Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 33 (39th Legislature, 2nd Session)

39-2-33

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LX No. 33 – 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, April 30, 2008 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P.

DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P.

SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

1389 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, April 30, 2008 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYER Mr. Speaker: Order. I'd like to advise the House that Hansard from yesterday morning has been distributed. However, the Hansard from yesterday afternoon will not be available to members until tomorrow. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 38–The Balanced Budget, Fiscal Management and Taxpayer Accountability Act Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak), that Bill 38, The Balanced Budget, Fiscal Management and Taxpayer Accountability Act;

Loi sur l'équilibre budgétaire, la gestion financière et l'obligation de rendre compte aux contribuables, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Selinger: I'm pleased to introduce the bill which will require government to keep one comprehensive set of books and audited financial statements for Manitobans that are consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 37–The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Premier (Mr. Doer), that Bill 37, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act;

Loi sur l'inscription des lobbyistes et modifiant la Loi électorale, la

Loi sur le financement des campagnes électorales, la

Loi sur l'Assemblée législative et la

Loi sur la Commission de régie de l'Assemblée législative, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this bill is our latest step in modernizing and enhancing the democratic process in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] PETITIONS Dividing of Trans-Canada Highway Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: The seven-kilometre stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway passing through Headingley is an extremely busy stretch of road, averaging 18,000 vehicles daily. This

section of the Trans-Canada Highway is one of the few remaining stretches of undivided highway in Manitoba, and it has seen more than 100 accidents in the last two years, some of them fatal. Manitoba's Assistant Deputy Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation told a Winnipeg radio station on October 16, 2007, that when it comes to highways projects the provincial government has a flexible response program, and we have a couple of opportunities to advance these projects in our five-year plan.

In the interests of protecting motorist safety, it is critical that the dividing of the Trans-Canada Highway in Headingley is completed as soon as possible. We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows: To request the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) to consider making the completion of the dividing of the Trans-Canada Highway in Headingley in 2008 an urgent provincial government priority.

1390 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 To request the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation to consider evaluating whether any other steps can be taken to improve motorist safety while the dividing of the Trans-Canada Highway in Headingley is being completed. This is signed by Megan Parker, R. Gibson, M. Nadolsky and many others, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Lake Dauphin Fishery Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Fishing is an important industry on Lake Dauphin. To help ensure the sustainability of the Lake Dauphin fishery, it is essential that spawning fish in the lake and its tributaries are not disturbed during the critical reproductive cycle.

A seasonal moratorium on the harvesting of fish in Lake Dauphin and its tributaries may help to create an environment that will produce a natural cycle of fish for Lake Dauphin, therefore ensuring a balanced stock of fish for all groups who harvest fish on the lake. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Water Stewardship (Ms. Melnick) to consider placing a moratorium on the harvesting of any species of fish on Lake Dauphin and its tributaries for the period April 1 to May 15 annually.

To request the Minister of Water Stewardship to consider doing regular studies of fish stocks on Lake Dauphin to help gauge the health of the fishery and to consider determining any steps needed to protect or enhance those stocks. This petition is signed by Norbert Jacques, Bernice Foley, Doris Bonnefoy and many, many others. Long-Term Care Facility–Morden Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present a petition to the Legislative Assembly.

The background for this petition is as follows: Tabor Home Incorporated is a time-expired personal care home in Morden with safety, environmental and space deficiencies. The seniors of Manitoba are valuable members of the community with in creasing health-care needs requiring long-term care. The community of Morden and the surrounding area are experiencing substantial population growth. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Ms.

Oswald) to strongly consider giving priority for funding to develop and staff a new 100-bed long-term care facility so that clients are not exposed to unsafe conditions and so that Boundary Trails Health Centre beds remain available for acute-care patients instead of waiting placement clients. This is signed by Konrad Loewen, Kurt Guenther, Phyllis Loewen, Peter Fehr and many, many others. Power Line Development Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

These are the reasons for this petition Manitoba Hydro has been forced by the NDP government to construct a third high voltage transmission line down th e east side of Lake Winnipegosis instead of the east side of Lake Winnipeg, as recommended by Manitoba Hydro. The NDP detour is more than 400 kilometres longer than the eastern route recommended by Manitoba Hydro experts.

