School under the direction of Mr. Manfred Glor and Ms. Brenda Klassen. The school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Fort Whyte (John Loewen). Also we have ten Grades 7 to 9 students from Isaac Newton School under the direction of Mr. Marvin Koop. The school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale).

And we also have twelve Grade 11 students from Immanuel Christian School under the direction of Mr. Jeff Dykstra. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. *

(1340) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Winnipeg Police Service Funding Agreement Mr. Gary Filmon (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, there has been a good deal of discussion and debate in the media about a proposal by the mayor of the City of Winnipeg to reduce the Winnipeg police force complement. I know that on CJOB last week the Justice minister indicated that he would maintain the Winnipeg Police Service's conditional funding agreement with the government of Manitoba.

That agreement does not call for the provincial government to fund 40 members of the police force but rather calls for that agreement to fund 40 additional members so that a certain minimum complement is maintained. I wonder if the First Minister can tell us if the city is fulfilling the terms of that agreement and thereby ensuring that the Winnipeg Police Service is at the agreed upon complement level. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for that question.

We certainly felt in 1995 when we put forward the proposal for additional police in Winnipeg and other centres in Manitoba that it was important to let the public know that we were all concerned about the safety and security of people in our communities. I am not aware of the existing complement of staff in terms of how it relates to the supplement versus the complement of staff, but we would be very concerned that the support of the provincial government is not allowed to erode in any way, shape or form. Mr.

Filmon: Yes, and of course in 1995 our government was very pleased to propose that agreement and to ensure since then that the agreement has been fulfilled. *

(1345) In a recent Winnipeg Sun article-! hesitate to promote the media today, I will try and think of something nice to say about the Free Press in my next

preamble-it indicated that the current complement of the police service in Winnipeg is 1, 173 instead of the 1,180 required to fulfill the terms of the conditional funding agreement. I wonder what steps the Premier has taken to ensure that the city increases the number of police officers to the required level. Mr. Doer: It did not come up at our first couple of meetings with the mayor that I had with the Deputy Premier (Ms. Friesen) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger). I note that the Leader of the Opposition has raised this question. We are trying to work in a co-operative way with the City of Winnipeg.

There are a number of issues we feel are very important to deal with in a partnership with the City of Winnipeg as our largest urban centre in Manitoba. There are a number of issues that we are facing: the

140 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December I, 1999 ambulance impasse that we have with the city; the issue of Centre Venture; the issue of Capital Region planning. But certainly, if the com plement is lower, I will certainly raise that with the Attorney General (Mr. Mackintosh) in terms of the commitment the province has made to this fund. Mr. Filmon: I thank the Premier for that response. Clean Environment Commission Appeal-Process--Conservation Minister's Role Mr. Gary Filmon (Leader of the Official Opposition): My next question is to the Minister responsible for Conservation (Mr. Lathlin).

As the minister responsible as well for the-as part of his department-natural resources in our province, his department is the proponent in the case of any proposals to utilize Crown land, for instance, for something such as a cottage lot development. Depending on the size and the scope of the development, some of those proposals would require a Clean Environment Commission hearing, a decision of course of the director of the environment

section of his department, and any decisions by the Clean Environment Commission are appealable to the minister, and any rejection of the requirement for a hearing is appealable to the minister as well. I want the minister to indicate how he would assure that any appeals are carried out in an objective and unbiased fashion when his department is both the proponent and, in the end, he is the judge and jury. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I made the decision to put the departments together as part of the reduction in the size of cabinet.

I made the decision to combine the departments because I felt, in the long run, it would be better for the people of Manitoba, and we certainly hope that the opposition will judge us by our action. We have heard the argument made before about this role. The minister [interjection] Well, the members opposite would license a plant; they would license a plant before they decided whether any trees could be cut. We want to have a more comprehensive approach. An Honourable Member: I do not need any lectures from- Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, with a new question. Mr.

Filmon: Well, I appreciate the arrogance of the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), who believes that he cannot learn anything from anybody else. That is the kind of attitude I am sure that- Point of Order Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): A point of order, Mr. Speaker. First of all, the Leader of the Opposition is not following our rules in terms of questions. The comments had nothing to do with that, and quite frankly, all I said from my seat was that we did not have a heck of a lot to learn from the previous government when it came to their handling of the environment.

That is what I said, and I would put that gladly on the record. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The same point of order. Mr. Laurendeau: The honourable member definitely does not have a point of order. He did not refer to his arrogance; it just spoke to his arrogance. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. On the Deputy Government House Leader's point of order, it is not a point of order; it is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Filmon: Speaking of the trees and the forests that the Premier (Mr.

Doer) referred to, I have another question for the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Lathlin). In the current review of the forest management licence for Pine Falls Paper, the forestry officers of his department will provide expert advice to the Clean Environment Commission and act as advocates for the proposal. Any appeal, of course, to the outcome of those CEC hearings will go to this minister. How can he be both advocate and judge on the proposal?

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 141 Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Doer: I guess we get howls of derision from members opposite because the former First Minister could not remember or did not know about 650,000 files going missing from our licence numbers. It was my responsibility and decision to reduce the size of cabinet, and I feel accountable to this House to the questions raised by the Leader of the Opposition. We felt that we had to take a different approach to stewarding our resources and conserving our resources over the longer haul.

We felt often that the decision was made by people in government to extract resources, license the plant and not connect the two together. For example, in the Louisiana-Pacific case, we made a decision, under the former government's process, of licensing a plant before we decided whether there was enough allowable cut of trees, and once the plant was built, how are you then going to deal with the issue of the allocation of the resource? We have appointed Mr.

Brandson as the Deputy Minister of the Department of Conservation, and we are hoping that we can conserve our resources-[interjection] Well, we know we will do a better job than members opposite. We are trying to practise sustainable development and conservation at both ends of the decision making so that Manitobans will be well served. *

(1350) Mr. Filmon: I love the arrogance. Bring it on, as they say; I love it. The Premier has indicated that he has reduced the size of cabinet. He might as well reduce it one further if he is not going to let the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Lathlin) answer. Point of Order Bon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Beauchesne is quite clear that when questions are raised it is indeed up to the government to determine who will respond. In this particular case, the First Minister (Mr.

Doer) made what we on this side and I think most Manitobans feel was a logical move to reduce the number of ministers and combine within one ministry functions that work well together. Indeed, that is why the First Minister was answering the question. This First Minister made that move, and it is a move that is supported by most Manitobans, even if the now Leader of the Opposition could not see its merit for 11 years. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Opposition House Leader, on the same point of order. Mr.

Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): It is on the same point of order, which is not a point of order again. It is very clear the Leader of the Official Opposition was posing a question to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, the honourable member is correct that the Leader of the Opposition has the right to pose a question, and a minister has a right to refuse to answer it or another minister can rise. The Leader is about to pose a question; I believe he should be allowed to do so. Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

On that point of order, the government has the right to name whichever minister they wish to answer the question. * * * Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, since the Premier is not going to let the Minister of Conservation answer any questions, my final question then is to the Premier. He has placed his minister in an inherent conflict of interest, where his depart ment is both the advocate and proponent on various different development proposals, and at the same time he is the only source of appeal for any decisions that are made. He becomes, therefore, the proponent and the judge and jury.

Will he remove him from this inherent conflict of interest? *

(1355) 142 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conservation): When I was asked by the Premier to assume the responsibility of the new Department of Conservation, of course I was honoured and proud to accept the assignment. The Premier has told the House that he had decided to join the departments together, Environment and Natural Resources, into one department, a move that I myself support and that I can work with.

I think the way the previous administration worked with the groups in Manitoba, and the Premier has given several examples-I am quite willing, and I think I am prepared, to take on the responsibility to make sure that everyone is treated fairly. R.M.s of Woodlands/St. Laurent Property Damage Assistance Mr. Harry Enos (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I do not want to ask a question of the Minister of Conservation. I want to ask the other minister, the minister of natural resources, a question.

About a month ago in this province we experienced exceedingly high winds throughout the province, record high winds, causing a considerable amount of flooding and property damage in the R.M.s of Woodlands and St. Laurent. Has the minister or has his office received any specific requests for assistance from those property owners? Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conser vation): I want to assure the honourable member that as members of the public come into my office to make presentations, I will deal with them as they come.

Since I have been the Minister of Conservation, I have had several groups come in to visit me. I have met with many, many groups. When I was in Brandon I met several groups, and I have actually gone into the communities and met with many other groups. So when it is time to deal with the group that the member is referring to, I will do so at that time. Mr. Enos: Mr. Speaker, it has been brought to my attention that his director of Water Resources, indeed, had a meeting at St.

Laurent with the aggrieved property owners, and I was assuming that perhaps by now some information would be on the minister's desk with respect to what kind of response this government would have for those who experienced severe flooding and property damage, and who had met with senior officials of his department over a week ago. Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Speaker, let me assure the honourable member that I will get to that file and want to assure the people from Woodlands that I will, in a very short while, be responding to the request that they will be making. Mr.

