Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 60A (35th Legislature, 5th Session)

35-5-60a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session • Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker Vol. XLID No. 60A - 1:30 p.m., Monday, July 4, 1994 ISSN OS42-S492

NAME ASIITON, Steve BARRETI, Becky CAJRSTJlDRS,Sharon CERll...U, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEW AJR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDW AJRDS, Paul ENNS, Hany, Hon. ERNST, Ttm, Hon. EVANS,Clif EVANS, Leonard S. Fll.MON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon.

FRIESEN, Jean MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Aftlliation CONS1ITUENCY Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley GAUDRY, Neil GllLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli HELWER, Edward R. IDCKES, George KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHI..JN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Man:el MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY,Ttm MANNESS, Clayton, Hon.

MAJR TINDALE , Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCORMICK, Nouna McCltAJE,James,Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHAJRD, Donald, Hon. PALUSTER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Duren, Hon. REID, Daryl REJMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Hany STEP ANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVBINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann Point Douglas The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St.

Johns Elmwood Morris Burrow s Sturgeon Creek Osborne Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonn et Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Rossmere KirldieldPBik FlinFlon La Verendrye Fort Garry Swan River PAJRTY. NDP NDP Liberal NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal Liberal NDP PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC Liberal PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP

4446 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, July 4, 1994 The Ho u se met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS RO�NEPROCEEDINGS READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Rallway Traffic Safety Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable mem ber (Mr. Leonard Evans). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? No? Dispe nse. The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS there have been two recent serious railway acddents in Brandon involving children; and

WHEREAS many residential buildings are near railway tr acks in Br andon an d in ur ban commun ities throughout the province; and

WHEREAS ma ny units own ed by Manito ba Housing have no rear yard fences, making it difficult to keep small children in the safety of their back yards; and

WHEREAS it is im portant th at everything reasona ble be done to enhance the safety of children, including steps that would minimize future possible accidents involving railways. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly request the Minister of Ho using (Mrs . Mc in to sh ) to consider the installation of fences in back yards of residential units owned by Manitoba Housing, particularly in those near railways. AND FURTHER your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly will request the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr.

Findlay) to encourage and prom ote im pr oved saf ety conditions to protect young children from railway and other traffic acddents. AND FURTHER your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly will request the Minister of Highways and Transportation to review this issue of railway traffic safety with the federal Minister of Transport to enhance and promote a greater degree of safety in the vidnity of railway trackage with

part ic ular reference to small children. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Farm Support Programs Government Position Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. Today, there is a very important meeting with Agriculture ministers across Canada meeting in Win nipeg dealing with the proposals from the federal gov ernme nt an d from the vario us provinces. This meeting is taking place under the environment of suggested reductions in support both for farm su pport progr ams and for transportation programs in the province of Manitoba and nationally.

We have lost close to 1,400 fanns in Manitoba since 1988, a situation that is not unique across wes tern Ca nada and prairie Canada with the decline in farming incomes and the decline in supports for farmers and farm families in this province. This is a very, very important issue for us and for all members of this Chamber because agriculture is one of the most important industries in our province. I would like to ask the Premier, can he table today in this Chamber the position that Manitoba is taking to that important meeting of Agriculture ministers?

4447 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July4, 1994 Hon . Gary Filmon (Premier) : Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enos). Status Report Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, there are reports that the existing pr ograms will be replaced by a so-called whole farm program . Our concern is, of course, that if the whole farm program is developed , we do not have a situation where we have a new program but we have half the support or less than the existing support for f ann ers across Canada.

All the advi sory groups to our Agriculture minister and all advi sory groups in agriculture in Manitoba have rec ommended that the levels of support from the fe deral government remain at least at the '94-95 level, that this not be an attempt to just rej ig the numbers and lower the investment in farm fam ilies and in western Canada It was indicated in some media report s today that Mani toba was worried that the fe deral government would be reducing their support for programs with the new farm support program.

I would ask the Premier, have there been any numbers on the table, and are there any possible reductions in support to western Canadian farmers at the meeting in Wmn ipeg today? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier) : Mr. Speaker, as the me mber kn ows well, our Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Eons), the member for Lakeside, is chairing that very, very important meeting.

He will take a very strong stand on behalf of all Manitobans, ensuring that not only will farm support programs be preserved for the benefit of our farm ers in Mani toba to ensure that they do have the security that they need to continue to operate the fam ily farms and to be able to continue to prosper on the farm s, he will of course be very, very adamantly opposed to any attempts on the part of the federal gov ernm ent to offioad onto the prov inces.

Those poss ibilities do exist from the cursory examination that w.e have of the proposals the federal government is talking about, but since we do not have detai ls, I canno t give him any more information as to exactly what the fe deral governmen t is proposing. We do have grave concerns when we read comments from the Honourable Doug Young about potential for ma jor, major reductions in transportation program s, prim arily the Western Grain Transportation assistance programs and oth ers. I know our Mini ster of Agriculture will be taking the strongest possible stand on behalf of Manitoba farm ers. •

(1335) Co-ordination Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I know the Premier mentione d the issue of transportation grants. Of course, transport ation programs plus the farm support programs are very important in their total, the accumulative total at the farm gate and to farm producers in western Canada . Can the Premier indicate the co-ordination from our own province on deali ng with farm income that is ari sing from a provincial government position on both the agricultural transportation policies and the proposals that are being dealt with by the Ag ministers?

How is it proposed by the fede ral government that both these programs will come together? How is it that the Mani toba strategy will deal with a comprehensive set of inve stments for agricultur e and for western Canadian produoors, rather than having one track dealing with the farm support and another track deali ng with the farm transportation policy and not having a co-ordination from the federal government and therefore no co-onlinatioo at the farm gate. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier) : Mr. Speaker, I will take that question, as well, as notice on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture.

Provindal Court Backlogs Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Jobns): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Justice. As of last Friday, about one-quarter of the full-time Provincial Court judges in Mani toba who

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4448 were av ai lable to dea l wi th the issues of Manitobans were no longer available to serve. The government has bought off eight judges recently at a cost of about a million dollars to taxpayers, while over 200 court-sitting days in Winnipeg this summer alone have been cut by the government due to Filmon Fridays .

In light of this and the fact that relations between this minister, the government and the judges of the Provi ncial Court and the morale of the judges have deteriorated to the point where the judges have now today launched a legal proceeding agaimt the gov ernment, will the minister advi se how the court bacldogs can possibly be reduced this summer, and will she advise this House now how much worse these backlogs will get? Bon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney Gener al) : Mr.

Speaker, just to co rrect the rec ord-the member is frequently wrong; he very rarely has his fa cts right-it is my understandi ng there are seven Provinci al Court judges who have acce pted the retirement. Mr. Speaker, media reports indicate that court documents will be filed at some point today. In the interest of due process, in the interest of fairnes s, I will be confinin g my comm ents to the fact that we as a government will be filing our defence in court , and our statements will be made in court in response to any documents filed by the other side.

I would also like to make it perfectly clear that this government intends to respect the court's decision in this matte r. PoHtical Interfe rence Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): In the interest of Man itobans, would the minister confinn that the government has attempted to use its finan cial clout to silence and to stifle, interfere with the Provi ncial Court judges speaking up on an issue related to its independ ence, that is, the appli cation of Filmon Fridays to the court? Bon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and At torney General): Mr.

Speaker, agai n, I am shocked by the member's questions, by his attempt to frequently interf ere, by his atte mpts to meddle in the area of judicial independence, by his atte mpts to meddle in cases before the court, by his attempts to meddle in cases where sentencing has not been handed down. It is shocking to me that someo ne with legal training would meddle so very closely in matters which have been before the court or are presently before the court. • (1 340) Mr. Mackintosh: Rather than reflecting on the propri ety of the questions, Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister should read Beauches ne .

I would like to table letters between the government and counsel for the judges. By the way, Mr. Speaker, the letters will show that the government has withdrawn support for a salary increment to judges on the condi tion that they forgo pursuing a matter in court against the government. My question, Mr. Speaker, is, how does the mini ster justify the independence of the judiciary in light of this action by the gov ernment in trying to silence the judges? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Spea ker, the member is absolutely wrong.

He is absolutely wrong in what he character izes as a part of the letter, and he should be ashamed of what he has characterized as a part of the letter. As the member knows, there are ongoing discussions to arri ve at judicial compens ation, and this was simply part of the process which is being led by the civil servants to deal with judicia l compensation. Provincial Court Workweek Reduction Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Oppositi on): Mr.

Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Justice, and my question relates directly to the implementation of Bill 22 by this government, which does not offend any rule of parliamentary procedure to discuss it openl y. My question for the Minister of Justice is, were the judges, those who ad minister the courts in this prov ince, the Provincial Court judges, given the same leeway to apply those reductions as many

4449 LEGISLATIVE ASSE:MBL Y OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 hospital administrators were given after many discussions with the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae)? He did see the light and allowed hospitals and hospital administrators to apply Bill 22 in the way to cause the least harm to the delivery of servi ces. Were the judges given that same independe nce, that same ability to take those reductions in cost and impose them as they saw fit and as they best know, running those courts every day, every week in this province? Ron.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Peihaps the member is already privy to whatever documents will be filed by the judges today. I have not yet seen them. I will be very careful and will refrain from answ ering in the interests of not wishing-[inteljection] Mr. Speaker, the other side seems to feel that there is not a line here . There most cenainly is a line. It is absolutely imperativ e that I respect the judicial process, that we know what has been filed as an issue , as a case before the court, and that I not make any statements which might jeopar dize a case before the court. Mr.

Edwards: This minister, this government, have interfered with the courts more than any other administra tion in the history of this province , Mr. Speaker. Consistently they have done that.

My quest ion for the minister : In the implementation of Bill 22, in the administra tion of the courts which she has the responsibility for and which is the past and is not directly related and does not pre judice this governm en t's court action, were the courts, were the judges given the right, the ability, the respect to impose those reductions in cost as they best saw fit to e nsure that the level of service to the people whom the courts serve in this province had the least effect? That was given to the hospitals. That was given to the hospital administrators.

Was it given to the judges and to the courts in this prov ince? Mrs. Vodrey : Pe rllaps the member would like to jeopardize a case which will be before the courts. Perhaps the member, again, would like to jeopardize a case . Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this government, I am not prepared to put that case into jeopardy, and I would ask that members opposite hold the same respect for due process through a court of law. Mr. Edwards: The Minister of Justice does not understand the principle that she is speaking of, Mr. Speaker, and she is using it to avoid very legitimate questions in this House today. Now, Mr.

Speaker, my final question for the minister: There was an agreement between this government in principle and the judges to sign off with respect to pay and benefits. I do not seek here today to discuss the details of that agreement , but I would like the minister to answer for all members of this House whether or not she or a member of the government specificall y indicated that they would not sign that off if, in fact, the judges were going to bring this court case on the issue of judicial independence. Did she put that condition and did she put essentially that threat, Mr.