The line losses created by the NDP detour will result in a lost opportunity to displace dirty coal-generated electricity, which will create added and unnecessary greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to an additional 57,000 vehicles on our roads annually. The former chair of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee has stated that an east-side bipole and a UNESCO World Heritage Site can co-exist contrary to NDP claims. The NDP detour will cu t through more forest than the eastern route, and will cut through threatened aspen parkland areas, unlike the eastern route.

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1391 Former member of the Legislative Assembly Elijah Harper has stated that the east-side communities are devastated by the government's decision to abandon the east-side route, stating that this decision will resign them to poverty in perpetuity. MKO, an organization that represents northern Manitoba First Nations and chiefs, has stated that the government has acted unil aterally to abandon the eastern route without consultation with northern First Nations despite repeated requests by MKO for consultations.

The NDP detour will lead to an additional debt of at least $400 million related to the capital cost of line construction alone, to be left to future generations of Manitobans. The NDP detour will result in increased line losses due to friction leading to lost energy sales of between $250 million and $1 billion over the life of the project. The additional debt and lost sales created by the NDP detour will make every Manitoba family at least $4,000 poorer.

We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows: To urge the provincial government to abandon the NDP detour on the basis that it will result in massive environmental, social and economic damage to Manitoba. To urge the provincial government to consider proceeding with the route originally recommended by Manitoba Hydro, subject to the necessary regulatory approvals. This petition is signed by Alice Parkes, Don Parkes, Becky Hern and many, many other fine Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, are you up on a point of order? * (13:40) MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Hon.

Oscar Lathlin (Minis ter of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): On a matter of privilege, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: On a matter of privilege. The honourable Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, on a matter of privilege. Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a matter of privilege. A contempt of the House has been committed, offensive and insulting comments that have been made in this House by the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat) and defended publicly by the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). There are two criteria which must be met.

First, the matter must be raised at the earliest convenience. During question period on Thursday, last Thursday, certain offensive remarks were made in this House by the Member for Minnedosa. Those insults were offensive to Aboriginal people and were an affront to members of this House. The comments came during question period while there was a series of questions from the opposition attacking Aboriginal fishermen. Almost predictably, during a response from Water Stewardship Minister explaining that Aboriginal fishing, the Member for Minnedosa called out, wine and beer.

Following question period, the Member for Minnedosa, along with the Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler) came over to apologize to myself and to the Member for Rupe rtsland (Mr. Robinson). Following the remarks on Thursday, the Member for Minnedosa apologized for her remarks. Four separate apologies were made to myself, to the Member for Rupertsland, to the Govern ment House Leader (Mr. Chomiak) and to Mr. Speaker. The apology we received was necessary and appropriate. Mr. Speaker, since this incident, I have been in Ottawa on official business.

I come back to hear the Leader of the Official Opposition on the radio denying the need for any apology to be made for the Member for Minnedosa's comments. He made those comments on CBC radio last night and again this morning, and this is the first opportunity that I have to raise this matter. Mr. Speaker, I must also make a prima facie case for privilege. Insults during debates in the House are breaches of privileges of this House.

The comments made by the Member for Minnedosa were insulting to me, to my constituents, and I would hope, to all members of this House, but she privately apologized and I accepted that apology. To my knowledge, she has not made a formal apology in the Chamber. As an Aboriginal MLA, a treaty MLA with a treaty number, I have witnessed racism all my life. I have seen not so subtle ones and I have seen some

1392 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 very direct racism directed at me. So I've become an expert, I'm afraid, to detect racism in whatever form it's thrown my way because I've lived with it all my life, in school and in the workplace and in everyday life. Often it comes out in so-called jokes which are not really meant to be humorous, but instead are set to reinforce privilege and power. Racist jokes really reflect the true feeling, the true value of the inside of that person making those jokes.

We have seen it in the code language that's often used in this Chamber when discussions of self-government, child welfare and other issues are talked about. I was shocked that the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) took the apology back in such a public forum as CBC radio. For the Leader of the Official Opposition to exacerbate the issue by announcing last night and this morning on CBC radio, a highly public forum, that no apology is necessary for those comments takes away any value from the Member for Mi nnedosa's (Mrs. Rowat) apology.

The Leader of the Official Opposition elevated the issue to a far greater height by making public the offensive comments and denying the need for an apology. His comments in the media make it seem as though this House accepts those sorts of comments being made.