Enos: A final question to another minister, the minister responsible for the operations of the Emergency Measures Organization in the province. I am also aware, Mr. Speaker, that senior personnel from that shop met with the af fected property owners at St. Laurent with respect to the concern that they have for some disaster assistance. Can the minister responsible for the Emergency Measures Organization enlighten me or give my constituents at St. Laurent and in the R.M. of Woodlands any reasonable hope that this government is listening to their problems? Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister of Highways and Government Services): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. This issue was raised with me, in fact, by a member of the Legislature. We are aware of this. In fact, EMO staff has been meeting not just the community but other affected communities as well. I will certainly get back to the member. We are concerned about it. There were a number of property owners who suffered quite severe damage in that particular windstorm. So I thank the member for raising the question. Pine Falls Paper Company Expansion Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Conservation. Both I and the member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) share a large area of this province where the Pine Falls Paper Company operates. This company has been actively pursuing a $200-million expansion of their operation which could see the establishment of a number of First Nations

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 143 sawmills. It could see securing, of course, the existing jobs in the mill in the woodlands. As well, it would create the economic opportunity to advance the east side road project and bring all-weather road access to a number of isolated First Nations communities in northeastern Manitoba. The key to that plan, of course, is the minister's department providing additional unallocated forest areas in northeastern Manitoba to the Pine Falls Paper Company. *

(1400) I would like to ask the minister today: is he, as minister responsible for, in essence, the old Natural Resources department, actively working with the Pine Falls Paper Company to promote and see this plan happen for the benefit of Manitobans? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): The minister was at a ministers' meeting yesterday. I met with the CEO of the proposal and met with some of the officials from Tembec. We met to review the potential investment. We reviewed the size of the area and the independent data that they had on the possible fibre sources that are there.

We discussed the issues of the First Nations in the adjacent area and other questions dealing with the road, the road issue either way. We talked about the potential for a sawmill, and obviously, with a new government, they understand that it is important, even though things were not resolved prior to the change in government, that there are some issues that we have to address and get independent advice on. I know that I was going to brief our minister after he came back from the ministers' meeting this last couple of days. The Minister of Highways (Mr.

Ashton) has also met with of ficials, and obviously we want to make sure that the economic opportunities are definitely looked at. We also want to make sure that we have the proper processes in place. One of the things I would say to the member is one of the things I said to the people: we have to make sure that we do not go back to the old ways of licensing a plant before we know how many trees are available. Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, I would remind the First Minister that that same mill that we sold also was spewing all types of sewage when it was managed by the government of which he was a part. Mr.

Speaker: Question, please. Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, the First Minister should not have such a lack of confidence in his minister. I know that he has already toured the mill- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): As a former Opposition House Leader, I would like in this particular case to draw to the attention of the former Government House Leader that questions beyond the first question require no

preamble. That is very clear in Beauchesne. In fact, I would suggest that the member who I think may have on occasion drawn our attention, when we were in opposition, to that citation-perhaps if he could follow those particular provisions of Beauchesne. Mr. Speaker: On the same point of order? An Honourable Member: Mr. Speaker, I feel that I found the member for Thompson's notes on how- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Praznik: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker, will put my question again to the Minister of Conservation. This is a very important- Mr. Speaker: Order. I was recognizing you for a point of order.

I had not recognized you prior to that. Are you up on a point of order? On the point of order, there is no

preamble for supplementary questions, so I would advise all members to please follow that. *** Mr. Praznik: My question to the Minister of Conservation: as the minister responsible for this department, will he commit to the House to

144 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 be an active proponent for this very important project for northeastern Manitoba? Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conser vation): I want to tell the member that I am aware of what is happening on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, Pine Falls and First Nations and the diff erent stakeholders who live in that area. I myself met with the Pine Falls people together with aboriginal leaders from that area I think two or three days after I was sworn in as minister.

But the one thing I want to tell the member is that we want to make sure that we hear from the aboriginal people, people who Jive on the northeast side of Lake Winnipeg, and also the industry. We want to make sure that we look at everything before we make any final decisions. Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, my question, my supplementary to the Minister of Conservation: will the Minister of Conservation tell us today which group of First Nations people he will stand by, those on the east side like at Berens River and other places who want the road or those out of Winnipeg who are opposing it? Mr.

Lathlin: I want to advise the member that I hope that, as I go through my new job as Minister of Conservation, I will be able to deal with all groups in a fair manner, and I hope that I will not come to a point where I am purposely siding with one group, particularly the aboriginal people. We will listen to the aboriginal people. I want to assure the member that I will not go into the aboriginal community and try to divide and conquer the aboriginal communities as has been done by this previous government before. Bulk Removal of Water Legislation Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr.

Speaker, notwithstanding what the Premier has indicated to us and what the minister has mentioned already, I would like to just say that I am pleased to see that the Minister of Conservation has returned from the meetings of the Council of Ministers of the Environment, and I understand that you discussed the issues of bulk removal of water from Canada.

In fact, this was a matter you addressed in your recent throne speech where you stated that your government will, quote: take immediate steps to protect our water resources and preserve our Jakes, rivers and streams and that new legislation will be introduced to protect water quality throughout Manitoba and to ban the bulk removals of our water. You have indicated today that you will be introducing legislation to ban the bulk removal of water.

Can the Minister of Conservation tell us: what is the Manitoba government's plan for protecting our water supply, when do you plan to implement it, and how will that plan be superior to the accord that has been brought forward by the federal government? Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conser vation): I want to advise this House that the Manitoba government is not in favour of bulk removal of water for Manitoba. I want to make that very clear. I made it very clear at the meeting in Kananaskis to the federal minister and also to the other provincial ministers. The Manitoba government will speak for Manitobans.

The Manitoba government will speak for the Manitoba environment. The Manitoba government will speak for Manitoba resources. And again I repeat, the Manitoba government will speak for the people of Manitoba in terms of preserving our fresh water in Manitoba. Mr. Maguire: Mr. Minister, what will be the nature of these consultations, and when will they begin, given that Manitoba was one of the five provinces that rejected the proposals that reserved its decision on the national accord? Mr. Lathlin: The position taken by the Manitoba government is this. We will protect Manitoba waters for the people of Manitoba.

We could not endorse the accord that was proposed by the federal Minister of Environment because of the fact that we felt that there were not enough safeguards. We felt that the minister could have been more aggressive in his proposal to protect the waters of Canada, so therefore we have asked for more time to look at the issue to make sure that we look at all angles, that we look at all the dimensions and make sure that we do not miss anything out. I particularly do not have much confidence in the accord because it is silent on the trade

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 145 issue. It speaks about the environment, but it is silent on the trade issue. We also know that treaties and agr eements that are being signed between Canada and the United States are not often honoured, so we are going to need more time to consult with the people of Manitoba to make sure that all areas are covered. * (1410 ) Mr. Maguire: How do you respond then, Mr. Minister, to the federal Environment minister's criticism that not endorsing the accord could leave Canada's situation vulnerable when it comes to protecting our valuable water resources? Mr.

Lathlin: I think if we just blindly follow the federal minister on his accord, then we would indeed be vulnerable to the Americans coming into Canada and taking our water. We are going to just take a little bit more time and make sure that all areas are covered to ensure that the waters of Manitoba are protected. New Holland Plant Government Initiatives Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): My question is for the Premier. As the Premier knows, I have spoken out concerning the loss of Norte! and the jobs that were associated.

Today I want to ask the Premier, given the fact that there is another major Manitoba company, the New Holland plant, former Versatile plant, which is in an uncertain situation-this is a company which had 600 employees under the former government. It has been reduced to 200 employees in Manitoba but is a major Manitoba enterprise. What is the Premier doing to make sure that we have these jobs and the enterprise in Manitoba? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): In fact, I am meeting later today with one possible purchaser of the company.

I did raise this issue with-well, there are four people that may be bidding or may not be bidding for the company. We did raise this issue when we were in opposition with the former Premier. We were very concerned the day we heard about this merger. We were concerned that the workforce had already been reduced because of the agricultural crisis from about 1, 100 down to 400 and, in fact, 200 of those 400 were on rotating layoffs and that this was a serious situation. We are concerned that the federal govern ment has put R & D money into the original proposal.

In fact, there was a considerable amount of federal investment made. We believe the federal government should make sure that the merger does not take that technology and that investment away without leaving that in the community. We are concerned that the employees and their pension plan are involved in any proposed takeover. We are working with the federal government, with the employees and any proponent or any possible purchaser of the plant to make sure that the reduced workforce that is left there can be maintained with the tech nologies that are at the plant. Mr.

Gerrard: My supplementary to the Premier is: was there significant provincial support given over the years to this plant, and could it in fact be used to make sure that the plant and the activity stay in Manitoba? Mr. Doer: Well, it is my recollection, and I think I am correct, that most of the investment has come from Mr. Epp in 1987 and then another support from Mr. Duhamel in subsequent years. So, yes, there are public com munity rights to deal with the takeover of this plant, but those rights hopefully have been properly negotiated by Mr. Duhamel in his latter agreement and Mr.

Epp in his previous agreement, and we certainly want to hold them to that. Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary to the Premier: with the change in support for business environment, what will the government do to ensure that their approach is more effective than has occasionally been the case in the past in keeping the jobs, the employment, the manu facturing high-wage economy here in Manitoba? Mr. Doer: Part of our approach, Mr. Speaker to make sure that the agricultural economy which has been, I think, really, really hurt by

146 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 both bad weather and the fact that the Americans and Europeans are subsidizing at a great level beyond the Canadian federal government-is to work very hard to make sure that producers in Canada, particularly in western Canada, are able to have the disposable income to proceed with decisions that would benefit the plant here in Winnipeg.

Obviously, as agriculture goes, to a large extent so do the implement dealerships in our local communities, one of which has just gone bankrupt, I understand, in southwest Manitoba, which is very, very tragic, and so do the manufacturing plants, particularly the ones that reside here in Canada. We see that as one part of the solution for the viability of the plant. We certainly will work with the federal government to make sure that the public investment from the Canadian taxpayers is protected, something that we raised last year in June or last session in June.

We will continue to work with the employees to try to get the best takeover of the plant by a concern that will keep the operation going. In fact, we would like to see the operation expand. Certainly it is in a survival situation right now, partly due to the agricultural crisis and partly due to this merger decision. If any member has any idea on this, we are open to it. We have been getting advice from employees, from possible take-over partners. We do need help from the federal government to make sure the taxpayer investment is supported. Health Care System Bed Openings Mrs.

Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): My question is for the Minister of Health. Last week the Minister of Health sent a directive to hospitals indicating that they must have 82 temporary beds physically in place by today. My question is: are those 82 beds physically in place today, and where are they? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): thank the member for that question.

As the member is aware, this year what we have tried to do is to try to do something that has not been done in this province for some time, and that is to provide funding to the institutions and direction to the institutions as to the capacity and the ability they have to deal with both the bed shortage that has been of a chronic nature in this province for the past five years, as well as the potential for the fluctuation that occurs as a result of peak periods normally attributed to respiratory illnesses and the like.

So, as a consequence, as the member knows, we announced and we met with the CEOs of all of the hospitals, and we directed the health authorities to ensure that there was capacity and availability of beds available, not just in the springtime when we are anticipating the opening of additional beds because of personal care home openings, but from this period on until the springtime that beds will be available to deal with any potential difficulties. I might add, Mr.

Speaker, the member might be aware, and I am prepared to provide it for her, that there was recently a report from the Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation that was in fact asked for by the previous Health minister with respect to dealing with bed shortages which indicated the timely nature for the opening of beds. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, my question, which was not answered previously in the previous answer-[ interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr.

Speaker, I look forward, from the minister's first answer, to his providing me with a detailed list of where the beds are, because my understanding is he directed them to be opened today. Bed Openings-Staffing Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): My question is: how many nurses have been hired to staff the 82 beds that were opened today as a directive of the Minister of Health? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 147 *

(1420) Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as you are aware and as members of this House are aware, for some time, when we were opposition, we had been imploring, almost begging the government to do something about our nurses' crisis. In fact, as long ago as three years ago we asked the government to take steps in order to deal with the nursing crisis, and you know-[interjection] I will provide an answer if members opposite will only hush in their seats for a second or two. Mr.

Speaker, as the member knows, there has been a crisis in terms of nursing in this province, and we undertook to resolve this crisis. We have undertaken to announce programs to retrain and retain nurses, and we will be announcing shortly a comprehensive- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, to help in the education of the member opposite, I would like to table a report that was released in Canada that showed for the past 10 years Manitoba is 10 out of 1 O, the very bottom, on full-time nurses employed.

We have directed the hospital authority and the hospitals to employ full-tin:e nurses, and that will be undertaken under th1s regime. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, the quick-fix Minister of Health obviously has not been able to fix anything. Given that the Minister of Health stated just last week, and I quote, "We made the resources available," has he put the money or the funding for the beds, and the staff, that were promised to be opened today, December 1, in the wish list that they presented to Deloitte and Touche? Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to assure members opposite that this government not only asked that full-time physician managers be placed in the hospitals, but we funded it, rather than announcing it and not funding it as the previous government did. We also funded, effective immediately, the geriatric hospital teams that this government announced and did not fund. I have a memo to that effect. We also funded, which the government announced and did not do, psychiatric nurses in the hospital.

We also announced and funded $12 million that that government did not announce-for immediate use to deal with the bed shortages, to deal with the crisis in the hospitals. While the other government talked and people lay in the hallways, we provided that funding. We w�nt through Treasury Board. We went to Del01tte and Touche, and it is there to prevent difficulties in the hallways, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Evening for Seniors Ms. Nancy Allan (St. Vital): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize a very special event that I attended last night in the St. Vital community. It was at Dakota Collegiate. It was an evening of song, music and refreshments, and it was organized by a very special group of people. It was an evening for seniors in their community. It was a very special evening organized by the parent council, which was one of the groups that organized it. The co-chairs were Diane Ranka, Pam McKay, with help from Deb Henderson and Joanna Blais.

Two community liaison officers who are students in the school also helped with this event, Leslie Later and Linda Watson. The Dakota Collegiate has a very special program. It is the Black and Gold Society, and it is a group of students who do community service work as volunteers and who were very active in organizing the event. The entertainment was fabulous. The junior and senior jazz choirs performed, directed by Marlene Treichel, and the choral group was directed by Bill Quinn. I would also like to thank the city councillor for St. Vital, Mr. AI Golden, who provided the

148 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 transportation for over 110 seniors to attend this event. The reason for this event was to bridge the gap between the young people at the collegiate and the elders, the seniors in the community, to break down perceptions that young people are perhaps not as desirable in the community as they would like. It was a dream of the parent council to have this first-time event happen in the community and in the school, and it was so successful that they are already talking about next year's event.

In following up, I would just like to congratulate once again everybody at the collegiate-the students, the staff and the parents for organizing this wonderful event. Thank you. Election Financing Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I would like to return to one of the issues raised during yesterday's Question Period. I feel that the issue is pertinent because it clearly shows a lack of integrity of the members opposite. The issue, of course, is that of the NDP asking for corporate and union donations before moving on promised legislation to ban them.

This promise was clearly a last-minute election maneuver. Still, the NDP-[interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The member for Charleswood is making a member's statement. Mrs. Driedger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Still, the NDP should stand by the promises that they made to the people of Manitoba who elected them based on their election platform. In the throne speech, the government said: The Manitoba government has committed to eliminate corporate and union contributions to political parties. The government should be accountable for their own promises.

Obviously, moral integrity gets thrown out of the window in the face of economic benefits. With the NDP's tables of eight selling for $1,400 and half-tables selling for $700, it appears that the NDP are attempting to get one last influx of revenue before changing the rules. The First Minister (Mr. Doer) and his colleagues are either against corporations and unions donating to political parties or they are for it. Perhaps NDP actually means no definite position. Perhaps the NDP should develop a position and then tell the people of Manitoba exactly what it is. Mr.

Doer was quoted by his own publication on September I 0 as saying: this is a fresh start for Manitoba politics going into the next century. It may mean less money available for the main parties, but it is a good price to pay, I believe, to help reduce the widespread cynicism and disgust we hear every day from Manitobans. I heard quite a bit of cynicism yesterday during Question Period, and I am sure that we all felt disgust.

If this is the government's solution to restoring trust in government, then the public can hardly be blamed for having no trust in this government that makes decisions based on convenience, as opposed to conviction. *

(1430) The Sun Christmas Cheer Fund Mr. Scott Smith (Brandon West): As I had mentioned in my opening statements in this House, Brandon is well recognized as a community that hosts some great events and has some great events because of the many good volunteers that we have in our community. I would like to draw members' attention to one of those particular events. It is a positive one that is going on in my community right now. It has a huge impact on the constituency, and it is the Sun Christmas Cheer Fund.

The Sun Christmas Cheer Fund are people in Brandon and the Westman area who open up their hearts at this time of year through November and right up until Christmastime for a Christmas dinner for those who are less fortunate. They also provide the ability for Santa Claus to provide a gift to those children and those families. Once the food and the presents are purchased, there is an army of volunteers who assemble in the basement of St. Matthew's Cathedral to assemble the hampers and deliver them to those who are disadvantaged.

December 1, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 149 Many, many people give a great deal of their time and their resources to this worthwhile cause. However, there is one person that I would like to mention who does such a large

part in this, Mr. Speaker. That person is Brian Marshall. Brian Marshall is well known for his involvement in worthwhile causes within the community and within the constituency of Brandon West. Brian also happens to be the managing editor of The Brandon Sun, the local newspaper. Starting in November he runs an ad once a week with reminders to those of the running total of the funds raised to the present time. As well, he gives credit in a long list to the many people who assist this worthy cause.

This year he has set a goal of $70,000 in the community, and through the exposure he provides the Sun Christmas Cheer Fund, I am sure, as in years gone by, that goal is well achievable. Mr. Speaker, $23,000 has already been raised to date. Because of the good people and their efforts, the less fortunate benefit in our community greatly. Thank you. Headingley Reeve John Curry Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris}: Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I share some sad news with the Legislative Assembly. Earlier today, the member for Charleswood (Mrs.

Driedger) and I attended the Celebration of Life funeral service for Reeve John Curry of Headingley. John Curry was 47 years of age and died suddenly last Friday, November 26, 1999. He leaves behind his family, Marilyn, his wif e of 26 years; his children, Tyler, Jennifer and Andrew, and parents, Ed and Grace Curry. John was a graduate from the Vincent Massey High School in Fort Garry, and from the University of Manitoba he graduated with a degree in agriculture. John was an exceptionally dedicated volunteer.

John received the Volunteer Recog nition A ward for Outstanding Service in 1996, and the list of his volunteer commitments was extensive and varied. For the past 22 years, John has been a vibrant member of the Headingley United Church. He served as board chairman, as trustee, as a faithful Sunday school teacher, and even as a dastardly villain and a dashing hero in the church dinner theatres. John was indeed a true and devoted friend to the community of Headingley. John also spent innumerable hours coaching various levels of minor hockey and was a mentor for countless young people.

John had a very special love and respect for nature. John Curry was both a man of honour and responsibility, of honesty and fairness and of deep Christian faith. At the time of his passing, John was serving the Rural Municipality of Headingley as reeve, and that is how I have come to know him. He was first elected reeve in the fall of 1995 and was re-elected to a second term in 1998. John was also chairman of the Mayors and Reeves Committee of the Capital Region. I say, Mr. Speaker, that John will be dearly missed for his practical common-sense approach to the issues facing the Capital Region.

So, on behalf, I think, of all members in this Assembly, we would like to extend our sincere condolences to John's wife, Marilyn, and the children, Tyler, Jennifer and Andrew. Thank you. Headingley Reeve John Curry Doug Kuhl Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to two outstanding Manitobans who passed away during the last week. John Curry, reeve of the R.M. of Headingley, died suddenly last Friday. He was 4 7 years of age. I, too, was at the funeral. John, in his second term of reeve, was a rising star as chairman of the Mayors and Reeves Committee of the Capital Region.