Speaker, to the judges, that they would not go ahead with that pay agreement until and unless the judges specifically indicated they would not bring any further court action? Did she do that? Mrs. Vodrey: It is the member who fails to understand the judicial process. It is the member who consistently fails to understand the judicial process. It is that member, that side of the House which constantly wants to jeopardize the system on behalf of Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, I will not see the justice system fail. They would see the justice system fail.

I will not see the justice system fail on behalf of this government. •

(1345) Highway Construction/Maintenance Northern Manitoba Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, not a day goes by when we, as northern MLAs, do not receive complaints about the condition of northern roads, whether they be into Nelson House, Split Lak e, Cross Lake , Norway House. Now inform ation obtained from the Department of Highways shows why.

July4, 199 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4450 I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Fdmon) if he can justify why the spending on construction in northe rn Manitoba has plummeted to 6.5 percent since this government came into office, compared to the 16 .3 percent it was under the NDP government. In tenns of actual numbers, it is now $5.7 mill ion compared to $14.7 mill ion under the NDP. Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportatio n): Mr. Speaker, the member fails to realize that when he left power they were spending about $85 million a year on capital, on highways in the pr ovince.

It has now been over a hundred most of the time we have been here-last year, $1 10 million; �s year, $1 0 9 milli on-a significant increase, while at the same time Saskatchewan over the same time period has gone from about $1 20 million a year down to $62 mill ion. We have consistently spent around $6 million a year in Highway capital in northern Manitoba, a significant investment in roads in northern Manitoba, as we have done a significant inve stment in roads throughout Manitoba where all Manitobans drive . Mr. Ashton: Well, the minister makes my point, Mr. Speaker.

Out of $1 09 milli on, $5.7 million is going to northern Manitoba. That is not acce ptable. I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Fibnon}: When is he going to govern on behalf of all Manitobans, including northern Manitobans, and give us decent roads? Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I will acknowledge and I am sure eve ry other Minister of Highways across the country would ma ke the same stateme nt-for every dollar we can spend, there are about six that are wanted to be spent There is a limit to what we can source from the taxpayer.

We make decisions continually throughout the year on a wide variety of criteria of where we must most urgently spend our money for the good of all Manitobans. Mr. Ashton: Well, Mr. Speaker, let us talk about criteria, and I want to ask the Pre mier (Mr. Ftlmon): We have money for an underpass on Kenaston-by the way, more than is being spent in northe rn Manitoba in the entire four years under this government in construction. We have money for the Winn ipeg Jets. When are we going to see some fairness from this First Minister who has to accept responsibility for ignoring northe rn roads? Mr. Findlay: Mr.

Speaker, that member does not understan d what the word "fai rness" to Manitobans means. They increased taxes , increased taxes, increased taxes and Manitobans do not want that anymore. They want a responsible government that uses the resources available to it in the most responsible ma nner, and this government has done it for seven budgets in a row. Farm Supp ort Programs GovenunentPodtion Ms. Rosann Wowch uk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, as our Leader bas indicated, there are very important meetings taking place in Wmnipeg this week, meetings that will discuss the future of farm ers across Canada.

Unfortunately, this government has not put forward their podtion as to how they propose to deal with the new whole income pr ogmms. I want to ask the Acting Minister of Agriculture: As we look forward to these pr ograms, is this government prepared to take a posi tion that will see progmms capped so that we would be targeting more family fanns instead of what we have with NISA right now where the majority of the money is going to a small number of fanners and the basic family farm is not being able to take as much advantage of the program as the large corporate and huge fanns are?

Will they consider capping the amount of money- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question. Bon. Glen Findla y (Acting Minis ter of Agriculture): Mr. Spe aker, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enos) is co-chairing a very important meeting, as there have been ma ny important meetings over the last few years in terms of safety nets for the farm comm unity. Manitoba stands tall in terms of what it has done in tenns of saf ety-n et suppor t for Manitoba far mers.

4451 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July4, 1994 Compared to Saskatchewan-! will compare that any time. Mr. Speaker, the member clea rly misses the issue. What is going on is the fe deral government is finding var ious ways and means to of fload support to the farm community on the prov inces, in fa ct, pull it away from the farm community of western Canada. Why does she not ask that question? That is the serious question. The Liberal government in Ottawa does not pay any attention to the problems of western Canada. • (1 350) Ms. Wowchuk: Mr.

Speaker, we all agree that there should not be federal cuts to the Agriculture budget What the fed eral government is doing is disgrace ful. I want to ask the Acting Minister of Agriculture if they will consider looking at ways to target the family farm rather than having the largest portion of money going to large farms. H this government believes in the rural community and sustainable development in the mra1 comm unity, we have to have people there and the money has to be distributed. That is all we are asking fo r. Will they cap the amount of money- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

The honou ra ble member has put her question . Mr. Findlay: I should not answ er for the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Ems), but as I recall, the figure is that 98 percent of the farms in Mani toba are fam ily farm s. We have targeted our support to the fam ilyfarms of Mani tobL Ms. Wowchuk: I want to ask the minister if he will admit the fact that in most cases there are farmers that only get $ 2,800 from this program, but there are specific farm ers that get well over a hundred thousand dollars. This is not fair. We have to look at ways of ta rgeting the fa mily farm on nee d, but more specifical ly- Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. The honou rable member has pu t her question. Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the member to read the process by which the programs work. They are targeted to need,

whereas in the past it paid to everybody reg ar dless of need. Today 's programs are targeted to need. I would recomm end that she read the guidelines and understand them so she does not misin form the farmers of Mani toba, who, by the way, proudly support what Manitoba has done over the last number of ye ars. Point of Order Ms. Wowchuk: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I would like the acting minister to correct the record because NISA is not targeted on nee d. It is- Mr. Speaker : Orde r, please . That is clearly a dispute over the fact s. The honourable member does not have a point of order.

Homeowner Protection Legislation Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I find it truly amazing that this government, when it wants to bring in regre ssive legislation that is going to take the province back wards, they can do it very quickly, but when they have an opportuni ty to bring in legislation that is going to prote ct homeowners from predatory tactics of banks, they take their time.

I want to ask the Premier why the government can bring in Bill 22 to break collective agreements and bring in Bill 38 to destroy wildlife areas without consu ltation, but when they have the chance to bring in a bill that is going to protect property o wners in this pro vince, it is going to take them two years. Bon. Gary Filmon (Pre mier) : Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice. Points of Order Ms. Cerilli: On a point of order, can you ask the Premier to listen to the questions in Question Period and answ er- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of orde r.

There is no point of order. ••• Mr. Speaker: The honourable First Minister is up on a new point of order.

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4452 Mr. Film on: I took the question as notice. That is very legitimate under parliamentary democracy, and if the member had been here awhile and understood the rules, she would know that, Mr. Speaker. ••• Ms. Cerilli: Can the Premier tell the House why other provinces in Canada have legislation that is going to protect homeowners when they sell their property under an assumed mortgage and why we do not have that kind of protection in Manitoba? Mr. Film on: I will take that question as notice. Ms.

Cerilli: There was a paper that was prepared for Manitoba's Secmi.ties Commissi on that I hope that the Premier will take the time to read since he has taken this matter as notice. I would like to have him tell the House when the recommendation at the end of the paper was first made to the government to amend legislation in Manitoba that is going to e nsure that homeowners are protected in this province. When was that recommendation first made to this governm ent- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question. Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice as well.

Manitoba Hazardous Waste Corp. Environmental Ljcensing Violati ons Ms. Norma McCormick (Os borne): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environmen t. During a recent inspection of the Manitoba Hazardous Waste Management facility in St. James, Department of Environment inspectors identified a number of deficiencies and operational problems which cont ravene the environment regulations and which indi cate that some activities are being carried on outside the corporation's licence.

My question to the minister: Can the minister advise us what steps are being taken to remedy this situation and to prevent future licensing and regulatory violations? Bon. Glen Cummings (Mi nister of Environment): I am not sure to which matters the member is referring, but ifl can assume that it is in response to an inspection that the Department of Envi ronment made abou t a month ago, that demonstrates precisely what we are doing to make sure that corporation and any other operating in the province is subject to inspection and enforcement and make sure they live by the rules. Ms.

McCormick: Can the minister assure us that the list of violations and defi ciencies has been provided to the community representatives as is required by the co-management agreement? Mr. Cummings: I am not sure ifl can con finn or deny that, but I will make sure that it does happe n. Status Report Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): My final sup plementary: The June 30 deadline has passed. Can the minister provide us with a status update on the sale of the assets of the corporation to lEI and whether the buyer has managed to raise the funds neces sary to comp lete the transaction? Bon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): We are waiting for some adjustment to the letters of credit to make sure that they are fully compatible with the conditions which we have imposed on the deal. Everyone within the corporation and within the proposed partnership gives us full assurance that they will meet those conditions, and then we will close the sale. McKenzie Seeds Privatization Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon Eas t): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Culture and Heritage.

In early April, when the announcement was made that McKenzie Seeds was exploring options to privatize the company, the statement was made that there would be a decision made within six to eight weeks one way or the other. Well, it is now three months since the initial anno uncement and no statements have been forthcoming.

4453 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 My question to the minister is: Will the minister now confinn that the govemment will not pro ceed with the privatization of McKenzie Seeds? Bon. Ha rold Gilleshammer (Minister responsible for A.E. McKenzie Co. Ltd.): No, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, I would then ask the minister if be can advise the House when the govemment will make a decision in this matter, because it is not in the public interest to leave this matter in a state of indecision. Mr. Gill eshammer: Mr.

Speaker, the member reminds me of the editorial in the Brandon Sun, which advised that member not to get hysterical about these things. Some discussions are ongoing. When there is something to announce, it will be done in due course. Mr. Leonard Evans: If I was hysterical, Mr. Speaker, there were 8,000 people in Brandon who were hysterical as well about the decision made by this govemmem to privatize. My final question is: Will the minister respond?

Will the minister give this House and myself as a member of this House the courtesy of responding to the written questions I placed on the Order Paper over two months ago respecting McKenzie Seeds? Will he give the House the courtesy and myself the co urtesy of an answe r to those questions, or is he going to ignore it? Mr. Gill eshammer: Mr. Speaker, I would remind the member that we spent a number of hours in commi ttee discussing McK enzie Seeds. The member indi cated that be had some more questions that we would be dealing with at a subsequent meeting, and I look forward to that. •

(1400) Pritchard Place Drop-In Centre Fundiog Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, in Wmnipeg's north end there is a drop-in centre called Pritchard Place Drop-In Centre. They are doing an excellent job of kee ping cbildren off the streets and out of trouble, providing a positive alternative in teDDs of recreation. I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services if she can confinn that Winnipeg Child and Family Services have indicated that their grant of $39,000 may not be renewed after August of this year. Bon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Servi ces) : Mr.