As a member of this House, I therefore have no choice but to raise this matter of privilege today since the very public comments by the Leader of the Official Opposition last night and this morning compel me to defend the integrity of this House and to demand that both the Member for Minnedosa and the Leader of the Official Opposition make apologies for the comments in as public a manner as his denial of the need for an apology was. Mr. Speaker, I cannot be quiet anymore. I have sat in this House; I have been here for 18 years now, nine years in government, and I have listened to comments from the opposition.

I know what those comments were all about, whether it was in child welfare, whether it's with treaty fishing, and so on and so on. To make matters worse, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Minnedosa occupies the portfolio as the critic for Aboriginal and Northern Affairs. Now, in my experience as an opposition member, I always thought it was my job to make the government accountable for my constitue nts, whatever they do, policies, programs for my constituents.

I also thought that I was an advocate when I was Aboriginal affairs critic, that I was supposed to question the government on their sincerity working with Aboriginal people. In other words, I was an advocate for Indian rights, programs and services. Now, since I've been here on this side of the House, I don't think I have ever heard any questions from members opposite asking questions about Aboriginal people in an advocacy way like they should, I think, especially if they're occupying that particular critic area. When ever they get up to ask questions, Mr.

Speaker, it's always in the sense that they're attacking us for working with Aboriginal people, in partnership with Aboriginal people, winter roads, northern road construction. In fact, the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen), in the last election, said, I'm going to bring all that northern money in the south where it belongs. Do you know who lives in the north, Mr. Speaker? Mainly Aboriginal people. So that's why I move that a formal apology be made in this House by both the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat) and the Leader of the Opposition. Thank you.

Moved, seconded by the Member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk). * (13:50) Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition. Before I recognize him, any other member wishing to speak, I remind the House that contributions at this time by honourable members are to be limited to strictly relevant comments as to whether the alleged matter of privilege has been raised at the earliest opportunity or whether a prima facie case has been established. Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): I hope I can be permitted some latitude as the Member for The Pas (Mr.

Lathlin) has made a number of statements that I think require a direct reply. I will certainly address comments to the issue of privilege and the two-part test under the rules of this House that has to be met in order for a matter of privilege to exist. I would say, at the outset, I have no doubt, and no member on this side of the House has any doubt, about the kind of discrimination and racism that has been faced by people of Aboriginal and Métis background through our province's history up until the present day. We have a history in our country which is a

chapter in our history, which is one that is not one of, I think, pride or celebration for any Canadian, and that is the dealings between governments and some individuals and our First

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1393 Nations people. So there's no question, Mr. Speaker, that on the broader question, the challenge of overcoming discrimination and establishing within our country and our province the kind of common purpose and respect that should exist, is a task that is, as yet, unfinished. Mr.

Speaker, I, like many members of this House and like many Manitobans, and it might be something that wouldn't be well-known to many, have connections to our First Nations people and our Aboriginal community that are very personal and profound, an adopted member of my family who is Aboriginal. It's something that has been a source of pride, but also a source of pain, when racist and discriminatory comments have been made, in the past, as they happen from time to time in our province. So I have no doubt that there is a sincere expression of pain and concern on the part of the member.

I think it's important, also, though, that we put the issue before us today in some context. After the election of last year, there was a disclosure of receipts, of documents that the government had been hiding until after the election. Within that box of paper was a receipt from the Fairmont Hotel that showed that members of the Premier's advisory group had at taxpayers' expense been drinking beer and wine in the context of planning the Spirited Energy campaign. Those tax dollars were spent in that way. Questions were quite appropriately raised by the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs.

Rowat), who had filed the access to information request, who had pursued disclosure when it came to the use of tax funds on the Spirited Energy campaign and who was one of the first to have access to those documents. So it's a file that is well known by the Member for Minnedosa, and it was a matter that was put to the government. At the time, the Member for Assiniboia (Mr.

Rondeau), responding on behalf of the government, said on television, in response to the disclosure that members of the Premier's Advisory Council had been drinking beer and wine at taxpayers' expense, he replied, it's sustenance, and that was the substance of his reply on television.

The comment was made to try to defend the position of the government, and whether or not it was a successful defence is certainly a matter for the judgment of others, but the use of the word "sustenance" was one that was taken note of by many members of the House and members of the media and in connection with the consumption of wine and beer by the Premier's advisory group. To bring it forward to the debate, which was taking place last week, last Thursday to be exact, the Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson) put a question to the Minister responsible for Water Stewardship (Ms.