A farmer and a remarkable man, John will be sorely missed. Our children grew up together, played hockey together and went to church together. As a personal friend for many years, John has been an outstanding and continuing source of inspiration. Always generous and ready to volunteer, John's community spirit is an example to all of us. Doug Kuhl, a River Heights resident and former president of the Liberal Party, also died last Friday. He was 48. Doug, our Liberal candidate in Rhinela nd in 1986, was always interested in and concerned about our province.

As an entrepreneur, Doug played a major role in the family business, The Southern Manitoba Potato Company. As a musician, Doug had a

150 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 rare talent for playing haunting and evocative melodies. He was a friend over many years and always a source of creative ideas and warm support. Let me end this tribute with a personal recollection of John Curry, the man who has been called the heart of Headingley. In the mid- 1980s, John Curry, always interested in nature, joined together with me and others in a research project at a northern lake. In this project, looking and banding eagles, we came across a towering tree some 70-80 feet up, where the nest was 70 feet above a bay.

John insisted on climbing up, and I remember him still, standing on top of that nest, waving with a warm smile to us down below. He stands still as an inspiration. His legacy will continue. Let us in his memory rededicate our efforts to a team approach to build a strong Capital Region for Manitoba. ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE (Second Day of Debate) Mr. Speaker: To resume debate on the proposed motion of the honourable member for St. Vital (Ms. Allan), standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Filmon). Mr. Gary Filmon (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, it is always a thrill and an honour for me to be able to address the Speech from the Throne. I was trying to count how many times that I have had the privilege of doing this. I know that it is in excess of 20 because I have been here for 20 years, and there have been some years, this being one of them, in which we have two throne speeches, so somewhere along the line there is a number. I can always say it is something I look forward to.

It is one of the great privileges of being a member of this House, to be able to rise and to be able to speak and, particularly in the case of the throne speech in the budget, to have the latitude to speak on a whole range of issues, all of which are important to our constituents and to the people of this province and its future. I want to begin by of fering my most sincere and generous congratulations to you as you assume the high office as the chief presider over this Chamber. You are the first person to be elected to that role, so I think your new responsibilities carry with it a special mark.

We all know that Speakers are very highly respected, and their portraits are hung on the walls on the second floor of this building in recognition of the significant honour with which we regard them and their role. Yours is a particularly honourable circumstance being the first elected Speaker and, as well, somebody who comes here with the special background of an Inuit heritage. *

(1440) I had the great honour to meet members of your family earlier this year when we had the group from Kiivilik to a trade mission here. As you know, you and I stood together as I admired the creative work of your mother and the clothing that she had made that was on display there, very beautiful handwork. I had the pleasure, as well, with you of meeting your brother John, the deputy minister in the new government of Nunavut.

I know that each of them will be exceedingly proud along with your other siblings and the rest of your family of this high of fice that you have assumed and the great honour that you certainly are bringing and the great credit to your family. I tell you, Mr. Speaker, as I have said in comments to the media, that I have always regarded you as being an honourable and a fair minded person and that I look forward to serving with you. I am confident that you will serve in this Chamber with great dignity and with great distinction. I sincerely wish you well.

I know that I look forward to working with you in the future. I wanted to add also my words of welcome back to the table officers who have the honour of serving this Legislature. Among them, of course, is our Clerk of the Assembly, a Clerk who has served us for I believe it is 16 years. An Honourable Member: Seventeen years. Mr. Filmon: Seventeen years. I am corrected. In those 17 years, we have gotten to know the Clerk well. I am not sure I had any influence on it, but the Clerk has in the past couple of years

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 151 joined the parish church to which I have belonged for more than 30 years, and so I have seen him more outside the Chamber in recent years. I know that he too has a great record of distinguished service to not only our Chamber but that of the Northwest Territories. When I was at the Northwest Territories at Yellowknife for the Western Premiers Con ference last year, I know that I saw his photographs, a very much younger version of our distinguished Clerk, but they remember him well there.

They probably would join with me in extending to him the very best wishes for a healthy and a very challenging and interesting retirement. I know that he will have that, and we will have an opportunity next week to officially pay our respects to him. I also want to greet the new pages who join us this year.

A long line of young people who come from high schools around the province to serve us in this Legislature and to be able to perform the various little tasks to ensure the well-being of the members during the period of time that we are in session, but I believe that they also learn a good deal about the democratic process, about government, about this Chamber, in the course of their service here. I have over the years on numerous occasions run into people who have been former pages.

I know that this past year when we were giving out awards to members of the Civil Service in Manitoba for particular accomplishments, it was during the week in which we hosted that major conference, a public service conference in June, and one of the people who received an award in the Department of Agriculture was a former page in this Chamber. Just a couple of weeks ago, I was shopping for some Christmas lights at Canadian Tire out in Westwood and was surprised as I arrived at the cash register to be greeted by one of last year's pages. So we see them in all walks of life after they leave here.

I hope that you, as pages, will enjoy your experience and will benefit from it. I also want to say a particular thank you to the civil servants who support the work of government, who over the last 11 and a half years have supported us, those of us who had the privilege of serving in government. I know that for the most part, they carry on with the change of government, and we will continue to see many of them in the course of our respon sibilities as members of the opposition as we deal with things like the Estimates or the bringing in of new bills and the review of annual reports.

We will see these civil servants, and we will feel comfortable and confident knowing that the work of the people of this province remains in good hands because of the loyalty, experience and dedication of the many thousands of civil servants who serve our province. I want to, Mr. Speaker, also congratulate the Premier (Mr. Doer) as he assumes his new role in this Chamber. People have been having a little fun at both our expenses over the last few weeks as we adjust to our respective changed roles.

It is a little different after 11 and a half years and the routines that you establish to try and make an instant, overnight adjustment to calling somebody by a different title or even to going to the right seat in this Chamber. Old habits die hard, as they say, and I just want to say that we will try and ensure that he does not get into his habits too deeply before he has to change in the future. I want to sincerely congratulate him. It is a great honour and a privilege to serve.

Although the hours are long and the stress is high, I think he will be seen as somebody who has indeed earned his role through the hard work of 11 and a half years as Leader of the Opposition. I am sure that he will enjoy the fruits of his labour as he serves as Premier. I also want to congratulate the members of cabinet. I used to make the point when I appointed a new member of cabinet that there have probably been fewer than 500 people in the history of this province who have served in the cabinets of this Legislature over the last 129 years, I guess it is, that we have been in Con federation.

That is a very small number, and you are in a very select category as a member of cabinet. It is a privilege, it is an honour, and it carries with it great responsibility. We here, of course, definitely acknowledge your right to govern. After a little while, we may be suggesting that you take the responsibility to

152 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 govern but at the same time-that is after the first envelope wears out-we acknowledge and congratulate you on assuming your new positions. I also want to congratulate all of those who have been elected in this Chamber, both those who have been re-elected, and for them-gosh, I was trying to remember how many times the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) has been elected. I think it is at least 12. It is an amazing record.

When I read his comments in the paper, it was vintage Harry as he looked forward to the change in government and the new circum stances with as much vigour and as much enthusiasm as he had to taking office when the change took place in 1988. I also know that he is a person who puts first and foremost the service of his constituents, and that is why he has remained here in this Chamber for some 33 years, a remarkable, remarkable achievement.

I just add one little sidebar to that, saying that when we were honouring the member for Lakeside with a get-together in his constituency for his 25th anniversary of his election to office, at that time Douglas Campbell, the former Premier, was still alive. On an impromptu basis he got up to speak, and everyone was absolutely thrilled with it because he continued, even at that time, I think at 95 years of age or 96 years of age, to be absolutely clear and concise and humorous in his presentation. He made the comment that he, Mr. Campbell, had served Lakeside for 47 years and now Mr. Enns was there for 25 years.

In the space of 72 years, they only had two members. He said the people of Lakeside are very loyal. He said once they get someone they like, they are reluctant to let him go. So now we have 47 and 33, we have 80 years of continuous service by two members in the same constituency. So there is somebody who can give everyone in this House lessons and information about service to the people of his constituency. *

(1450) So it cannot possibly be the same and it should not be for the newcomers. I know for the newcomers it is an extremely special moment to first walk into this Chamber as a member, to feel the regal nature of your surroundings, to look and observe the various Latin phrases, the various images that surround this Chamber and to know that you are indeed in hallowed halls, that this is an honour and a privilege that is beyond any that many of us could have expected.

I do not think there is anything that exceeds the thrill and the exhilaration that you feel, and I say that to members both on our side of the House and members opposite, that this is something that you will remember for the rest of your lives. This Chamber is steeped in history. You only sit back and remember some of the ma jor decisions that were made here, some of the wonderful speeches that were given here. I like to think that when I entered this Chamber I was among giants of the time.

I sat in the back row in my first session, and I listened to people like Sterling Lyon, Sid Green, Warner Jorgenson, the two Sauls-Saul Miller, Saul Cherniack-and I marvelled at their ability to stand up and without many notes to just carry on for it seemed hours on end. In those days, some of the speeches were that long. We always used to dread when certain people were left in the order of speakers on particular issues and the Leader had not used his prerogative of unlimited time. We always knew that if, for instance, Sam Uskiw was available, that Sam could go for four hours without even having a sip of water.

It is a privilege and an honour, and I hope that you feel that same sense of exhilaration as I did in my first opportunity to serve in this Legislature. I think it is even more so for many of you who like me had no family background or history in politics, because I know that there are some who come here with family history. My colleague for Kirkfield Park, his father was a member of Parliament and so on. Some grew up with it.