Speaker, we on this side of the House certainly do encourage very actively and promote recreation as an option to reduce crime, and it also keeps our children very active and involved, especially during the summer months. Mr. Speaker, I do want to indicate that I will have to take the details of that question as notice and report back to my honourable friend. Mr.

Martindale: Will the Minister of Family Services endeavour to e nsure that funding is kept in place either from Winn ipeg Child and Family Services or from some other source, so that they can continue with the same level of staffing and the same level of service so they continue to provide this service and keep cbildren off the street and in a positive alternative setting? Mrs. Mitc helson: Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated to my honourable friend, I cann ot confinn or deny what Winnipeg Oli1d and Family Services is doing as an external agency to government regarding their funding commitments, but I will endeavour to get the detailed information, ask the questions and report back to my honoura ble friend. Hikel Report Tabling Request Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolsele y): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education. Th is win ter, I asked under Fre edom of Information for a copy of the Hikel report, which examined the merits of the ACCESS programs at Manitoba's universities. That request was refused, Mr.

Speaker, but the minister has repeatedly said in Estimates and in the House that he will be tabling that report and he said, in June. It is now five months after my initial request for that report. Will the minister tell the House today when he is going to table the Hike l report? Bon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, to cor rect the

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4454 revisionist history as put forw ard by the member for Wols eley, I said I would make every effort to ta ble same in the mon th of June . Mr. Speaker, translation is a probl em, yes, No. 1. Number 2, Mr. Hikel is out of town until, I underst and, July 8 or 10, and at that time, the report will be completed. So at this point , I cannot table the report. Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised by the minis ter's response.

Could he tell me whether he will be tabli ng that report upon its completion on July 10, or is he, in fa ct, giving himself another out here for yet a further delay of three or four months? Will it be July 107 When will it be? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, as I said, I would make every effort to table it as soon as possible. I am hoping that will be July. I was once hopi ng and expecting that it might be the end of June. That was impossible . ACCESS Programs Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolsele y): Mr.

Speaker, will the minister confirm that that report upon which he has ba sed his poli cies of cut tin g ACCESS programs, that that report is based upon only foc us groups and that there has never been any systematic contact and analysis of the effects ofbis policy upon ACCESS students? Will he confirm that? Bon. Cayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I will not confirm that because the member is dead wrong. There were many discussions with individuals, with institutions. There was a wide cross

section of refere ncing done that led to the final recommendations within the report. Omands Creek Protection from Development Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Urban Affairs. In my memory, there have been four times that developers have sought to either develop over or right up to the riverb ank of Om ands Cree k, which is in the west end of W inni peg, most recently back in 1989 when the owners of Rae & Jerry 's were going to put up an office tower and car wash.

There is another application that has been filed in the city of Winn ipeg to build a parki ng lot , an extension, right out over the river. Mr. Speaker, my question for the Minister of Urban Affa irs: Given that the provi nce has a significant investment in this park through the purchase of Bluestem Park , which happened some years ago, is the mini ster aware of this app lication? Has the min ister had discussions with Mayor Thompson or other city councillors about how to preser ve again and protect the environm ental integr ity of that very important river in the west end of Winnipeg? Bon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Urban Aft'airs): No, the mayor has not brough t this particular issue to my att ention regarding the parking lo t. We have , however, as you know, passed legislation that requires the City of Winni peg to pa ss a by-law concer ning construction over waterw ays. We are waiting for them to do that , and we have discussed, the mayor and I, the time line and the delay in getting that by-law to pass. So we are looking for them to proceed as requested, with the formation of that by-law and lookin g for wording to come forward in the near future. Mr.

Edwards: This app lication is set to go before the standing committee this Friday, I am led to believe. My question for the minister: Will she speak to those at City Hall to ensure that the province and her off ice are well brie fed on this app lication? -because the prov ince must take a role in protecting this park. We have been jo int purchasers and joint developers of this park. It is now time to stand up and make sure that it is not compromised by anot her parkin g lot . Mrs. Mcintosh : The ma yor and I will be discussing this and many other issues in the days to come.

We are in co mmunication on topics of this nature . The appli ca tion going forw ard to City Hall, of course-it is not coming forw ard to the provi nce,

4455 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 but rather going forward to Uty Hall. I expect that we will be discussing this issue, the mayor and I, for a number of reas ons, primarily to discuss the passing of the by-law that is required for the city to do. Mr.

Edwards: My final question for the mini ster: When the minister meets with the mayor and does discuss this, would she be prepared to discuss ways of solving this once and for all and simply sitting down with the owners of that small piece of property, which is the only privately held piece of property between the two parks, the city parlr.: and the provincial park, and bringing that piece of property into public ownership? There must be a way to do that There have been years and years of negotiations. Will the minister discuss with the mayor ways of once and for all solving that, Mr. Speaker? Mrs.

Mcintosh: The mayor and I, and other councillors as well, have discussed this issue at length in terms of other methods of trying to re so lve it, including the discussion of the possibility of a land swap and that type of solution. Those discussi ons are still ongoing. They have not been resolved at this point. Manitoba Mineral Resources Trout Lake Divestiture Mr. Jerry Storie (F1in Flon): My question is to the Premier (Mr. Filmon). Last year, the government of Manitoba decided to raid Manitoba Mineral Reso urces of some $16 million for their own pwposes.

On Thursday, the government ann ounced that it was selling its share of Trout Lake to HBM&S. As the MLA for Flin Flon, obviously I have mixed fee lings. I think that particular sale may help HBM&S in the short term and it may help the steelworkers, the people who work at HBM&S, in the short term. My question, however, is to the Premier.

Will the Premier be giving the people of northern Manit oba and the people who are involved in mining across the p rovince the assurance that the $25 million in sale will remain an asset with Manitoba Mineral Res ources so that it will be available for MMR to continue to work with mining companies in the province of Manitoba and mining communities in Mani toba for the improvement and the benefit of those communities in the future? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, I am very pleased my honourable friend is content with the sale of the Trout Lake asset to Hudson Bay and thei r acquisi tion of Granges' shares of the Trout Lake mine, because in his community that means an $80-million to $100-million investment in the Trout Lake mine , 50 additional jobs over the next two and a half years in the construction, the deepening of the shaft there, and continued employment at the Trout Lake mine for app roximately 10 to 11 years.

My honourable friend obviously has not been aware of the tremendous success that the Mineral Explorati on Incentive Program and the Prospectors Assistance Program have meant to exploration activities in northern Manitoba and in his own constituency. Those programs, worth $10 million, are providing ever increasing levels of exploration activity with ever increasing ability to employ more and more people in the mining industry of northern Manitoba. Mr. Storie: Well, Mr. Speaker, even sending the Minister of Ener gy and Mines to purgatory and not asking que.stions has not improved his ability to answer questions.

He still cannot get to the point. 1be question was: What is going to happen to the $25 million? Is it going to go to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) to make the government of the day look good for a moment and abandon mining in the province of Manitoba, or it is going to be used in MMR to conti nue to support the properties MMR contin ues to hold, including Farley Lake and other properties they may want to acquire, may want to explore in the coming months? Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if it would be impr udent to observe that asking many quest ions does not improve my honou rable friend's ability. 1be reality of the matter is that the capital we re cover ed in the sale of Trout Lake and the

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4456 exploration propertie s that were currently part of the MMR portfolio will be utilized to reduce the losses that have oc curre d over the MMR time and existence because there have been ad vances of almost $26 million. The interest on those advances will equate to almost $55 million, and the $25 million achieved through the sale of Trout Lake will not re cover our costs since 1971 but will con tribute significantly to that . • (1 410) F1in Floo/Creighton Crisis Centre Fee-For-Service Request Mr. Jerry Storie (Fiin F1on): Mr.

Speaker, my final question is on a different subje ct, to the Min ister responsible for Family Ser vices. [intetjection] Whether it is a final , final question or not will be determined by the length of this session. It may be the final answer of this particular governmen t as well. We will know that later on today as well.

My question is: Will the Minister of Fami ly Services, when she receives a request from the F1in Flon Crisis Centre, which is reopening its doors notwithstandin g the 100 percent cut they received in funding from this government, will they be honouring the fe e-f or- service request from the crisis cen tre to continue to provide service to abused women and fami lies in crisis in the community of F1in Flo n? Ron. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr.

Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question, because it does all ow me to put on the record the good worlc that has been done in the North and the co-operation between F1in Flon and The Pas and the whole region to ensure that women who do need support through crisis intervention do receive that support. I also do want to commend F1in Flon and the community, the people in the community who · have banded tog ether around reopeni ng of the crisis centre and providing support to the women in that community. I also want to thank The Pas and F1in Flon together for worlcing out a mutual agreement . Mr.

Speaker, we will continue to work with The Pas and with F1in Flo n to ensure every woman who does need support through crisis intervention will receive that support. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Que stion s has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY Ron. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if there is leave of the House to introduce the report of the Committee on Law Amendments of this morning to report on Bills 22, 24, 27 and 31. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for those bills to report? Some Honourable Me mbers : Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave. It is agreed to.

PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Standing Committee on Law Amendments Third Report Mr. Jack Penner (Chairperson oftbe Standing Committee on Law Amendments): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Third Report of the Committee on Law Amendments. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Law Amendments presents the following as its Third Report. Your committee met on Monday, July 4, 1994, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred.

Your committee has considered: Bill 22, The Statute Law Amendment Act, 1994; Loi de 1994 modifiant diverses dispositions Ugislatives Bill 24, The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia r� duction du volume et de Ia production des d�chets Bill 27, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act; Loi modifiant le Code de Ia route Bil/31, The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Cor poration Amendment an d Income Tax

4457 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Jul y4, 1994 Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia Loi constituant en corporation le Fonds de participation des trava illeurs duMan itoba et Ia Loi de l'impot sur le revenu and has agreed to report the sa me without amendment. Mr. Penner: I move, seconded by the honourable member for La Ve rendrye (Mr. Sveins on), that the report of the commi ttee be now received. Motion agreed to. House Busin ess Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if there is leave to waive private mem bers' hour today. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the will of the House to waive private membe rs' hour today? Yes? [a greed] Government Motion Res. 4.1- Administration and Finance Department of Justice Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you might seek le ave of the House to consider the government motion listed on page 15 of the Order Paper dealing with Resolution 4.1, Administrati on and Finance, in the Estimates of the Department of Justice. Mr. Speaker: Is there lea ve to allow the honourable government House leader to introduce Resolution 4.1 which is on the Notice Paper? The notice has been filed today. [a greed] Bon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney Gener al): Mr. Speaker, I move , seco nded by the Minister of Consumer and Co1p0rate Affairs (Mr. Ernst), THAT WHEREA S on June 29, 1994, the Committee of Supply defeated Resolution 4. 1, Administra tion and Finance, in the Estimates of the Department of Justice; mAT the said resolution be reinstated in the ori ginal amount of $4,145,100.00 in the Main App ropriations, 1994. Mr.