Melnick), who has responsibility for the fishery at Lake Dauphin. In the course of the minister's reply, she made reference, quite appropriately, to the issue of sustenance for the Aboriginal fishers on Lake Dauphin. It was in response to the use of that word that the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs . Rowat) then gestured toward the Member for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau) and made reference back to the issue of beer and wine that was consumed by the Premier's Advisory Council and described as sustenance by the Member for Assiniboia. That's what happened, Mr. Speaker.

After the comment was made, the Member for Minnedosa realized very quickly that she had said something that could very easily be taken out of context. It could very easily be interpreted as a hurtful, discriminatory comment. Upon realizing that that potential existed, the member did what I believe is a very honourable thing and she immediately went to the minister, to the Member for The Pas (Mr.

Lathlin), the member fo r Rupertsland, and the Speaker himself, and indicated that it was not her intent to make a comment that could be interpreted as racist, that it was a comment that was directed toward the Member for Assiniboia in the context of the Spirited Energy be er and wine that was consumed at taxpayers' expense by the Premier's Advisory Council. So, in that context, and all of us from time to time say things in a give and take, back and forth across the floor that are part of the banter of this House, sometimes appropriately and very often not, Mr. Speaker.

It goes both ways and all members know that. In this case the comment was made and the potential for misinterpretation existed. The member did the honourable thing, provided her explanation, and indicated that in the event that offence was taken, that was something that she regretted. That was the appropriate thing to do. I then had the opportunity, after Estimates on Friday, to speak directly to the Premier (Mr. Doer) about the issue. I provided the same explanation to the Premier. He agreed at the time that it was not an issue to play politics over.

He understood what the context was, and he indicated to me that he didn't

1394 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 think that this was an issue that was appropriate for political debate. Later that afternoon, Friday afternoon, the Premier phoned me in my office and indicated that he had taken certain steps to identify whether it was anybody who reported to him responsible for posting the question period video and sending e-mails out to communities in order to raise concerns about whether or not a racist and inappropriate comment was made. He indicated to me at the time that he wasn't able to ascertain who had done it and wasn't in a position to stop it.

I understand the position he was in, and I respect and appreciate the fact that he did take steps to try to identify who was responsible for it and to have it shut down. * (14:00) Mr. Speaker, the issues that the Member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) is talking about are serious ones, and the Member for Minne dosa (Mrs.

Rowat) has been a tremendous advocate on behalf of Aboriginal women and children, on behalf of Aboriginal communities, on behalf of many in our province who have needed an advocate on the opposition side of government on issues wher e they felt they weren't getting a response from the existing government. The member has taken forward issues in relation to the care of children. She has br ought forward issues in relation to treaty land entitlement settlements.

She has brought forward issues with respect to economic development opportunities on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, where we have unemployment rates in the range of 70 percent to 80 percent, and many, many members of those communities indicating to us that they want nothing more than the opportunity to participate in the economy of our province, to find hope and opportunity through employment and benefit sharing. The Member for Minnedosa has been a strong voice on those issues. I know that's been a source of agitation to members of the governing party.

I know that they feel that they have a monopoly over standing up for Aboriginal people in our province, and the comments that have been made by the member, many of which are factually inaccurate and demonstrably, provably, inaccurate demonstrate an attitude that this governing party believes that they have a monopoly on representing the interests of Aboriginal people. We dispute that, Mr. Speaker, and many, many members of the Aboriginal community in our province would also dispute that. So what we have are many important issues for debate in this House.

We have the issue of 80 percent unemployment in many communities. We have issues of higher-than-average suicide rates in many of those communities, an issue which requires urgent attention. We have the issues of care within Child and Family Services, and we have many, many other important issues. Mr. Speaker, I have said, contrary to what the members opposite would want to say, that we need a fair balance in our spending when it comes to infrastructure and development– Mr. Speaker: Order.

I've allowed members a lot of latitude, but now it's turning into a debate, and that's not what the matters of priv ilege are about. It should be dealing with the earliest opportunity in a prima facie case, but now it's turning into a debate. So, I caution the member, and I as k him to deal with the prima facie case, please. Mr. McFadyen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So the test on a matter of privilege is whether or not some action has been taken, or words have been spoken, that might infringe and limit the ability of an MLA to effectively perform their duty as a member of the Legislature.