In my case, I have often said that growing up in the north end of Winnipeg, my parents were very private about their pol itical beliefs, and they probably more often than not voted for the person rather than for the party, and I have to acknowledge that probably it was not the party that I ran for. But having said that, we all grow up with our own strong views. I look across at the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) and know

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 153 that he carried a card in our party at one time. That may be the case with others. Point of Order Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Highways and Government Services): A point of order, I think it would be important to note that I have been a card-carrying New Democrat since I was 17 years old. In fact, I joined the party in 1973 . I have only belonged to one political party, the correct political party, the New Democratic. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, it is not a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. *** Mr. Filmon: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we will accept the comment from the member for Thompson unless I can find the records. But I remember when I first ran in River Heights that I found him on a membership list, but it could have been an error, I suppose. I now want to speak about the throne speech. In speaking to the throne speech, Mr. Speaker, I must say that my immed iate reaction sitting and listening to it was that, yes, it was brief, briefer than most throne speeches that I have heard. I do remember some shorter, but there were particular reasons why at that time there was a short throne speech, often not from a new administration.

Secondly, it was in more clear and concise language. I must admit I am very happy with the move toward new, clear language. That is I think something that is here to stay, much of it from the initiative of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh) who is the Government House Leader. Many of our resolutions and presen tations in this House are in new language which is more clear and concise. I think that, too, is an idea whose time has come, and I compliment the government on that.

But it was not the brevity of the speech in terms of the words, the volume, but it was the brevity in terms of vision that I was concerned about. There really was no vision in the throne speech. There was no plan. Clearly there was an attempt to mention every special interest that is important to the government, but, you know, government has to be more than a collection of special interests. It cannot just be that you mention everybody who is going to be rushing to the throne speech to see whether or not you mention them.

It has to be the substance of it, the co-ordinated vision, the plan for the future that is going to get us from where we are today to a better place, hopefully, in the future for our province. As I said, it seemed like a rehash of the election promises and a whole series of eight-second clips, and you cannot run a province on eight-second clips. There was not any detail. I remember the members opposite always saying when our throne speech came out, the first comment would be there is no detail there.

Well, there certainly was not any detail in this throne speech, so that is one area in which they have not been able to improve on us. I can say that, Mr. Speaker, but worse than that there was no substance. I mean, we try and look at what they are going to do that is going to be substantive and there was almost no substance to any of it. A lot of empty slogans, and I think that is trouble. You know, there have been some comments from various different business groups, ones that often were critical of our government.

They are critical of everybody who is in government, but the comment was made that there was no mention ofthe economy. I was reminded of that debate between Clinton and Bush in 1992, in which he said: It is the economy, stupid. I do not know, but I would venture a guess that if you canvassed the people in this province that they would still think it is the economy that is important to their lives, although there are many, many other issues that they will talk about. But to not even talk about the economy in the throne speech, I think has to be a huge, huge mistake in judgment-huge mistake in judgment, Mr.

Speaker-[interjection] Well, the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) says it is here. Yes, it is. It says: Today, the best economy policy for any province is a strong education policy. I think they have it backwards. The fact of the matter is that if you do not have a strong economy, then all you are

154 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December I, 1999 doing is educating your people to go somewhere else to be able to apply their skills and their knowledge. *

(1500) Mr. Speaker, if there is anything that we did right over the last decade, it was to ensure that there were growing and increasing opportunities year after year after year, to the point that members opposite then said that the big criticism was we were not training people fast enough for the jobs that were there-a good problem to have. I would tell you that, time and time and time again, my colleagues, the other premiers from across Canada said that is a problem I would give my eyeteeth to have.

They said you guys have got the economy going on all cylinders, and they said you know, that is a situation that every province is envious of. Indeed, we have been seeing that over and over again. There was no mention of taxes. There was no mention of taxes other than to carry out the commitments that we had made and that had been passed in this year's budget, the 1.5 percent additional reduction in personal income taxes to continue to move us to be competitive with all of the jurisdictions around us.

In that respect [interjection] Well, you know, the member opposite says they are giving a $75 property tax credit. We were going to be removing the education support levy off property taxes, which would have given every Manitoban a greater reduction, every Manitoban a greater reduction in the taxes that they paid on their property. So what a minimalist approach. If indeed the problem is high property taxes, $75 is not going to help people anywhere near the level that they would have been helped by the policies of this administration.

You know, the irony of all of this is that all that you have to do is look around North America and find out what is on the minds of people everywhere in North America, whether they are in other provinces in Canada or whether they are in the United States, whether they are in provinces run by any party in Canada. You take a look at Newfoundland. They are going to be reducing, they just announced last week, their personal income tax rate from 69 percent of the federal rate to 52 percent of the federal rate.

Still higher than ours I might say, but that is a very major jump for a province like Newfoundland that has always been considered one of the have-not provinces of Canada. And then you look at this

article in last week's National Post: Saskatchewan NDP looking at large tax cuts, and the NDP Finance Minister Eric Cline from Saskatchewan has announced that they are going to go to the second lowest personal income tax rate in Canada. Second lowest in Canada, he said. Major, major, major reduction. They have an idea of what the people are looking for in this province and every other province in Canada. The only people who are out of touch, who have no idea of what is going on in the real world, are the NDP in Manitoba Today's NDP. That is a serious, serious issue.

Looking at the throne speech, of course, as well, Mr. Speaker, only the NDP would announce a summit to convince the business community that they are not antibusiness, and that is precisely why they have to hold a summit with business, to try and encourage them and ensure them that they are not antibusiness, because everybody knows that with every passing day you get the antibusiness sentiment now coming out from the members who have been elected. Because, why? They have this great sense of confidence. It is wonderful, wonderful to see members opposite like the member for Thompson (Mr.

Ashton) saying we have nothing we can learn from members opposite, and he has an attitude. He does not think he can learn anything from anybody because he knows best, and then his colleague just down the road, the new member for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell), he stands up there, of course, and he says: I do not have to tell you anything about what we are doing. You lost the election; we won the election. We are in charge, and you have nothing to say about it. Mr. Speaker, the new government also, of course, committed to review the minimum wage. No problem with that. The Premier (Mr.

Doer) said though at his news conference that they were going to increase it every year. That is what he is quoted as saying. That is what the news media told us, and we will see if that happens.

December I, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 155 I just say to him, there may be reasons to increase the minimum wage. We as a govern ment increased the minimum wage several times that we were in office, and so there are reasons why.

The problem with annual increases is that a Jot of small businesses have to adjust their price lists every time there is an increase in the minimum wage, and so you are burdening them with an increased cost of operation to reprint all of the menus of all of the restaurants in the province of Manitoba, to change all of the price lists for all of the small businesses in Manitoba every time it is done. If you do it more often, then it becomes a very costly part of the process. It is not just the fact that they have to adjust their wages.

They are prepared to do that as long as their businesses are going well, and they are able to carry on in business. They will share the proceeds of their business success with their employees. But there are certain things that become impractical, and that is the kind of thing we are concerned about, because we see impractical solutions to straightforward issues across the way. The proposal that was made during the election campaign about mandatory leave for employees was one of those knee-jerk impractical solutions.

The proposal that came out of the annual meeting last year of the New Democratic Party to go down to a 32-hour work week was one of those impractical solutions that comes out of the New Democratic think tank, and that is an oxymoron, New Democratic think tank. Mr. Speaker, the throne speech talks about a commitment to living within their means but you know, they have already thrown up their hands and said that they are not going to be able to balance the budget this year. They have taken a quick snapshot. They announced it two days after taking of fice before they even had the snapshot.

They waited until eight days before they released this financial review. Eight days ahead of releasing the financial review, they appointed Deloitte and Touche to do the review. You tell me who can do any kind of a thorough review of any numbers in eight days, especially when you have $6-billion worth of spending. But they had already arrived at their conclusions. I watched the Premier (Mr. Doer) on Insight, on cable television, and he was already talking, this was two weeks before the review was released. It was before even Deloitte and Touche had been appointed. He was already saying what the conclusions were.

He was on cablevision because he wrote the conclusions. We know what the game plan was. We knew what the game plan was the day that the transition team was appointed and it consisted of Mr. Schroeder and Mr. Kostyra, the two former Finance ministers. The fix was on. They were going to ensure that they ran up the deficit to the greatest extent possible and then hung it on the previous government. * (1510 ) That was the preconceived decision, and we know that they did that in 1981, in 1981 -82 when they took of fice, and I remember that well. It was November 30 of 1981 that the transition took place.

That is when I last moved out of my ministerial office. They took a budget-and nobody ever accused Sterling Lyon of over spending-with a deficit that was projected and passed at $220 million and they had four months left in the fiscal year and they ran it up to $252 million. What did they do? [interjection] We are talking 1981-82. Wake up. They ran it up in four months. What did they do? Within the first month they were in government, they increased by 16 percent the welfare rates in this province, and blew up all of the expenditures.

This province became a magnet for social allowance recipients from all over the area. That is why, from that point forward until 1996, we had a continuous increase in the number of people on social allowance, in good times and in bad, they continued to grow. Even as the economy improved in the '80s, the number of people on social allowance kept going up and up and up. The only time that it started to go down was after 1986 when my colleague from River East implemented programs of welfare reform that gave greater incentives for people to get into jobs and get out of welfare.

That 21 ,000 people have been taken off welfare and into the workforce between 1996

156 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December I, 1999 and this year. There were improvements that were going to be made this year with the passage of legislation to ensure even more that people would be required to go into the workf orce rather than chronically be on welfare. The fact of the matter is that, foolishly, the member for Crescentwood-Fort Rouge it is called now, sorry-he stands up and he says: I have never met anybody who wants to stay on welfare.