Speaker: It ha s been moved by the honourable Attorn ey General, on behalf of the honourable government House leader, seconded by the ho nourable Minister of Consumer and Cotporate Affairs, THAT

WHEREAS on June 29, 1994, the Commi ttee of Supply def eated Resolution 4.1, Administration and Finance , in the Estimates of the Department of Justice; THAT the said resolution be reinstated in the original amount of $4,145,100.00 in the Main Appropriatio ns, 1994. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opp ortunity to speak to this resolution which reverses a deed done in this House which affected 68 civil servants in this government .

I am very pleased to take the opportunity to examine also the record of this government and say that wher e the members opposite want to make complaint s, they have that opport unity in Question Period and in debate. I am more than happy to engage in debate today around this resolution which provi des for the reinstat ement of the budget line which, as I said, affects 68 individu als. Let me start by putting on the record what I consider to be the record of this government and by putting forw ard the reco rd of this government and the very hard work of a number of those civil servants, Mr. Speaker.

I believe that the members will understand where the difficulty on their side lies and, I am sure, will agree that in fact these individuals certainly do deserve to have their money reinstated, and their positions . Let me start out with the issues that we have heard raised in this House a number of times. First of all, we have heard the issues raised around the functioni ng of the court, partic ularly the Domestic Vi olence Court.

I would just like to take some time to remind the members opposite that it was this government who took the issue of domesti c abuse and abuse within families so seriously that we set up the Domestic Vi olence Court. In setting up the Domestic Vi olence Court , we were able to develop a court which would deal with abusive situations wit hin spousal relationships or pa rtner relati onships. It would also deal with abuse between parents and children, and it would also deal with abuse of the elderl y within fam ilies.

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4458 This government, Mr. Speaker, has worlced very hard to make sure that the functioning of the Domestic Violence Court is operating in the most effi cient way and continues to improve. The court implementation team, which was set up when the Domestic Violence Court began, continu es to examine ways to make sure this court functions in its most ef fi cient way.

I can say that they are examining it from all parts of the system, that they are making sure that they are looking at not only within Courts but also Prosecutions and Corrections, and we are looking at all ways to make sure that we are making a statement to Manitobans that domestic violence is unacceptable and that we will be dealing with it in a very thorough way through our Domestic Violence Court.

I would also like to take a few moments to speak about maintenance en force ment, because this government has rec ognized that maintenance enforce ment issues are of great importance in this province, parti cula rly to the people and the children who depend upon the enfor cement. That is why this government 's record, particularly over the past two years, speaks to our commitment. I am happy to tell the House again that we have increased the st aff in the Maintenance Enforc ement area by five in the past two years; that is three who were increased last year, two additional this year. •

(1420) In addi tion we put forward approx imately $50, 000 or more towards computer enhancements, Mr. Spea ker. That allows for the re call of inform ation and the access to inf ormation to be much quicker than hand searches which were previously done , and also the money that we have put fo rward for the automated voice enhan cement. That is particularly significant because the majority of our calls are calls in which people are asking to be updated on the status of their accounts. When we move to a voice-automated system we will be able to allow access to status of accounts seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

That means that people who are interested in finding out where they stand, what their balance is, what is the amount owing and so on, will be able to do so at their conven ience. Should they actually have time at ten o'clock in the evening or seven o'clock in the morinng, they will be able to access it in a more timely way for themselves. So I am ver y pleased that we are moving towards continued improvements .

I stress that, because though I believe that we have made great improvements from the time that we have become government, we also recognize that the system is not perf ect and we will be continuing to worlc towards making it a better system. We are also very active participants in the Family Law area, which is examining issues of the amount of child custody which at the moment there is considerable concern about what should the amounts be. So that is being examined in a national committee.

I am very proud of Mani toba's lead position that we are taking in terms of making sure that we are valuable contributors in this whole area of child support. Mr. Speaker, I also said that we would be taking measures to improve the Maintenance Enf orcement. That has been somewhat misunderstood by the other side . They assume the only measure to be taken are legislative measures.

I have made it clear during the process of Estimates, in questions and answers, that those measures are also very concrete measures in the area of staffin g, in the area of computer upgrading, in the area of automated voice enhancement, in the area of our participation on the national committees. We are also meeting with Manitobans to find out what Mani tobans see as their nee ds in the area of maintenance enfor cement , so that, when we do come to make revisions in the act, we will be able to make revisions that are reflective of what Manitobans· are saying and what their concerns are. Mr.

Speaker, I am very happy to bring the members up to date again on what the progress has been in the area of maintenance enf orcement. In the area of issues that deal with aboriginal justice , I would like to inform the House again of the initiatives that the Department of Justice has und ertaken. Let us start with the policing end, beca use it wa s this gover nment that has

4459 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July4, 1994 und ertaken, with the fe deral government, to enter into First Nations policing policy. First Nations policing policy is a tripartite agree ment. It involves consultation within communities, and it allows communities, encourages communities to decide what type of policing they would like to have , and then allows the three parties to work toward that type of policing.

We have at the moment an interim agreement with the DOTC communities, but during the course of Estimates I made it clear that we are exploring with other communities across the province what a First Nations policing policy in their community would look like. I met with the Solicitor General in Ottawa on behalf of our governm ent and indicated our willingness to proceed in the First Nations policing policy and receive from him his assurances that he, too, was committed to the First Nations policing policy and the funding arrangement that the First Nations policing policy involves. Mr.

Speaker, that meeting took place, I believe , on a Thursday . By the Sunday evening we had Department of Justice staf f on the road to aboriginal communities so that meetings could begin to take place on the Monday morning. We worked very quickly in the area of meeting with those communi ties, but, as I said, it also requires a consultation process to be undertaken within their communities. We looked forwanl to signing the First Nations policing agreement, which is now being worked out in its final details with the Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council communities and otheiS as they are finalized.

The mem bers also know that last year amendments were made to allow prosecutions to take place by aboriginal people within their home communities with the support of qualified Crown attorne ys, but that allows for direct participation within communities . 1be member also knows that we have been very supporti ve of sentencing circles around the province and that there are sentencing circles now which are underway, sentencing circles which involve the whole commu nity coming together, the offender and the victim. This is currently taking place.

I am very happy this government has been able to move ahead in the whole area of the administration of justice in aboriginal communiti es, taking specific note of how those communities would like the process to go. In the area of aboriginal courts, Mr. Speaker, this requires the supp ort of the fed eral government . This requires the fe deral Liberal government to agree to its pa rticipation in moving tow ard aboriginal courts.

I asked the federal Minister of Justice in my previous meetings with him where he stood on that, where he stood in tenns of moving tow ard aboriginal cour t and what kind of agreements he was prepared to enter into. I have not yet had an answer, so we will see, the test will be: Is the fe deral Liberal government prepared to move into the aboriginal courts process? As of yet, we have not had any commitment . I would like to take a few moments now to speak about this gov ernm ent 's initiatives in the area of youth crime and violence . Mr. Speaker, this is a concern a cross Manitoba.

Issues of public safety are a concern to all Mani tobans. It is because the issues of public safety and confidence within the justice system were such a concern that this government called together the first-ever summit on youth crime and viole nce. 1be summit took place in December. It involved 500 Manitobans, over 500 Manitobans from all parts of Manitoba. It was a representative group. It included parents, teache iS, community workeiS, police officeiS, and also young people . We are very happy at the participation of young people . 1bere were over 100 young people who took

part in that summit. If we were to do another it would be great to have even greater participation, because the participation of young peo ple was very important as we arri ved at conc lusions. Flowing from the summit was a list of 700 recommendations that were appl icable to families in the smalle st group, to communitie s, to schoo ls, to government, to the Department of Justice. So we, for our

part in government, have looked very closely at what we can begin to implement, and we drew from the recommendations of Manitobans a nine-point plan.

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4460 This government , Mr. Speaker, has put forward a nine-point plan to deal with youth crime and violence , and we said from the be ginning, the nine-point plan is only a start. It is not the only things and the only initiatives that this government can do, and in fact, we have already passed the nine··point plan in terms of our initiative s. But in terms of the nine-point plan it represented a start. It represented a start that dealt with youth crime and violence both from the prevention end, also from the intervention and also from the consequences end.

Manitobans were interested in that 1bey wanted a comprehensive plan and a comprehensive view , a way to deal with youth crime and violence that dealt with all three areas. Underl ying our plans to work in the area of youth crime and violence lies legislation. 1be legislation that deals with youth crime and violence is the Young OffendeiS Act. Mr. Speaker, the Young OffendeiS Act is

an act which falls under the jur isdiction of the Gover nment of Canada, and we have made repr esen tation, our government has made representation to the Government of Canada, to the federal Minister of Justice to strengthen the Young OffendeiS Act. We put forward our position very for cefully. We were very pleased to see that the fe deral Minister of Justice has said that he will contemplate making some change s. Some of those changes are changes which we, in Manitoba, put forward very specific all y. However, that remains to be seen.

We have taken a very strong position, but it will depend upon the political will of the federal Liberal governm ent to decide if they will bring forward those changes in rea lity to the Young OffendeiS Act. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) • (14 30) Madam Deputy Speaker, I am very interested in the area of the Young OffendeiS Act because I have received large numbeiS of petitions that asked for changes in the Young OffendeiS Act. I have received over 8,000 names, and I have not had one member of the parties opposite come forward in suppo rt.

Manitobans have made themselves clear, but no support has flowe d from the members opposite . I have had no phone calls from the federal member s of Parliament who are representatives of the fe deral Liberal Party. I have had no phone calls from them that indicate that they will stand with Manitobans in the area of the Young Offenders Act, no calls at all.

So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we know where the fe deral Liberal Party and where the Liberal Party, in general, stands in the area of the Young Offenders Act, but we continue to hope that we will be able to convince them, most of all that Manitobans will convince them of the position that Manitobans expect them to take and that following that they will attempt to convince their party cousins in Ottawa that this act should be amended. So we look for their support. Also in the area of prevention, this government has said that it will be expanding the youth justice commi ttees.

I have now signed at least seven more youth justice committees into existence since the nine-point plan was ann ounced. We also ann ounced last week, Madam Deputy Speaker, the fonnation of the youth gang contact line, which is a program which again deals with the community. It is a prevention program . It will allow for those young people who do not want to be involved in youth crime to be able to speak to people who are experienced in dealing with youth gangs so that they can find a way to withdraw thems elves.

It will also allow paren ts who are concerned about their young child's activities and want to have clarification or give meaning to the activitie s that the y can phone the youth gang contact line and, again, speak to the experts and get the information that they need to assist their young pers on. Madam Deputy Speaker, in addition to the nine-point plan, we have gone further.