That includes infringement of their democratic rights, their ability to participate freely in the matters before the Legislature, including participation in votes and debates and other important procedures within this Legislature. There are two issues in a matter privilege, both of which must be addressed by the member bringing forward the matter. The firs t is whether the matter is being raised at the earliest opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I would argue that this matter has not been raised at the earliest opportunity. The comments that are the subject of the discussion today were made Thursday.

There were direct discussions between the Member for Minnedosa (M rs. Rowat) and members of the governing party on Thursday. There were discussions between myself and the Premier (Mr. Doer) Friday, where it was agreed that politics wouldn't be played for such a profoundly sensitive and painful issue for so many Manitobans. The House sat last week on Friday morning. It sat on Monday; it sat on Tuesday this week, and today is Wednesday. The opportunity to bring this forward existed as of Thursday, and here we are six days later, and the matter is now being brought forward.

So I would submit that the matter has not been raised at the earliest opportunity.

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1395 Secondly, whether there has, in fact, been a breach of the privileges of the House, whether there's a prima facie case of privil ege, and we would argue that there's been nothing done to impair the ability of members of this House to fulfil their duties and responsibilities as democratically elected members of the Chamber. Nobody has been prevented from speaking. Nobody has been prevented from voting or otherwise carrying out their duties. What we have is a member who has decided to play politics with a sensitive issue. So, Mr.

Speaker, I believe that an explanation, an explanation was required, and that's what I said yesterday in the media, that an explanation was required so that people understood the context and the intent of the comment. If the intent of the comment was an honest one, and if it was not a racist one, then that needs to be outlined, and all of us know, including members opposite, that the intent was not one that carried with it any sense of discrimination. The intent was related back to the Spirited Energy campaign. So, that was what I said yesterday in the media.

It called for explanation, but once the explanation was provided and it was clear that there was no racist intent, that the member owed nobody an apology, merely an explanation. That is what she has provided. That is what I provided in the media, and that is what we're putting forward today. Thank you. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I rise to speak to the matter of privilege raised by the Member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin).

I believe that the points raised by the Member for The Pas have some validity, and I believe my advice would be to the MLA for Fort Whyte and for Minnedosa to make an apology, because I think that in this case, it would be the smartest and most appropriate thing to do. Thank you. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I certainly welcome the opportunity to comment. I think the advice of the Member for River Heights, in this instance, is the appropriate advice.

I have looked for comments this afternoon in order to have the matter dealt with and, unfortunately, at this point that opportunity has been lost, and it should not have come to this. There are examples, I think, when the former Minister of Health, Mr. Orchard, called Mr. Cheema a boy, whether he intended to do it or not, he stood up and apologized because of the ramifications of his comment. With respect to timing, this matter did occur last Thursday, the Member for The Pas was out of town attending government business after the House had adjourned. So, in terms of timing, this is his first opportunity.

With respect to the issue itself and the facts of the situation, as put on th e record by the Leader of the Opposition, I believe it's inaccurate. I was present during most of the discussions, in fact, after the comments had been made; I went over and talked with the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat), in order to establish what, in fact, had happened and an apology was rendered. I thought of it–I actually thought for a while, and then I thought, no, this is a well-intended apology, and this is the appropriate thing to do.

And the member apologized to the Member for Rupertsland and apologized to the Member for The Pas, and I believe, I heard had in fact apologized, and I indicated to members opposite that as far as I was concerned, the matter was done. Now, with regard to the facts situation, we have a situation where the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the political party says, not only that there's no apology necessary, that no apology is forthcoming.

In fact, that the comments were an explanation, which differs significantly from the personal apologies that were offered and, I think, well accepted, by members of this side of the House last Thursday, and in fact, should have ended the matter. But the matter has been made much more serious and difficult by virtue of a leader of a political party saying that, not only is his apology not necessary, it's not going to be offered and, in fact, the apology which was accepted by members of this side of the House was, in fact, an explanation. * (14:10) Mr.

Speaker, if you are a First Nations person and you’re a child you can't speak up. Who do you speak up to? If you’re a First Nations person and you're an adult, who do you speak up to? If you're a First Nation person who is elected to this Chamber, you have a right, in fact, you have a duty to speak up. Tomorrow we'll all be commemorating the Holocaust, and we'll all say, if only they had spoken up, Mr. Speaker, if only someone had said something. Playing around with intent and trying to play legal

definitions of the actions do not help the cause of this Chamber. The cause of this Chamber is justice and fairness to all Manitobans.