Well, he is not living in the real world because if you ask people in any part of this province, you ask people in your areas, and you will not find people who agree with that statement. The members opposite are living in a dream world if they believe what the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Sale) says about people on welfare, that they all, every single one of them, want to be in the workforce. The fact of the matter is that people, because of the policies of the New Democrats in the '80s, have been encouraged that they could stay on welfare as long as they want, no matter what their circumstances.

They have been made to be dependent on government, and they pass that attitude of dependence on from generation to generation. Nothing will break it, other than strong policy by government to try and make sure that there are disincentives for people to stay on welfare and incentives for them to get into the workforce. That is reality, and the member for Fort Rouge does not understand reality. An Honourable Member: I have worked a lot longer in the inner city than you ever have. Mr. Filmon: I lived in the inner city.

I once had a debate with the member for Fort Rouge by virtue of correspondence when he had his Sunday school class send a letter to every member of City Council, 50 members it was in those days, saying that the problem with the inner city was that City Council was not spending enough money on the inner city. I sat down and got all of the facts and figures from every department in the civic service and demonstrated to him that we were spending more, on a proportionate basis, on a per capita basis, in the inner city than anywhere else in the city of Winnipeg. We were building arenas that were not being used.

We were maintaining all sorts of public facilities from libraries to playgrounds to other things. We were rebuilding entire blocks. We were tearing down houses. Those were the days in which the federal government had those massive programs in which they put up 75 percent of the cost, in some cases 90 percent, and they were building, and we were spending tens and hundreds of millions of dollars in the inner city. I said to him: we have brand-new houses. We have brand-new neighbourhoods. We have new landscaping, new ornamental lighting. We have everything new there.

Ask your teacher why he lives in Fort Garry and preaches to the people about the problems of the inner city. Then I listed for him-because, like him, I am a practising Anglica n-all of the parishes of the Anglican church that were in the inner city. I listed the housing addresses of each of the rectors. Not one of them lived in the inner city. They lived in Fort Garry, like he did. They lived in River Heights. They lived in Crescentwood. They lived in all these other areas, but not one of them lived in the inner city.

I said ask what it would take for him to move his family into that core area that he believes is in need of renewal. If we built him a new house, if we made a new street, if we gave better community centres, if we gave a new rink around the comer, what would it take? Well, of course there was no answer because he prefers to live in the suburbs and preach to the people in the inner city about all of the things that should be done. He talks the talk, but he does not walk the walk, Mr. Speaker. That is the problem. Well, if the new Premier (Mr.

Doer) is taking responsibility for the weather we have had this November, I am going to accept that, because I am going to talk to him about it in February too. I found it interesting, Mr. Speaker, as we listened to the cocky arrogance of the members opposite, particularly, and I am sorry he is not here-I am sorry, I cannot ref er to that. Excuse me. I found it interesting and particularly I paid attention to some of the comments made by the member for Brandon East (Mr.

Caldwell) last week and all of the arrogance that he displayed about his knowledge and his understanding and his lack of respect for members on this side and so on.

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 157 *

(1520) Mr. Speaker, I remember coming into this House in 1988 with another group of people who were very, very cocky and arrogant. They were a group led by Sharon Carstairs. The member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) will perhaps relate to that, because there were 20 of them elected in 1988. They were very public about how good they were. An Honourable Member: Sale was their adviser. Mr. Filmon: Oh, I am told that their policy adviser was the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Sale). They came into this House and Mrs.

Carstairs made a speech to the effect that if they want to know how easy it is going to be for them to take over and govern, all they have to do is look around them and see all the dead wood that was around them and they would know that they are going to be in government in a very, very short period of time. She imbued them with that attitude. There is not one of them here today. In fact, more than half of them were gone within a couple of years. But they used to come in here with the attitude that they knew everything.

They did not need to take advice from anybody else in this Chamber on either side, and they are a long gone piece of history in this Legislature. So I am very, very encouraged to hear the cocky arrogance of many members opposite who have been newly elected and know that that is the first step towards their walk out of this Chamber for the last time. I think one of the reasons why the new members opposite are going to have difficulty is that there is not one of them who has any real business experience. None of them have [interjection] Well, okay. That is right. The member for Elmwood (Mr.

Maloway) has a small business which he owns. His ma jor source of income, though, is a Crown corporation, so even there he is a little bit sheltered in terms of his understanding of how business really works. But he has no, they have no understanding of how people who have to work in the private sector, and that is the vast majority of people [interjection] Well, the member for Brandon West (Mr. Smith) is giving me some signs there, and he has had actually a fair bit to say with his chirping in Question Period as well. He is a good example of exactly the difference.

You see, I once heard a speech by a person who said that you can break the people into three categories. You have tax avoiders, those people who do not pay taxes at all, and then you have taxpayers, and obviously there are a lot of taxpayers. Then you have tax consumers, and those are the people who collect their living, who make their entire living by spending taxpayer money all the time. If you look in those rows, that is precisely what you have got. Virtually every person has only made their living by consuming tax dollars. Mr. Speaker, the member for St. Vital (Ms.

Allan) wants to be an exception, and I will make an exception of her, and the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), I will make an exception of him, but everybody else has the attitude that, oh, the taxpayer will not mind paying a little more. When it comes to making a choice between whether their interests are those of the taxpayer or those of the group that they belong to that consumes taxes, where will their loyalties be? Well, the member for Brandon West (Mr.

Smith), of course, made that decision when he was a member of city council, protector of the taxpayer supposedly in that role, but he was a member of the firefighters' union and he went and counselled the firefighters to ask for more money because he believed that the city could afford it. So when it comes down to making that choice as to which side do they stand, they do not stand with the taxpayer. They stand with the tax consumer because they believe every time that the tax consumer is the principal one that they serve. That is a long-term concern.

That is a long-term concern. [interjection] Well, the veteran backbencher for Dauphin-Roblin is giving us some advice over there, Mr. Speaker. [interjection] Well, Mr. Speaker, we have many, many things that we can take issue with the members opposite on, but we do know many things about them by just the few comments they have made. The Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Caldwell), of course, has already said, and it is a quote from the November 19 Brandon Sun:

158 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December I, 1999 NDP Education Minister Drew Caldwell said the new government has no plans to start cost cutting. No plans to start cost-cutting, Mr. Speaker. That is a concern. He, of course, is the same person who on the one hand is protecting children against the evils of YNN because of its commercialization, but he is letting all sorts of other commercialization go on in the schools. That was pointed out very well by the member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilles hammer), by the member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith), by many of our members opposite.

There is commerciali zation everywhere throughout the schools. You know, even Coca-Cola has some principles in that they are not going to go and advertise on the World Wrestling Federation now because they do not like the content. These guys here have no principles. On the one hand, they say that they are going to stop YNN because the teachers' union is opposed to it. On the other hand, they are going to promote all sorts of other commercialization in the schools. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is going to start to catch them up time after time after time. There is no principle.

All there is is political decision making, and it is going to be a problem. The members opposite should be concerned. think that there is, out of the entire throne speech-and I said that it was brief, but it was not so brief that it could not have spoken about rural development and rural Manitoba. There are two references in the throne speech for a whopping four sentences on rural Manitoba. Now, given the crisis that is facing our rural community, Mr. Speaker, I think it is incredible that there would only be two ref erences and four complete sentences on rural Manitoba.

Now members opposite did, throughout the election campaign, imply that we had spent too much time being concerned about rural Manitoba. We took the attitude that no matter where development took place it was good for all Manitoba. We took the attitude that if you got a plant like Maple Leaf Foods in Brandon, it was good for all Manitoba. If you got a strawboard manufacturing plant in Elie, it was good for all Manitoba. We took the attitude that if you had an expansion to the biggest book-publishing firm in Canada, in Altona, it was good for all Manitoba. Why? Well, Mr.

Speaker, when the New Democrats were last in government they did an economic study of what happened when ma jor investments took place. They did the analysis for the Limestone plant way, way up North, and what did they find out? Out of that investment, hundreds of kilometres up North, forty cents out of every dollar accrued to businesses in Winnipeg. Why? Because the engineers, the suppliers, the service people, all of the construction people came from Winnipeg, and so it did not matter where it took place in the province, Winnipeg benefited out of it. *

(1530) We took the attitude that it was best for the entire province that we had development everywhere in the province. That is why Winnipeg is growing and thriving with a lot of high-tech electronic businesses, why there have been expansions to a lot of our manufacturing businesses, why there have been additions of software developers and all sorts of other things taking place in the city of Winnipeg.

At the same time, we had major investments going on throughout the province in rural Manitoba, but rural Manitoba is a special entity in the sense that its opportunities, its characteristics, its advantages are all different than you might find in the city of Winnipeg. It is different to try and locate a business in a small community of a couple of thousand or a few hundred people. You have to have particular things going for you. You have to know what advantages, whether it is location, whether it is resources. All those things.

So it does require a special effort; otherwise you will go back to the days that were there under the New Democrats before where nothing happened in rural Manitoba, and we cannot afford that. We are concerned. All Manitobans should be concerned. With only two references in the throne speech they do not understand the problem, and that is what we are faced with. There are references in the throne speech to strengthen our Home Care system on page 5. Mr. Speaker, it was our government that more

December 1, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 159 than tripled funding to the Home Care program. Our last budget provided an additional $20.5 million, a 16 percent increase to the total funding to our Home Care program to $14 7 million. It says that they are committed to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that the federal laws prohibiting the possession of child pornography remain enforceable, including resorting to the notwithstanding clause. Mr. Speaker, we agree with that. We support the government.