We have brought forward into this House changes to 1be Highway Traffic Act which deal with public safety. 1be changes to 1be Highway Tr affic Act deal with public safety to say that where we have the power to grant licences, that where people are con victed of certain Criminal Code offences including auto theft and auto vandalism that we

4461 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 will deny them a driver 's licence in the interest of public safety, because we want to have the most responsible drivers avail able to be on our highways and on our roads and our city stree ts. So we look forward to the suppor t of memb ers opposite in making sure that the amendments to The Highway Traffic Act pass, that in fact they become law in the interests of public safety for Manitobans. We also announced a gun amnesty.

Gun amnesty allows for people to turn in firearms that they no longer want or firearms which are perhaps now illegal, and they can turn them in without penalty during the specified period of time for the gun amnesty. This will allow for certain firearms now to come out of circulation. Where people do not want to have the firearms we are aware that they may not want to go to the expense of storage of those firearms, that they may not want to go to the expense of managing the firearms in the most app ropriate way, and through the gun amne sty it allows them to turn in those firearms.

It also allows them to turn in ammunition as well, so that we can help remove from possible circulation some of the guns, the firearms and the ammunition which would perhaps be then available ille gall y. So that is another one of the initiatives which we have put forward. Mada m Deputy Speaker, I would sa y underlining all of this is community involvement. We want to make sure that Manitobans are participants in the process, that Manitobans feel that they can make sure that they have confidence in the justice system, confidence in the people who work in the justice system.

That is why this government has put forwatd and woiked on and put into action the initiatives that are before you today that I have just recently spoken about. 1bese initiatives have been put forward by government, by this government , and also in preparation have been assisted, certainly in tenns of developing and making sure that all the details have been put into place , have also required the assistance of the Department of Justice : That is why I am happy to put forw ard this resolution which reverses the eff ect of a vote that was taken in this House which dealt with 68 civil servants, not just government.

I believe that confidence within the Department of Justice and certainly this government is certainly well placed due to the plans that have been put forwatd by this government. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I am rising and speaking very brie fly this afternoon on the resolution that was passed by the House last week and the resolution that is before us today. First of all, I would like the record to be set straight. The Minister of Justice was very inaccurate when she spoke about the motion.

She was inaccurate in the sense that the motion that was actually before the committee had nothing to do with the $4 million-plus in Executive Support line in the budget, in the Estimates for the Department of Justice. lbe resolution that the opp osition put forwanl dealt only with the Minist er's Sala ry and was designed to show the fact that the people of Manitoba have lost confidence in the Minister of Justice, not in the staff surrounding the Minister of Justice.

Had the Minister of Justice not filibustered the entire rest of the Estimates pr ocess, we would ha ve, Madam Deputy Speaker, been able to have a vote on the motion that had been placed before the committee, which was to reduce the Minist er's Salary, not the entire $4.1 million of Executive Support. So for the Minister of Justice to stand in the House today and accuse and put responsibility for that motion aff ecting 68 civil servants on the opposi tion benches is the height of hypocrisy. If she had not filibustered her own Estimates we would have had the vote on her salary and her salary alone .

Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like very briefly to speak about three areas of the minist er's own responsibility, of the minister 's own behaviour, and three of the many areas that we could speak on that show why we voted to reduce the Minist er's Salary, which is the way in the parliamentary procedures that we can show our

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4462 displeasure with the actions of the minister in runni ng the dep artment. The first is the Victims Assistance Fund The Victims Assist ance Fund was originally established by the previous government to provide, out of surcharges paid for by individuals found guilty of offen ces , a fund that would give money to nongovernmental agencies and organizations, to do programming for victims that was not part of the regular government 's opera tion. Madam Deputy Speaker, this Minister of Justice (Mrs..

Vodrey) was not in her current portfolio when the changes were made last session to the Victims Assistance Fund, to in effect open it up to the government 's ongoing programming, a raid. What has happened under this minist er's jurisdiction is that agencies ru;td groups that have asked upwards of two years ago for funds under the Victims Assistance Fund program have not yet heard if they are going to get funding, and if so, how much funding, and if they are getting funding, when that funding will flow. Up to two years these organizations have waited to put these programs in place.

This government has talked throughout its mandate about the need to be efficient and eff ective in the role , in the operations of government. Well, one of the best ways to allow an organizati on to be efficient and effective in the mnoing of its operations is to know what kind of funding they have available . For groups to be on tenterhooks for upwards of two years before they know that they can put a program in place or cann ot put a program in place is unconscionable and is only one example of what this government and this Minister of Justice have done to the justice system in this province.

Madam Deputy Spe aker, in August 19 91, Doro thy Pedlar produced a report that was a magn if icent report on the issues and the recomm endations surro unding domestic violence. It should have acted as a guide to all of the actions and legislation of this government. Unfortuna tely, as in many of the reports that this government has received over its six-year mandate, this report has by and large gathered dust. •

(1440) One of the recommenda tions that Dor othy Pedlar recommended or discussed in her report was the fact that there were long waiting lists and not nearly enough resources for long-ter m programming for individuals , the vast majority of whom are men who had been convicted of domestic violence assaults , to get support for their long-tenn programming. The current government has not supported long-tenn-and by that we mean six months to a ye ar-pro gramming for these abusers, since Pedlar was tabled. There has been no long-tenn programming for these individuals for over three years now.

The Minister of Justice said they are in the process of evaluating and trying to fonnulate these program s. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, we know that for a program of treatment and rehabilitation to be effecti ve for individuals who have been found guilty of domestic viol ence, you need not only short-tenn pro gramm ing, you need not only group pro gramming, you need not only probation, but you also need lo ng-term counselling, individual and group. Everyone who has ever been involved in this issue knows that to be the fact. Yet under this Minister of Justice (Mrs.

Vodrey) and her predecessor, nothing has been done in this regard. This is only one example of the many recommendations in the Pedlar report that have been honour ed in the breach not the observance. Finall y, Madam Deputy Speaker, the minister talks about all the good things that they have done in Maintenance Enforcem ent and how things are getting better and better every day. None of us are Dorothy and we are not in the land of Oz. We are in Manitoba in 1994, and every single woman who has to deal with the Maintenance Enforcement branch and the Department of Justice today knows that is a total fab rication.

There is no troth at all to the statement that things are getting better in Maintenance Enforcement. Each Maintenance Enforcement officer has between 900 and 1, 100 active cases, Madam Deputy Speaker. The officer who deals with

4463 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July4, 1994 out-of -province cases has as many as 1,700 cases . It is absolutely ludicrous. It makes absolutely no sense at all to say to a man-again, largely men are the individuals who are asked by court order to pay maintenance to their ex-wives and their children. It makes absolutely no sense to these men to tell them, you are supposed to pay X amount of dollars every month or every three months and then not have the staffing there to enforce that court older.

I would be remiss if I left any impression, Madam Deputy Speaker, that we are talking about the actual people who do the maintenance enfo rcement work from the dire ctor on down. These are dedicated people who know what needs to be done . They just do not have the resources to do it. The minister talks about the fact that they are meeting with Manitobans to see what they want in the area of maintenance enf orcement Again, this is ridiculou s. There is no need to speak with Manitobans, to meet with Mani tobans, to wait longer and longer periods of time. We know what needs to be done in maintenance enf orcement.

We know how to do it in maintenance enforcement. The only thing that is lacking is the will to put in place the resources, both human and financial, to actu ally make maintenance enforcement work. On those three issues, Madam Deputy Speaker, three out of hundreds, the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodre

y) must take responsibility for her lack of action, her actions that do not meet the demands and the nee ds of the people of Manitoba For those three reasons, if for no others, we put fo rwanl the resolution in commit tee that the Minister's Salary be reduced. Again I would like to state emphati cally that our resolution did not take into account, did not say anything of a negative nature about the civil serv ants that were involved in the minist er's Executive Support line.

The Minister of Justice knows full well that is the case, and she is playing some sort of sophomoric game with the House if she thinks we do not know that and the civil servants involved do not know that as well. Thank you. Mr. Gary Kowalski (Th e Maples): Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise to speak to this resolution . I also want to add my comments about the 68 civil servants . The spectre has been raised that they will lose pay or salary. To raise that spectre and use that to frighten peop le, I disa gree with.

We know that, because the minister filibustered when we had an opportunity to vote on the minister 's perf ormance , that opp ortunity was taken aw ay. This is why our caucus has gone this route, because we were denied the opportunity to vote on the minister's perf ormance. Now , the minister 's performance-this is a way of commenting on that.

Overall, there are many things this Justice minister has done that are positive and I would do as a Justice minister, but it is the tone and the message, the tone of retribution, of punishment, of survival of the fittest that has been presented by this Justice minister that I disa gree with. One of the things that continually has happened in this session is that the Justice minister has been very offensive as opp osed to defensive when answering qu�ons and pointed to the opposition as for our viewpoint .

We are not government, not yet, and for the minister to continue to stand-we had every possible forum that we put our views forw anl. The minister went on about her record and her perf ormance. I can honestl y say that the Justice minister's perf ormance, I have not seen any worse than any of the other ministers ' and the vote of confidence or nonconfidence will be taken by the electorate in an upcoming election. That was an appropriate place to do th is, but it is the prerogative of the oppos ition. which was exercised by the member for SL Johns (Mr.

Mackintosh) by putting a motion forwanl to reduce the Minister 's Salary. That is his prero gative . The opportuni ty to do that was taken away by the filibuster. One of the things that has repeatedly come up in this session is comments in reg ard to judicial independenc e. I asked a question in Estimates in relation to the reassignment of one judge , and I was taken to task for askin g the question. Yet, as I said, as a police officer of many years, I put

July4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4464 questions to many innocent people . If they were innocent, they need not have any guilt and they should not fe ar a question that was given with good intent, with a sense of duty to perform a task , a duty that had to be done . A member of this Legislature to put questions to the ministers is not only a duty but a responsibility. When I receive a copy of a report of the Provincial Court Judges Association of Manitoba to the Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judge s at St. Johns, Newf oundland, dated September 21, 19 93.

When I read in that report: In the race to succeed as Canada 's harshe st tormentor of provincial judges, the province ·of Manitoba wins hands down. No matter that their gold medal has lost some of its lustre as the system of justice in Manitoba crashes down about their hea ds, they have reigned in on the one branch of government that does consider itself independent, and it makes them fe el warm all over. The backlogs grow; morale has sunk to an all-time low. No longer do pro vincial judges run to the rescue as they did three years ago, whe n they worlced long hours to reduce horrendous caseloads.