1396 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that given what happens in this Chamber, given the significance of what happens in this Chamber, given the impact what our words have on the public, th at the appropriate course of action to deal with this matter and deal with it finally would be an apology and that would render the issue moot. However, if an apology is not made, then the rights of members on this side of the House or members on any side of the House and First Nations are not satisfied by virtue of, quote, an explanation.

Explanations have been given to people for hundreds of years, Mr. Speaker, and haven't solved anything. An apology can go a little way. I respect the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat) and I respect her for her comments on Thursday and apology and I accepted that. I said that to the House Leader and I said the matter was done. And as far as we were concerned, the matter was done. Then, yesterday and today, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) who is responsible for a political party, said, not only is no explanation necessary, not only is an apology not necessary, it's only an explanation. Mr.

Speaker, I think we have a bigger responsibility to the public in this Chamber. We have a bigger role for rights, fo r liberties and particularly, to be very cognizant of the rights of minorities and to respect human dignity in any form. No matter if it's something that I say or the leader of the opposition says, if it can be taken out of context and cause hurt or pain, Mr. Speaker, I think we owe an apology. I would strongly recommend that we follow the advice of the Member for River Heights (Mr.

Gerrard) and dispose of this matter by not defining the issue as being solved by, quote, an explanation, when it's clear that it's now unclear because of the Leader of the Official Opposition's comments, and dispose of it the way that Don Orchard with the Member for Maples and say, regardless of what my intent was, what I said can be seen as demeaning and can be seen as affecting people's rights. As a member of this Legislature, I owe it to another member of the Legislature to apologize for that. Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): I appreciate the comments that were shared by all members of the House.

I want to thank the Member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) for his comments. The context of the statement made last Thursday was made not to be malicious, it was made in jest to the Spirited Energy campaign. I clearly stated that in my comments to the individuals that I spoke to after question period. If I offended anybody based on the comments that were made, I apologize for that. Mr. Speaker: I thank all members for their contributions and that should take care of the matter. Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: Order. Let me consult with the table for a second here.

Okay, that does not end the matter because the request was in the matter of privilege. The request was by formal apology by the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat) and the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). We've heard from the Member for Minnedosa. That takes care of that issue, but we still have the issue pertaining to the Leader of the Official Opposition. Mr. McFadyen: Mr.

Speaker, given that the statement that caused offence–and I understand how it could have been interpreted in a way that would cause offence–was made by the Member for Minnedosa and the Member for Minnedosa has addressed the issue directly, I believe that the issue is now moot. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: No, a matter of privilege is a very serious concern. I'm going to take this matter under advisement and I'll consult the authorities and I will return to the House with a ruling. PETITIONS (Continued) Bill 200, The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment Act Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition: Plastic bags are harmful to humans, animals and the environment. Toxins from photodegradation, the breakdown of plastic bags, end up in Manitoba's soil, waterways and food supply. Plastic bags take many years to photodegrade and are a blemish on our roadways, parks, streets, hang from bushes and trees and litter our landfills.

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1397 There are many alternatives readily available, ranging from re-usable bags to biodegradable bags to crates and boxes. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge all members of the Legislative Assembly to consider supporting Bill 200, The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment Act, presented by the honourable Member for River Heights, which will ban single-use checkout bags in Manitoba. Signed by Robert Evenson, Camean Holenski and Logan Brunette and many, many others. Provincial Nominee Program–Applications Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Immigration is critically important to the future of the province, and the 1998 federal Provincial Nominee Program is the best immigration program that Manitoba has ever had. Lengthy processing times for PNP applications causes additional stress and anxiety for would-be immigrants and their families here in Manitoba. The government needs to recognize the unfairness in its current policy on who qualifies to be an applicant.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to consider establishing a 90-day guarantee for processing an application for a minimum of 80 percent of applicants that have family living in Manitoba. To urge the provincial government to consider removing the use of the restrictive job list when dealing with the family sponsor stream. T h i s i s s i g n e d b y R . M a n a b a t , E . S i l v a a n d C. Tomas and many, many other fine Manitobans. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to table the Manitoba Health and Healthy Living Supplementary Information for Legislative Review, 2008-2009, Departmental Expenditure Estimates. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions I'd like to draw the attention of all members to the public gallery where we have with us today Colleen Smook who is the recipient of the Lieutenant-Governor's Volunteer Award for the NOR-MAN region. She is accompanied by her husband, Nick Smook, and former Volunteer Award recipient Bobbie Montean, who are the guests of the honourable Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr.