It was our position on that issue, and we hope that the process that we had initiated of seeking intervener status at the Supreme Court will be proceeded with, and that the government of Manitoba will take the strongest possible stand on that particular issue. Mr. Speaker, the whole issue that we have been discussing at some length already in this session, balanced budgets, is a key issue. It is a very key issue to all things that we do in this province in future. I believe that this is one of the most important achievements that our government had made.

Because there were 23 years of chronic dependence on unbalanced budgets that finally culminated in our first balanced budget in the 1995-96 fiscal year. After that the budgets were not only balanced but indeed in surplus position on an audited basis in each successive year. But we are not out of the woods by any stretch of the imagination. Any thought of returning to deficits is absolutely abhorrent, I would say, to most Manitobans. Why? Because we are still spending $490 million a year of interest on the debt, most of which was accumulated during the Pawley years in this House.

The net tax-supported debt tripled in six and a half years under the Pawley government. Who did they put in charge of the transition but the two Finance ministers from that particular era of the Pawley administration. Who did Today's NDP look to for advice on the most critical issue facing them? Yesterday's NDP, the guys that put us into the deep hole that we have been working so hard to dig our way out of. Now, of course, they are starting to find all sorts of excuses and reasons why they must run a deficit budget this year, Mr. Speaker.

That, when they are faced with a situation that no other government in the history of this province has taken office with, and that is $270 million in the bank account, the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. As my colleague for Kirkfield Park has said, budgets do not just take care of themselves, budgets have to be managed. People know that. Only people who have never worked in the private sector believe that you do not have to manage a budget. People who work on the farms know that they get unexpected expenses.

They may have to do another round of spraying that they did not anticipate in the budget that they prepared for that particular year for their farm. People who are in a small business know that all of a sudden something happens to them. There is a fire, they have to pay the deductible their insurance is not adequate to cover. They have to adjust their budget to be able to survive and to make ends meet. People who are in their own homes know that something happens. A child's clothing gets lost or destroyed, and they have to come and adjust their family budget.

Everybody knows that that happens in everybody's budget. We have made adjustments as much as $300 million and more in fiscal years in the last few years and made the adjustments and balanced the budget, Mr. Speaker. Only the members opposite, who are going to embarrass their Leader (Mr. Doer), are going to start by throwing up their hands and saying, no, we cannot do it, it is impossible, they made us do it, and they are going to try and blame it.

Well, they are not going to get away with it, because Manitobans know that they have the respon sibility, they have the authority, and they have the ability to balance the budget if they want to. Mr. Speaker, I want to make one other comment to the members opposite when it comes to talking about the balanced budget, because I was even more concerned last Friday when in Question Period the Premier (Mr. Doer) refused to commit to not removing all of the basic principles of the balanced budget legislation.

Now, he wanted to talk about adding to it a provision that they could not sell a Crown corporation and put the proceeds in, but I want to know from him whether or not they are committed to not remove and change markedly any of the provisions of the legislation, because

160 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December I, 1999 he was already, again on CJOB and again on cablevision, on Insight, talking about the fact, well, the Provincial Auditor has given comments about it. You know, I want to address that. The Provincial Auditor is an independent authority. He was hired by our government on a nonpartisan basis, and he has comments to make. I might say that the comments are very similar to the comments that were made by the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Sale) when he was arguing against balanced budget legislation, and he called it silly.

What he said was that you are going to put yourself in a fiscal straitjacket, that you would put yourself in a position where in order to balance that budget you would have to do dramatic changes and reductions to services in order to keep the budget balanced if you ran into an emergency like the flood of the century or the forest fires or any unforeseen consequence like the southwest Manitoba situation in farming. We said no. This balanced budget legislation has a number of different provisions that ensure that you can keep the budget balanced. It is like a three-legged stool.

One of those, of course, is the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, and it is there to ensure that when you are faced with a dramatic, unexpected situation, you can take money from the Fiscal Sta bilization Fund, and you can therefore keep it balanced. *

(1540) So when the Auditor says this does not go along with generally accepted accounting principles, that is true, because under any other circumstances in other organizations, people show a deficit on their budget. They say: we made money this year, we lost money last year, it all follows that. But if you want to ensure that you can have unforeseen consequences, unfore seen circumstances like the flood of the century or the farm disaster and still take care of it and still balance the budget, you need to have a fiscal stabilization fund.

It is part and parcel of the reason why the balanced budget legislation works. It is part and parcel of why the people on Wall Street have said that it is the best that they have seen in North America, and as long as they recognize that it only works if you have all elements of it there, you have the cost controls, you have the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, and you have all elements of it there, you have the referendum on tax increases, that is all part and parcel of the discipline that needs to be there. Mr.

Speaker, if they start unravelling it one step at a time, then Manitobans will not have what they voted for and what they wanted, which is balanced budgets for all time and future. So this is not an exercise in pure accounting theory. This is a practical way of ensuring that budgets-[interjection] No, Mr. Speaker, the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Sale) is the person I referred to when I talked about silly. He said that balanced budget legislation was silly. I have respect for the Auditor.

I signed his Order-in-Council hiring him, and I respect him, but I am saying that this is not an exercise in accounting theory, this is a practical application of what it takes to ensure that budgets can remain balanced without causing chaos within the delivery of services throughout the provincial government, and it works. Point of Order Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, the Premier has made some very important comments in regard to the Auditor and the function of an Auditor- An Honourable Member: Past Premier. Mr. Sale: Past Premier, right. What the Auditor said, Mr.

Speaker, and what I think is very important that this House understand is that the transfers from the Fiscal Stabilization Fund should never be shown as current revenue. The deficit to which the Fiscal Stabilization Fund is being attached is, in fact, a deficit which is being of fset and not current revenue. That was the Auditor's point. [interjection] It is not a silly point. It is a very valid point of public clarity about our finances, which you would never allow happen. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr.

Speaker, the member is well aware that a point of order is to be raised not to disrupt when a member is speaking but to bring up the disruption of a rule. This member has not brought forward a rule or

December 1, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 161 anything in Beauchesne that has been [interjection] He has no point of order, and he should not have been disrupting. Could you call him to order, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale), it is clearly a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, another area that I thought was not very well served in the throne speech was the fact that the throne speech referred to the flood of the century on the Red River that took place two years ago.

That was indeed very well fought and dealt with by all Manitobans, particularly those within the Red River Valley. It was an enormous job for which compliments have been given in successive throne speeches. But here it is two years later and for whatever unknown reason, the members opposite want to take some credit for the response to the flood of the century. They do not even talk about the major flood that took place in southwestern Manitoba just this spring. There was an enormous saturation of the ground. There was a million acres that went unseeded.

It was a very substantial natural disaster that in many ways was larger because of its impact on the GOP than was the flood of the century on the Red River, and it is not even mentioned in the throne speech. I found that incredible. The member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns ), the member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings), the member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshammer), many of my colleagues and I met on numerous occasions with people in all the communities throughout southwestern Manitoba. We listened to them. We met in the cabinet room.

We met in their own communities and we made a commitment, a very substantial commitment of $50 per unseeded acre, based on the recom mendation of countless farm groups and many, many people in that area. We made that without having the backing of the federal government. It was, indeed, a risk. It was a significant risk, and I say that we took it with our eyes wide open. We indicated that it should be funded out of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, but the federal government should pay its share. The member for Lakeside (Mr.

Enns) will remind members opposite that we did not accept that the federal government should only pay 50 percent, for instance. Our proposal to the federal government was on something of that magnitude, they ought to be there for 70 percent. These are the kinds of things, and we will continue to support the government and to work with the government to get the attention of the federal government to say that this is a natural disaster that ought to be cost-shared by Ottawa. It cannot be the responsibility solely of the people of this province, a province of 1.1 million people. But getting on to agriculture, Mr.

Speaker, I want to say that we had a good debate over the last couple of days. It is an area of great importance. It is an area that I believe is a key area all the time for the Manitoba economy, over $3 billion contributed to our GOP but more importantly also the source of a great deal of other jobs in the whole food production side. Agriculture today, having been here in this Legislature for 20 years, has changed dramati cally, since the first debates and discussions that I sat in on 20 years ago.

I remember 20 years ago that the former member for Arthur-Virden who was then the Minister of Agriculture got into great difficulty by suggesting that he would wrestle the Wheat Board to the ground. Today more and more and more people are seeing that the Wheat Board does not need to be abolished, but the Wheat Board needs to change. The Wheat Board cannot remain inflexible and cannot continue to block out opportunities to our Manitoba producers and our Manitoba agripre neurs who want to create better opportunities [interjection] I ask, as the member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr.

Praznik) asks: will the government opposite have the courage to work with change and support change? Because they did not have the courage when we were in government and we changed the marketing system for hogs in our province to a dual marketing system. They opposed it and indeed the Minister of

162 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December I, 1999 Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) continues to argue that it is detrimental to our province.

But the one thing that was evident was that we would not be able to become the centre for hog production and processing if we did not change. * (1550 ) I have heard from ministers in Alberta and ministers in Saskatchewan, including premiers, that they envied our move, our dramatic and our very, very strong move to dual marketing before they got it because it resulted in us getting a major investment, firstly, by Schneider's, and then, secondly, by Maple Leaf and indeed in becoming the centre and the focus for value added processing in the hog industry. It has meant thousands of jobs.

It has meant well over $1 00 million of investment, in fact between those two alone, over $15 0 million worth of investment, and yet the Minister of Agriculture continues to say that she has her reservations. I can tell her this: that her colleagues to the west do not have any reservations about that. Even the New Democrats know that you must ensure that processors have direct access to business with producers in order to ensure that they can get the supply of hogs that they need. Why change? Why do we have to continue to look at change in agriculture as a necessity, not a choice but a necessity?