The governm ent of the day cares not a whit about our lot. • (1 450) That report was written by Judge Ronald Mey ers, the provincial representative, to that body. When I see later Judge Meyers is reassigned, to ask that question, there is nothing sinister to ask if this report had anything to do with his reassignment I think it is a responsibility and a duty as oppos ition to keep an eye and monitor the government. So, as I said, what we are voting on here, it is not the 68 civil servants who, even if the government was def eated, would continue to get paid. We are not even voting on the minist er's perform ance.

What we are voting on here is the process, that we did not have an opportunity to indicate our assessment of the minister 's performance in itself because the minister filibustered during Estimates. With those few comm ents, I will not reiterate on and on about the other justice initiatives that we have talked about in Estimates, we have talked about in Question Period, we talked about in committee . Why repeat them? It is a very simple matter. This is a vote about proc ess, and we did not have the opportunity because the minister abused the proc ess. No, pardon me , I withdraw that.

The minister took advantag e of the process by filibustering in Estimates so we never had a chance to vote on that matte r. That is what this vote will be about. Thank you. Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupert sland): Madam Deputy Speaker, I too would like to take this opportunity to put a fe w re marlcs on record with relation to the inaction of this government with respect to the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. I think that all members of this House know that the previ ous government, the NDP government, in 19 88, following the shooting death of J.J.

Harper, enacted the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry to examine the administration of justice and aboriginal peoples in this province . That report was subsequently tabled in 1991. We are just now about a month or two away from its third anniversary and still no action on the part of this government with respect to developing any partnerships with the aboriginal organizations to enact the major recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry . I have asked questions in this House of the Justice minister with respect to the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, but the re sponse that I received was not sufficient.

I would like to again reiterate what my honourable friend for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) was talking about. It is not simply an opp ortunity for us to vote against the department or the number of civil servants that was mentioned earlier but simply the inaction of this minister in fully implemen ting the recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have roughly 293 rec ommendations contained in the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, in Volume 1, and out of the 293, about 10 1 of them rela te directly with the province.

It was the hope of the First Nations community and also the Metis communities of this province that this province would take a leading role in being able to do something meaningful with

4465 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 respect to the administra tion of justice and how it affe cts aboriginal people in this province of Manitoba. Of the ap proximately 60,000 First Nations people resident in this province and are curre ntly residing on reserves, roughly 40 percent of them live in off -reserve environments , in places like Wm nipeg, and we have also the Metis people who account for about 80,000 of our over all population.

In total, the aboriginal population of Manitoba is only something like 10 percent to 11 percent, yet it is aboriginal people who constitute the most in the correctional institutions, including the fe deral system, where we have in the Stony Mountain Institution, at any given time, about 60 percent are our people being incarcerated there .

As well, we have places like Headingley, where we have our people overly repr esented, the Da uphin Correctional centre, the Portage Correctional centte, The Pas Correctional centre and even the women 's correctional centre in Portage Ia Prairi e, badly overrepresented by aboriginal people, and that is truly unfortunate.

In the meantime , aboriginal people are always talked about in a negative way, that they are a burden to the tax-paying community, but, Madam Deputy Speaker, what we fa il to consider is that the people in these institutions are in fact contributing to the tax-paying community by employing jail guards, by employing probation off icer s , by employing parole off icers, by employing other people who are involved in a correctional system and in the overall justice system. It is unfortunate, as well, that aboriginal people are also the ones who fill up the co urtroo ms of this province for whatever reason.

One only has to look at the ma jor recommendations of the Aboriginal Just ice Inquiry and have a look at the socioeco nomic conditions of aboriginal people, and they will soon realize why our people are so grossly overrepresented in the court system and also in the jails of this prov ince.

In 1992, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, the Manitoba Metis Federation, the Indigenous Women 's Collective and the Aboriginal Council of Winnipeg jointly considered the Province of Manitoba's official response to the report of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry of Manitoba, and as a result, the four groups that I mentioned expressed their profound disappointment with the limited vision and political will reflected in the prov ince 's response .

At the time of the release of the AJI report in August 1991, the Minister of Justice at that time stated that in the past government had done things to aboriginal people, then did things for aboriginal people, and now intends to work with aboriginal people . We fe el that this government, Madam Deputy Speaker, and their current position on aboriginal ref orm would seem to indicate that it intends to continue to do things to aboriginal people.

Unfortunately, as we await the third anniversary of the release of the report, still nothing concrete has been talked about and not even a mention of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry in Manitoba. Yes, I have beard about some aboriginal just ice initiatives in Hollow Water, St. The resa Point, Lizard Point or otherwise known as Waywayseecappo, the Northern Fly-In Sports Camps , which were highly prai sed by the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry co mmissi oners, but in the meantime there are a lot of things that have to be done .

There were four things that the aboriginal organizations in Manitoba were concerned about when the inaction of this government became app arent There was the lack of consultation with aboriginal organizations in reaching a policy position on the An recommen dations, and a proposed process for further study of the issues, which further pushes aboriginal people to the margins of priority setting and decision making, was not a consideration.

Also, this government that has acce pted the recognition of the inherent right to self-gove rnment simultaneously refuses to recognize one of the most vital components of inherent jurisdiction, and that is the right of jurisdiction over justice. According to aboriginal people, those two are indivisible; also, the fa ilure to recognize that justice for aboriginal people must

July4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4466 be founded on principles and practical measures that will re dre ss present social and economic inequalities faced by aboriginal people . The leadership of Manitoba has always said and continues to maintain that they are prepared to be responsible , flexible and determined in seeking justice for aboriginal people . Accordingly, they would like to work with a government that is committed toward this goal, provided that the following principles form the basis of that relationship, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Fll'St of all, full and equal participation in defining objectives and decision making in the process to develop policy in the area of aboriginal justice. The province must abandon its unilateral position and ensure the means for full, equal participation.

As well, the recogn ition of the inherent right to self-governm ent and aboriginal jurisdiction over justice and establishment of an open process of dialogue on substantive matters between the gover nment and aboriginal government repr esenta tive s, and this must include full disclosure of the governm ent's position on all AJI recommendations and a rationale for these positions. • (1. 500) Theref ore, it was in 1992 that the aboriginal organizations challenged this cmrent government to reconsider its position on aboriginal justice issues and encourage them to recognize their responsibility to join aboriginal organizations in a partnership to begin the process of bringing about si gnificant and fundamental reform in a relationship between our peoples.

At the same time, the area of policing was very much one of the major recomm endations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry , and the Da kota Ojibway Tribal Council was the police force that was kind of highlighted and used as a model to recommend the policing of aboriginal people over their own people in the report. Discussions are curre ntly happening with this government and the fed eral government, Madam Deputy Speaker, with respect to a policing agreement, a First Nations policing policy between the Government of Canada, the provinces and the First Nations in question.

Unfortunately, thi s gover nment and Newfoundland are the only two governments in Canada that have not moved on this policing initiative over First Nations comm unities. We feel that is not appropri ate, and we have asked questions on the Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council policing initiatives. The responses that we have received in this House have been, to say the least, inappropriate and not accurate and also not reflective of the true situ ation that does exist in the DOTC comm unities.

In fact, for the record, there was a period of time this past winter that many in these communi ties, and many of the elders that live in the eight Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council communi ties, were afraid to go outside because of the lack of law and order in their communities because of the absence of the DOTC police force . There were times this winter as well, Madam Deputy Speaker, where the RCMP did not respond to calls from First Nations communities that are under the DOTC.

Now what we have last heard is that the province is cmre ntly in dialogue with the Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council police force with respect to policing. We certainly encourage that, but to date , as was recommended by the AJI, and what the federal government is committed to, a national aboriginal policing policy or a First Nations policing policy has not been adopted by this government. That is truly unfortunate.

The Aboriginal Justice Inquiry report, it is becomi ng apparent that it was-and all Manitobans should be proud of this extensive report that was carried out by Justice Hamilton and Judge Murray Sinclair over the course of three years. All Manitobans should be proud that it took an exhaustive review of the situation faced by aboriginal people with relation to the justice system that often weighs against them .

It is the most comprehensive report that one will find of the aboriginal situation in this country and peihaps in North America, and Manitoba should be proud of thaL On the other hand, this government should be

4467 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July4, 1994 ashamed of itself for not acting upon the recommen dations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. The Aboriginal Justice initiative that talked about an aboriginal court model has not been acted upon between the Manitoba Asso ciation of Friendship Centre s, the Aboriginal Council of Winni peg, Indigenous Wo men's Collect ive, Manitoba Metis Federation and the Assembly of Manit oba Chiefs. We are eagerly awaiting the outcome of those initiatives and those discussions that began at one time.

What we are talking about here, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that aboriginal people be given the opportunity to expre ss themselves and play a meaningful role on matters that concern their lives . I think it is unfortunate that the previous minister and this minister have not rendered that respect to First Nations people and other aboriginal people in this province, that they do in fact speak on behalf of the communities that they are elected to represent, as are all members of this House , to represent their constituencies.

It is with regret that I am unable to report to my constituents that this government has moved on any of the recommenda tions of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. In the meantime, we have heaid about some initiati ves, as I said in my earlier remarks, in Hollow Water, St. Theresa Point, and we commend the government for that. However, the major recommendations and how we correct the situation of aboriginal people in conflict with the justice system in this province have not been even touched upon. That to me is truly unfortunate .

I would like to take this opp ortunity at this time to thank members of this House for all owing me the opportuni ty to speak on this matte r. Of cou rse, I speak against the resolution before this House. Thank you. Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Deputy Speaker, I think it is a shame that the minister is not listening to the remarks of the member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson).

I think that is a very unf ortunate symbo l of this governme nt's lack of attention to aboriginal issues , in fac t, the issues of Manit obans, because that is what they are, and the point of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry recommendations . I think the member for Rupertsland provides an invaluable bridge between aboriginal peoples and this government, a bridge that I am afraid this government has not even begun to cross, as they have fai led to reach out to aboriginal peoples, they have failed to do what was their obvious task, and that was to begin to implement the recommendations of that inquiry report.

As I said, Madam Deputy Spea ker, in my remarks the other day in Supply, this motion is a result of the opp ositio n's lack. of confidence and our censure of the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey). The reason that the caucus came to the conclusion that we must vote in the way we did came because of the minister's inaction and inability on several fronts. Abo riginal issu es-that was one of them.

Another one was the lack. of priority given to the issues confronted by women in Man itoba, their fa milies, children, and finally , the minist er's inability to deal with rising violent youth crime, car theft and vandalism, and our frustration that this minister puts on a few bells and whistles here and there thinking that will somehow fool Manitobans into believing that the government is taking action to deal with youth crime, while at the same time, this government has created an environment which has worsened the plight of youth, which has increased the hopelessness of youth, which has taken away the little supports famil ies and youth have en joyed. 1bere is a cause and effect.