Ashton) On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. * (14:20) ORAL QUESTIONS College of Physicians and Surgeons End-of-Life Decision Protocol Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, all Manitobans know what great medical care we receive from Manitoba's physicians. They exercise a high level of diligence and excellence in everything that they do. In very many cases, those physicians, particularly those that work in emergency rooms, are called on to make very difficult decisions in a very difficult context.

In particular, I refer to those situations where physicians are considering matters related to lifesaving treatment and end-of-life decisions. Mr. Speaker, some years ago a process was undertaken by the Law Reform Commission of Manitoba. A report was written, under the leadership of Professor Phil Osborne from the University of Manitoba Law School, that recommended certain guidelines be put in place to guide physicians as they deal with end-of-life decision-making in the medical context.

A couple of months ago, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba released a statement which outlined a protocol to be followed by physicians as they go about making these profoundly important and sensitive decisions. Mr. Speaker, since that time, concerns have arisen and, in particular, concerns from the disabled community and the Association for Community Living and others, about the understandable anxiety over the potential for physicians to use that power and authority under the statement in ways that may be inappropriate.

1398 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 Mr. Speaker, we know that the college has listened carefully, but thes e concerns continue to exist. In particular, in a letter written on March 31 by Val Surbey on behalf of the Community Living association, she indicated that some of the individuals live with complex medical needs and rely upon the life-sustaining treatments alluded to in the document for their very existence.

They went on to say that the repercussions of the College of Physicians and Surgeons' statement have far-reaching effects that could compromise the futures of many other people who lead lives that some health professionals may view as futile, in quotes, due to impaired cognitive mental and/or physical functioning. We know that our physicians exercise outstanding judgment, but there is a statement that exists today that is causing some understandable anxiety among members of the disabled community.

I just want to ask the Premier whether he would, if he hasn't already, undertake to raise the issue with the college and ask what their intent is in terms of responding to the correspondence dated March 31 that they received, as well as the other comments that have been provided to the college on this very important and sensitive issue. I just want to ask the Premier whether he has had any communications with the college on the issue and, if so, whether he can brief the House on the status of those discussions. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, as I recall, the Law Reform Commission report recommended that the government seek advice from the College of Physicians and Surgeons and families and the public in this matter. The College of Physicians and Surgeons has issued guidelines. The chair of that body, or the chief officer, Dr. Pope, is both a lawyer and a doctor, dealing with both of the issues raised by the Law Reform Commission. The issues the doctors deal with every day, and, as I understand it, the college did put out guidelines.

There have, subsequent to that, been court decisions made on individuals and, obviously, the Legislature is bound by decisions made in court. Any advice we have from the disabled community, we will respect in this regard. Mr. McFadyen: It's clear, at this stage, based on the interim judgment of Justice Schulman on the Golubchuk case, that there's a certain amount of uncertainty in terms of what the law is with respect to the rights and powers of physicians in these very difficult and challenging circumstances. What has happened though is that the college has issued a statement.

That statement has generated some understandable concerns and new issues, and to date, we're not aware that those concerns and issues have been addressed. So, in that context, the statement that has been issued would appear to grant to physicians a power that many did not believe previously existed. That is a perception, Mr. Speaker. I know that there was a careful process of consultation undertaken by the college.

I know they're sens itive to the concerns that have been raised, but there are outstanding issues that have yet to be responded to by the college which is the appropriate level at which to deal with the issue. Mr. Doer: I just had a note based on my earlier answer, and the 2003 Law Reform Commission recommendation to the public of Manitoba and the medical community included: The Commission does not favour legislated implementation of these principles dealing with the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment.

It's preference is to see them embodied in statement or bylaw by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba. And, certainly, it goes on to say that we've got to be very careful about politics in very important issues of ethics, religion and medicine. This whole issue also is potentially before the Court of Queen's Bench based on the lower court's decision on this matter, and certainly, to date, we've been operating on the basis of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission to the College. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, I still didn't get a response to the question so I'll put it again.