Well, Canada is probably the most vulnerable country in the world to commodity price reductions. Indeed, I have always said I just marvel at farmers when I recognize how much stress they have to deal with and indeed what great risk they face every day in their daily life. Farmers are remarkably resilient people. Think about all the things they have to be concerned about. One is weather. I mean, you can have a late spring that does not allow them to get seeded on time. You can have an early frost that destroys the crop. You could have a hailstorm. You can have too much rain; you can have too little rain.

You can have all these different things going. It is a remarkable risky situation that they have to deal with year in and year out that decides whether or not they are going to get their income as expected. They have interest rates that are often very variable. I mean, they went through that period. My own brother-in-law lost his farm. Why? Because the interest rates rocketed up to over 20 percent in the early '80s and it did not matter what he did with the debt load he was carrying. No matter how efficient he became, there was not a thing he could do to keep the farm in operation. Absolutely. Lost the farm.

This is an incredible risk that he faced, because he has no control over these interest rates. Of course, the third area is prices. The prices are all set on a world market. It is not Canada that sets the price of grain or the price of hogs or beef or anything else. It is a world market. So it is well beyond any control that he could attempt to exercise. It is an unbelievable situation of huge risk, and yet they continue to be there, and yet they continue to produce, and yet they have become, I would argue, the most efficient producers in the whole world.

The farmers of Canada can stand on any forum and demonstrate that they have become the most efficient producers in the whole world, but they are also the most vulnerable. Why are they the most vulnerable to world commodity price reduction? Because 80 percent of the crops that they grow, wheat crop for instance, 80 percent is not for consumption in Canada. It has to be sold on an export market.

So again they are dealing in an environment that is well beyond our borders, well beyond our control, and they are subject to all of the things that we have been talking about in this House, the fact that there are these huge subsidies from the European Community, billions and billions of dollars a year, the fact that Bill Clinton is up to, what, $7 billion to $8 billion in the United States. An Honourable Member: Plus. It will be $1 1 billion by the time they finish. Mr. Filmon: The Premier (Mr. Doer) says it may hit $1 1 billion. These are the kinds of vulnerabilities that they face.

Our government, the little, old government of Canada, does not have the capacity to put $1 1 billion on the table. That is true. Yet our people have to be in the game. So there are so many things that are at risk here, which is why we have to do so much more

December 1, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 163 to process our production here. It is why we have to become so much more diversified, so that we are not just dependent on one or two or three commodities, that we have a whole diversity of crops. That is why we have become, in the last decade, the largest producer of edible beans, why our legume crops, why so many different crops, sunflowers, so much has been expanded and diversified here. Canola and hogs exceeded the value of wheat production last year in our province. It is the only way we can go.

It means that the government has to lead the way in being open to change, because if that government sits there and says, no, we are going to protect certain things and we are going to make sure that nobody changes this or that or the other thing, our producers are lost. They cannot survive based on the economics that they face, based on the challenges that they face, the competition that they face. There is only one solution, and that is that they have to become less and less dependent on all of these areas that are at risk. That means that more and more has to be processed here.

That means that we have to process more of our various different grain crops. That is why the Canadian Wheat Board, in taking a position that says that no, you cannot sell your product directly to a processor to have a pasta plant here, is killing opportunity. No other place in the world would allow that situation to prevail, where a producer and a processor cannot enter into a direct agreement to be able to produce that value-added product. An Honourable Member: We would have no McCain potato plant in Portage if that were the case. Mr. Filmon: That is right.

The member opposite talks about all of these areas in which we have value-added processing. Look at them. Potatoes. We are huge producers. We have the largest French fried potato plant in Canada right now, huge producers of that. It is not subject to any marketing board, and it is not subject to any government control at the production side. The same thing is true of canola. It is not under the Wheat Board; it is not under marketing. An Honourable Member: That is why we have the crushing plants. Mr. Filmon: Crushing plants here, refining, and all that going on. Beans, sunflower seeds.

We have some processing going on in southern Manitoba in that area. Oats. We have the Can Oats plant there. Why is that happening? It is happening because it is out of the control of the Wheat Board now, and it allows for the market to decide and the entrepreneurs to decide. We have to have that opportunity. I am not saying take the Wheat Board down. I have always said that directly to their face. We as a cabinet over the last few years have been meeting a couple of times a year with, what do we call them, the commissioners of the Canadian Wheat Board.

We have been saying to them we are not your enemy, but if you do not allow for this kind of flexibility, then everybody in the production side of agriculture is going to become your enemy because you are going to prevent them from ensuring that they can make a living, ensuring that they have the financial stability for them and their families, and ensuring that you add the value and you create the opportunities in rural Manitoba and throughout the farm and rural economy. You have to be able to do that.

If you block it off, then the farmers are the ones who pay; Manitobans are the ones who pay because of lost jobs and lost opportunities. So I am saying to you, Mr. Speaker, that the government opposite has to embrace change, has to become an advocate for change, and has to shed its old NDP ways and really show that it is Today's NDP when it comes to all of these things.

We have here in this province the George Morris Centre study that was done for the hog industry that demonstrated that this is the cheapest place in all of North America to produce hogs and therefore the ideal place to process them is somewhere close by. The George Morris Centre showed that we have an advantage in terms of the cost of our feed grains because we are the place where it has the greatest cost in transportation to take them somewhere else. So, therefore that applies, that we want to process as much as possible here.

164 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 1, 1999 *

(1600) Those same economics do not just apply to hogs. They apply to beef. That is why now we have record levels of beef production in this province. We do not have the processing here. We lost it decades ago, but we must ensure that we are doing everything possible to get more and more processing. That is why the egg production is here. We work very hard. There are some great new opportunities for egg production for the industrial market and for the export market, both of which are outside of the traditional marketing boards. The marketing boards are for table-consumption eggs.

We do not have that constraint on us, and we ought not to let CEMA-and I told that to them when I met them in Niverville this spring. CEMA is an organization that we support as long as they are talking about the domestic table market. The minute that they tell us that we cannot allow expansion to meet the industrial and the export market is the minute that they do not have our support. They tried to do that. We had a battle for two years over that, and that is taking place now. What does it mean? It means jobs and economic opportunity for our province. An Honourable Member: Grain that we do not have to export.

Mr. Filmon: Grain that we do not have to export, as the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) says. Poultry production, all of these areas, we have a competitive advantage, but it needs a commitment on the part of government to look at things differently. We got into, with a considerable amount of controversy, the production of elk, the farming of elk. I do not know where the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) stands on that. I do not know where she is on that, but this is an area of continued opportunity. There are many, many places.

You know, when we look at wild boar, elk, bison, all these areas are continued diversification. They imply more money coming into farm hands and more economic opportunity in the rural areas, and eventually more opportunity for processing here in our province. The PMU industry. This is an interesting one because the members opposite have been opponents of the PMU industry. Absolutely. Well, you know, the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) has taken a position. In fact, she is quoted in the literature of the groups that right throughout North America oppose the PMU industry.

That had better be an issue that the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) takes a hold of. Because the fact of the matter is, I travelled through this province during the last election campaign and met many PMU producers. If you want to deny them the opportunity to be in business, you are going to be destroying a lot of the farm economy in your area as well as most areas in this province. [interjection] Our farmers are very, very efficient producers and our farmers must have more value-added. They must have more processing.

They must have more diversification at their disposal in order to ensure that they can survive in what is the riskiest, I believe, line of work in this entire country. But if we are really going to help our farmers, we have to remove roadblocks. We have to reduce regulations and bureaucracy that prevent this value-adding, this diver sification and this self-sufficiency that is the ultimate goal. It is good for farmers. It is good for communities. Indeed, I spoke at the AMM annual meeting about an

article that was provided for me by the member for Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner) that talked about healthy agriculture, unhealthy farm communities. It talked about the fact that in the United States they had nice towns and villages and cities that grew up based on taking agriculture production and processing it and creating jobs and opportunities there. We need to do that. We have not done it for a century. We need to do it now, and we had started to make a very significant move on that.

These last 10 years have seen more investment in diversification and value-adding than ever before in our history, and we cannot Jet that change. You know, I found it interesting that the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) declared victory after one meeting with her federal counterpart. I do not know who saw this news release that she put out. I did not see it

December 1, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 165 until later, but on October 15 she put out a news release, I guess to try and justify the comments that her Premier (Mr. Doer) had made during the election campaign saying that he could establish a better relationship with Ottawa, that he would have much better relations. So it says here: Agriculture and Food Minister Rosann W owchuk is describing her meeting with federal Agriculture and AgriFood Minister Lyle Vanclief in Ottawa yesterday as productive.

While no firm commitment was made, the federal minister listened seriously to the concerns raised, and W owchuk expressed optimism that negotiations will be ongoing. I welcome the opportunity to meet with the federal minister for the first time and to talk to him about the situation in Manitoba, she said. Where there did not previously seem to be much hope from the federal government, in this meeting the federal minister did not close the door on the possibility of federal aid. This was an important first step in the process, and I am optimistic that we can reach agreement in the near future.

So the minister took that, and he said, well, I have satisfied her. So the next week he announced that there was nothing more. He now had the minister in his court. He did not need to do anything more. I suggest that the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) wait a little bit longer to declare victory next time she meets with him. In concluding my discussion on agriculture, Mr. Speaker, I want to say, yes, let us say firstly that we need proper safety nets in place. We would all agree with that.

I think in the early '90s, with the GRIP and NISA programs, brought-in programs that were stable, brought-in programs that provided stability as well as intelligent opportunities for farmers to participate to the extent that they wanted to, it was a balanced program that provided a good underpinning, but they are not there-well, NISA is there. I should not say that. But there was totally inadequate compen sation for t

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-1-6
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 1st hansardpdf 6.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e3fcb895ed2276ff251a5173c3d6bd5b414b26ad

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