You reap what you sow, Madam Deputy Speaker. This government fails to understand that. It fails to understand that when you take away recreational activities from youth, for example, at the friendship centres in Manitoba, which have had to reduce their youth wolkers, you have as a result an increase in youth crime. This government will do everything it can to look at the short-term bottom line , and the consequence is obvious. 1be statistics for violent off ences, 170 percent increase in auto theft in the last year alone, overcrowding at the Youth Centre- there are

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4468 sometimes as many as 230 youth housed in a fa cility designed for 150. You look at the backlogs in the court which this government cannot manage. In fac t, it just gets worse all the time. It bought off judges so they cannot manage it through a secret back-room deal .

It required the courts to close down during the summer months , resulting in a loss of 200 court sitting days over the course of the summer alone, in Winnipeg alone. • (1510 ) So as Manitobans fa ce increasing youth crime, the government comes out with a bell and a whistle here and there, amendment to The Highwa y Traffic Act I would be amazed if it has much, if any, deterrent effect at all. It came out with its nine-point plan, and it is to this very day exactly that, a plan. It has only put in place a phone line.

You can imagine, after the summit on youth violence and crime held in Decem ber -what is that, about sev en months ago-and so me tremendous recommendat ions-over 700 of them-what does the government have to show for it? A phone line . It turned its ba ck on all of those recom mendations that talked about increasing support for famil ies and youth, on prevention. I remember the co-ordinator of that summit saying that it was virtually unanim ous from all of the working groups that there has to be a new era of youth and family supports in this provin ce.

We have to prevent crime because dealing with it after just does not ma ke us safer, Madam Deputy Speaker. Now one thing I am glad to see was not implemented from the nine-point plan, the minister announced military boot camps. Of course, now she says, oh, I never said that. Well , it is right here in the document dated February 17, because at the time she ann ounced that, she did not have a clue, I do not believe , about the U.S. experience and the fact that actually that kind of correction model further threatens the safety of Mani tob ans.

This minister, attempting to push a few buttons and put so me bells and whistles on; announced to Manitobans a policy which would further threaten our safet y. She announced increased police surveillance of ga ng members. We ll, no thanks to this government, the City of Winnipeg po lice , on their own, created a youth gang unit-no thanks to this government, Madam Deputy Speaker. She talked about a council so there can be input from young Mani tobans. I do not know the whereabouts of that council. She talked about expanding the ma ndate of the youth justice co mmitt ees. I have not seen any ma ndate expanded.

She takes credit today for there being seven new youth justice commit tees in Manitoba -we ll, no thanks again to this government . She talked about esta blishing a provincial council on youth crime. There is no provincial council on yo uth crim e. These were plans announced on February 17. It is summer. It is July. We have backlogs , Madam Deputy Speaker, in the youth court which as of today have now been documented reaching up to one year, worsened by the fact that the courts will be closed for up to 200 sitting days this summer.

I do not know where we are going with this problem of rising violent youth crime and auto theft and vandalis m, but I will tell you, Manitobans, people in my neighbourhood are fed up with it; I am fe d up with it. Yet, the minister just keeps on with a bell and a whistle here and there, failing to deal with the real issue. When will this government, as a who le, the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) as well , the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Public Insurance Corp ora tion (Mr. Cummin gs), the Fust Minister (Mr.

Filmon) and others in the cabinet look at rising youth crime as a result, as a symptom flowing from this government 's policies over the last six years? Fina lly, I wanted to just again reiterate our concern, our regret about this minister 's policies that aff ect particularly women. We have talked about the Maintenance Enforcement office. That office is essential to maintain famil ies, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is bani enough, and I know this from first-hand exper ience, raising a fam ily without a partner.

The difficulties that can fol low from death have been my experience, but that is compounded when one raises a family fol lowing

4469 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July4, 1994 divorce and separation, and the financial abuse that can be perpetrated against women in Manitoba is intensified by this government 's failure to put in place effective maintenance enf orcement poli cies. We have backlogs in the Domestic Violence Court that we have talked about throughout this session. My understanding is they are getting no better. We know of waits of up to 18 months to deal with child abuse cases . We know that the government is going to offload victims services onto communities in seven Manitoba towns and village s.

All of this toge ther has led to our caucus seriously having to consider moving to reduce the Minis ter's Salary to $1, and subsequently, as a result of the minister talking out this motion, our decision to, in our parliamentary way, show Manitobans that we cannot tolerate this minister 's app roach to the issues that I have outlined, and we must ce nsure this minister 's actions. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): I too want to put some comments on the record reflecting the speakers before me. My colleague for The Maples (Mr.

Kow alski) has spoken about our dissatisf action with the ministe r's choice of a strategy to mount a one-person filibuster and to talk out the Estimates clock in anticipation that the members would be denied the opportuni ty to vote. He has spoken about our dismay with the process. I want to speak about my personal dismay on the content of what the minister said to fill up those minutes as she talked down the clock, when I heard that vicious and ill-deserved attack on the young people of Manitoba, a further evidence of the blame -the-vic tim mentality which is so characteristic of this government.

She spoke of the rising tide of youth crime, about how the public is clamouring for a get-tough ap proach to youth crime and violence . 1his is completely unconscionable for several reasons. First of all, statistically there is no increase in youth crime and viole nce. In fact, 85 percent of violent crime is committed by adult men. The victims are commonly women and children and, of course, each other. Yet, day after day after day, we do not read in our public press an attack on adult men. We read about an attack on young people.

I am finding it extr emely troubling that the government continues to blame kids for adult failures, particularly in the presence of statistical evidence that youth crime is not on the incre ase. It should trouble us to be part of turning public sentiment against young pe ople . They have enough to deal with without us blaming them for our problems and for leading the attack. As well, I would like to speak on the commitment made in the throne speech to improve the maintenance enforce ment system .

We were promised that there would be activities taken to ensure that money was flowing to families in a timely and expedient way. Yet, what have we seen? We have seen a commitment to a voice mail system, to further depersonalizing the contact between the mothers who so desperately need money to raise their children and the people in the public who are there to serve them . We have had some indication that there will be some improvements to the physical facility so at least when people go there they can discuss their family situation with some de gree of dignity.

But still we see no significant commitment to improving the reso urces put toward the collection of maintenance enforcem ent nor the willingness to use any of the methods that have been chosen by other jurisdictions to make payers aware that this province takes its court orders seriously. We have seen evidence in other jurisdictions of denial of drivers licences, of hunting licences, and of more expedient garnishment of earned income . There have been many other activities taken in many other jurisdictions that this province refuses to even consider.

In the meantime, our costs go up and up, as do the emotional and the financial costs and the burden to the families. We cannot any longer accept these sort of hollow appro aches to improvements as meaning anything of significance, meaning anything that would make a difference to the families of Manitoba. So, as a consequence , we will stand

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4470 against the resolu tion and will vote against the proposal being put fo rward. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is the motion moved by the honourable Minister of Con�umer and Cotporate Affairs (Mr. Ernst): THAT

WHEREAS on June 2 9 , 19 94, the Committee of Supp ly def eated Resolution 4.1, Administration and Finance, in the Estimates of the Department of Justice; THAT the said resolution be reinstated in the original amount of $4, 14 5 ,10 0 in the Main Appr opriations, 1994. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed] An Honourable Member: On division. Madam Deputy Speaker: On division. The corre ction for the record is the motion was moved by the honourable Attorney General (Mrs. Vodrey). • (1 520) Bon.

Jim Ernst (Government House Lea der): Madam Deputy Sp eaker, would you now call Report Stage on the bills as listed in the Order Paper. REPORT STAGE Bill 2-The Prescription Drugs Cost Assistance Amendment and Pharmaceutical Amendment Ad Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Manness ), that Bill 2, The Prescription Drugs Cost Assistance Amendment and Phann aceutical Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur 1 'aide � 1 'achat de m6dicaments sur ordonnance et Ia

Loi sur les pharmacies), reported from the Standing Committee on Law AmendmentS, be con curred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 3- The Cancer Trea tment and Research Foundation Amendment Act Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. De:dcach), that Bill 3, The Cancer Treatment and Rese arch Foundation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Fondation de traitement du cancer et de recherche en canc6rologie ), reported from the Sta nding Committee on Law Amend ments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 4- The Energy and Consequential Amendments Ad Bon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Education (Mr. Manne ss), that Bill 4, The Energy and Consequential Amendments Act;

Loi sur 1 '6nergie et apportant des modifications correlativ es, as amended and reported fr om the St anding Committee on Law Amendments, be con curred in . Motion agreed to. Bill 5-'lbe ffighway Traffic Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Lea der): On behalf of the Minister of Highways (Mr. Fin dlay), I move, seconded by the Mini ster of Rural Development (Mr.

De:dcach), that Bill S, The Highway Traffic Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant le Code de la route et app ortant des modifications correlatives), as amended and reported from the St anding Committee on Economic Development, be con curred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 7-'lbe Crown Lands Amendment Act Bon. Albert Drie dger (Minister of Natural Resources) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Pramik), that Bill 7, The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les terres domania les),

4471 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 reported fr om the Standing Committee on Economic Development be con curre d in. Motion agreed to. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) Bill S- The Fisheries Amendment Act Bon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik), that Bill S, The Fisheries Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia pech e), reported fr om the St anding Committee on Economic Develo pment be conc urred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 9-- The Convention Centre Corporati on Amendment Act Bon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Spe aker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 9, The Convention Centre COJ:poration Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia COiporation do Centre des congres), reported from the Sta nding Committee on Economic Development be conc urred in. Motion agreed to. Bill lO-The Wlldlif e Amendment Act Bon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resonrces) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik), that Bill lO, The Wildlife Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia conservation de Ia fanne ), reported from the Standing Committee on Economic Development be conc urred in. Motion agreed to. Bill li- The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government Honse Leader) : I move, seco nded by the Minister of Family Ser vices (Mrs. Mitchels on), that Bill 11 , The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur I' Assembl6e 16gislative ), reported from the Standing Committee on Economic Development be con curred in. Motion agreed to. Bi11 12-The Provincial Auditor's Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government Honse Leader) : I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), that Bill 12, The Provin cial Auditor's Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le v6rificateur provincial ), reported fro m the Standing Committee on Economic Development be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 13- The Condominium Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelso n), that Bill 13, The Condominium Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les condominium s), reported fro m the Standing Committee on Economic Development, be conc urred in. Motion agreed to. •

(1530) Bill 14- The Real Estate Brokers Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelso n), that Bill 14, The Real Estate Brokers Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les courtiers en immeubl es), reported from the Sta nding Committee on Economic Development, be con curre d in . Motion agreed to. Bill IS-The Law Society Amendment Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Lea der): On behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey), I move, seco nded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchels on), that Bill l5, The Law Society Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Soci6t6 du Bmeau), reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments , be con curred in. Motion agreed to.

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4472 Bill 16- The Provincial Court Amendment Act Mr. Gord Mackintosh (SL Johns) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg ), THAT Bill 16 be amended in the prop osed subsection 37(2) as set out in

section 6 of the Bill, (

a) in the part preceding clause (a), by striking out "six" and substituting "five"; (

b) in clause (

a) by striking out "thre e" and substituting "two"; (

c) by striking out clause (b); (

d) by adding the foll owing after clause (c): (

d) one person who shall be the chairperson of the council, who is not a lawyer, judge or retired judge, appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in-Council on the recommendation of the Standing Committee of the Assembly on Privileges and Elections. Motion p resen ted. Mr. Mackintosh: Essentially, this amendment is to e nsure that the Judicial Council be comprised of a m�ority of laypersons , not judges.

The last Attorney General and the current Attorney General have gone around this province, and particularly fo llowing the Judge Allen and the Judge McD onald matters , have promised Manitobans that judges would be made more accounta ble to the public of Manitoba, and Manitobans welcomed that announcement, and they looked fo rward to these amendments to The Provincial Court Act, only to find in them a change which did not make judges more accountable to the public whatsoever. In fa ct, it made judges more accountable to themselv es, Mr. Speaker.

For the first time in Man itoba, the Judicial Council , which is the disci plining body responsible for looking into charges of misconduct of provincial judges , was comprised of a majority of judges. It is a majority because three of the members are to be out-of-province pr ovincial court judges, three to be non judges, the chair is to be a judge, and in the event of a tie, that chair gets a second casting vote . Now, Mr.

Speaker, there have been concerns expressed in Manit oba, particularly over the last year about the lack of accountability of judges to the public, and those con cerns emanate especially from remarks that have been made from the bench from time to time reflecting on women and aboriginal people , in particular. Manitobans are concerned about, what we can call, the society of judges.

Manitobans recognize that judges do not, as they would like , reflect the diversity of Manitoba, do not always have the sensitivity that Manitobans would like to see to the issues, particularly to the challenges fa cing aboriginal peopl es, people from dif ferent backgrounds, new Canadians, and fa cing women. It was thought that the amendments to the act would make a step towards greater accountability to the public and greater sensitivity on the part of judges to those special challenges that many Manitobans fa ce. In committee, Mr.

Speaker, the minister attempted to change the argument from a political one to a legal one. What she said was for there to be independence of the judiciary there had to be a majority of judges on the Judicial Council. After some debate with the minister, I still fail to underst and the rationale for that argument. Certain ly, judges must be indep endent in their daily decision making from the governm ent of the day . That has been clea rly set out in some decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, Valente in particular, and indeed has been the subject of considerable discussion in the public fo nnn today.

When it comes to discipline, surely the independence of the judiciary does not mean that judges can only judge themselves. The public input is critical. I think so long as the government of the day does not govern the discipline process, independence of the judiciary will be maintained. In fact, in Manit oba since 1972, there has never been a majority of judges on the Judicial Council. The Law Ref orm Commission, in its report of 19 89, did not recommend that the judicial council be comprised mainly of judges, and it is indeed unfortunate that the governm ent today decided that

4473 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 we should have an enhanced power for judges -instead of a greater accountability to the publ ic, have greater accoun tability of judges to themselve s. If in fact the minister can advise of a

section in the Constitution, can advise of some decision on point, then I will say I am wron g, but there is no such section. There is no decision known to me, to Manitobans, which would prohibit a majority on the Judicial Council being comprised of the public. Judges of the Provinci al Court hear, I believe , between 80 and 90 percent of the cases in this province . They are instrumental in affecting not only public policy but individuals and famil ies, particularly since the advent of the Charter of Rights and Freed oms. *

(1540) I think Canadians and Manitobans are looking more and more to the judiciary to solve many of the challenges and many of the disputes that exist in our community. This is not the time, I submit, to go backward and make judges more accountable to themselves. It is time to step forward. In the self-governing professions-of which the judiciary is not one-there is a marked move toward greater participation by the public on the discipline bodies and for good reason. But, unlike those self-governing prof essions, the power of judges expands well beyond affecting individuals. It affects public policy.

So this motion is moved to reduce by one the number of Provincial Court judges on their disci pline body. It removes a lawyer from the discipline body because, Mr. Speaker, we fail to unde rstand why a lawyer who has appeared before a judge and may appear before a judge in the future who was the subject of a complaint, whose firm has appe ared before a judge and whose finn is likely to appear before a judge in the future, and a la wyer who is part of that soc iety in the administration of justice who has, at a minimum, a perceived bias should take

part in the discipline process affecting judges. The test, Mr. Speaker, is the public perception. Will the public perceive that justice is done, that discipline is done in a wholly unbiased way?

What the amendments do finally is, instead of the lawyer position, it creates a new position, that of chairperson, who is appointed by the process est ablished under such le gislation as The Ombudsman Act, The Provincial Audit or's Act and by precedent dealing with the chief electoral officer and the Clerk of the House so that this Assemb ly, not the government of the day, but this Assembly through a public process will appoint a chair person. I commend the amendment to the House, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : Mr. Speaker, I will speak against the amendment.

We covered these issues in the committee. As the member knows, this is a bill which does allow for increased accountability in the area of judges. It is an improvement. It is what this government had promised to bring forward. This was developed in consultation with the public. There was an opportunity to speak with many groups and to explain exactly how this new process would operate . The bill as it stands makes improvements in that instead of simply having one system of the judicial council, it separates the adjudicative and the investigative function. That is a very important change. However, Mr.

Speaker, the issue that the member speaks about, that is, the composition of the council, is one in which he overlooks the very important matter of judicial independe nce. This is not a partisan issue. I would remind the member that Ontario and the Attorney General of Ontario, when Ontario brought forward their legislation, have recognized also the importance of the number of judges who sit on the judicial council and that they must have a majority in order to meet the requirements of judicial independ ence. I also, Mr.

Speaker, would refer the member and members op posite to the comments of Justice Sopinka of the Supreme Court in his comme nts. He also made comments about the requirement of having judges to have the majority of members to meet the requirements of judicial independe nce. It is also the opinion of the Department of Justice. It

July 4, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4474 is also the opinion of this government as we bring forward this bill. Mr. Speaker, throughout all of the discussion, I have believed that the member is willing to put this legislation and this process at risk . It is very important that this bill be brought forward in a way that we believe is constitutionally sound to do the work that it is required to do, and in order to have this bill meet the requirements that make it constitutionally sound, we believe that it requires that judges have a majority on the Judicial Council. Mr.

Speaker, let me speak about how this council is organized. The council does have three judges, but they are three judges from outside of the Province of Manitoba, because we recognize the difficulty the judges would have in terms of making decisions about one of their own pee rs. So we came through discussion and agree ment with western prov inces, and they have agreed, the Province of Alberta, Br itish Columbia, Saskatchewan, the Northwest Territories to provide judges.

Manitoba will only be responsible for the expenses of the judges while they are here, and those judges will continue to be paid their salaries in their home jurisdiction. So that brings an amount of independence which I believe is important. Mr. Speaker, the council will also have two lay people on its committee, and that is important because the views of Manitobans who are also a party to the ju stice system should also be represented. Yes, there is another member, the sixth member, who is a lawyer. Mr.

Speaker, I would remind the member that in the whole judicial process, it involves the judiciary, it involves lawyers and it also involves the public. The way this committee has been set up is one in which all three of the participants in the justice system are represented, and we believe that it is also constitutionally sound based on the kinds of traditional accountability bills brought forward in other pro vinces, based on comments by Justice Sopinka of the Supreme Court. The member sa ys that the Law Ref orm Commission did not recommend this particular grouping on the Judicial Council. That is true.

That report came in around 1989, but since that time there have been cases which have been bef ore the Supreme Court in which judicial independence has been a very important matter, and in reviewing the cases that have gone bef ore the Supreme Court, other legislation across Canada, the requirements for this bill to be constitutionally sound, we maintain that the bill as it stands is going to be an effective one for Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, the member also speaks about judges, and he seems to group them en bloc.

He seems to make an assumption from the very beginning that all judges will vote together very specif ically. Well, I do not think that he can necessarily make that assumption. We believe that the judges who will be coming to sit on this very important council will be making their decision based on the facts bef ore them , as will all members of the council. So we would rej ect the amendment brought forward by the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh). We believe that the bill, as I said, as it has been put forward, meets the concerns that have been raised around judicial accountability.

It splits the investigative and adjudicative function to make it fair. It allows for representation of all parties of the justice system. It follows also the kinds of issues that were of concern when other provinces brought forward this. It pays attention to comments by a justice of the Supreme Court. Mr. Speaker, we would rej ect the amendments . We would speak against them, and we believe the bill, as it stands as was passed in committee, is one which we would recommend to the House . Mr.

Gary Kowalski (The Maples): I would like to add just a few comme nts speaking to this amendment There are some positive elements in this amendment. One of the positive elements is striking off clause (b). I agree with the member for St. Johns' (Mr. Mackintosh) arguments in favour of that Also, in his new proposed

section (d), the way in which the person who is not a lawyer, judge or retired judge would be app ointed, I think is a

4475 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 4, 1994 positive step, and I think that could have been in the original legislation. But I cann ot support this amendment and the main reason is the judicial independ ence. We have arguments from the Law Refonn Commission and from a number of other sources-my natural instinct, my natural position would be to have more nonla wyers, non judges on the council, but we have legal op inions , we have opinions that say it would fall through a Charter of Rights, a constitutional argument. If the member for St.

Johns had legal opinions to the contrary, I wish they would have been presented along with this amendment. But from the briefing from the minister that we had prior to this bill being presented in the House, from the research that was done, my understanding is that there must be a majority of judges on this council in older to meet constitutional requirements. So for that reason we cann ot support this amendment. Mr. Speaker: Is it the ple asure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: No. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment will please say yea.

Some Honourable Members : Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. • (15 50) Formal Vote Mr. Mackintosh: Yeas and Nays. Mr. Speaker : A recor ded vote having been requested, call in the members. The question bef ore the House is the proposed amendment to Bil1 16 at the Report Stage . It had been moved by the honourable member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackint osh), sec onded by the honourable member for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg), that Bil1 16 be amended. All those in fa vour of the amendment will please rise.

Division A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: Yeas Ashton, Barrett, Cerilli, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Friesen, Lath /in, Mackintosh, Mal oway, Martindale, Plohman, Reid, Robinson, Santos, Schellenberg, Storie, Wowchuk. Nays Carst airs , Cumm ings, Da cquay, De rkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme, Edwards, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gaudry, Gilleshammer, Gray, Helwer, Kowalski, Lam oureux, Laur endeau , Mann ess,

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-5-60a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 5th hansardpdf 60a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	f7a4648043ea8d733226066b80c7cf12f8623a7d

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