We know what the recommendation of the Law Reform Commission is. We are not, today, advocating that these issu es be resolved through legislation which we would accept is too blunt an instrument to use in such delicate cases, where case-by-case judgments need to be exercised. However, we do agree that dealing with the issue at the level of the college is the right way to go.

So my question to the Premier is: Will he undertake to discuss those issues with the college and ask them what their plans are in terms of responding to the issues that have been raised and when we can expect a response and what their current thinking is in terms of how those issues might be properly reflected in the statement?

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1399 Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, we have accepted the advice of the Law Reform Commission. The issue of directing the College of Physicians and Surgeons on a medical matter is something the government has not undertaken in the past.

Issu es dealing with the public views on the original MMA, or the college guidelines, pursuant to the Law Reform Commission, the lower court decision, ultimately a decision of the Court of Appeal, which will take into consideration, I would imagine, case law in Canada, which includes advice from the disabled community and the proposed bylaws by the college, I'm sure the court will consider. Mr. Speaker, if the member will look at the budget, he will see that there's a property tax credit which will actually lower school taxes in Manitoba, as last year, Manitoba was the only province that saw less school taxes.

He will see less personal income taxes. He will see a higher threshold for income taxes. He will see a caregiver's tax credit, and he will see an increase in the exem ptions. And all things in, Manitoba remains one of the most affordable places to live anywhere in this country. In terms of discussing i ssues with the college, I know the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) does that from time to time, as I say, in a non-directive way, and certainly, issues with the disabled community will be followed by our government. I would point out, Mr.

Speaker, that we also followed the advice of the disabled community in Manitoba when we were dealing with proposed changes to the social welfare legislation that was proposed in 1999, so we always listen to those members. Personal Tax Rates Government Response Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, today, April 30, is a very distressing day for Manitoba taxpayers. Today is tax-filing day. Today is the one day that we realize just how much the Finance Minister of this province is gouging Manitoba taxpayers.

Not only are we the highest-taxed province west of Québec, but using the Province's own numbers in this year's budget, we realize that a family of four earning $60,000, can expect this year a whopping $55 in tax savings, Mr. Speaker. Oh, no, no, no, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I forgot two family cars, $40 in additional registration, this family is going to receive $15 this year in tax savings. I wonder if the Minister of Finance can tell me what he's going to do with his $15. * (14:30) Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, it's pretty obvious the member opposite doesn't even take the time to read the paper, where once again it's reported that Manitoba is the province, for the second y ear in a row, where the wages are growing faster than any part of the country. Mr. Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely an absurd answer. I am talking about personal taxes, personal tax gouging. Taxpayers in this province have choices when it comes to what kind of mortgage they want to get, or what kind of automobile they want to buy, or whether they want to conserve energy and ga soline. They have choices to do that.

But they have no choice as to the amount of taxes that this minister is going to put on their backs. This tax year, today, Mr. Speaker, Ontario taxpayers pay $1,187 to their provincial treasury. In Manitoba, this Finance Minister is going to receive $3,276. His numbers, is he so proud of that, that he is such a bearer of bad news. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, what we're proud of is that, since we've been in office, the disposable income of Manitobans has gone up over 10 percent. When members opposite were in office, disposable income went down 6 percent.

The actual amount of money in people's pockets shrunk when they were in office. When we've been in office, the actual amount of money has grown by over 10 percent. This has reflected itself in robust reta il sales. It has reflected itself in a robust housing market. It has reflected itself in rising wages. It has reflected itself in Manitobans that have more prosperity now than they've seen in over a decade. Mr. Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, the minister raises minimum wage by 50 cents, and, therefore, wages are increasing in the province of Manitoba. He talks about a $75 rebate on the property tax.

If he would fund education the way they should fund education, they wouldn't have to collect it in the first place. By the way, my taxes in my school division went up 6.9 percent. That's over $75 that I'm going to have to pay in my division for more taxes. He took away my $75. Wages and disposable incomes are not going up in this province, Mr. Speaker. He's taking more

1400 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 money out of the pockets of Manitobans. Today is the day that he has to be responsible for that. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, there's only just one small problem with everything the member said. He contradicts the evidence. He doesn't have any facts to support what he's doing. The reality is the property tax credit, which had been reduced from $325 to $250, is now a minimum of $600. It's gone up over double since we've been in office, and it will go up even more as we move ahead. The tax system has been simplified.

There were literally thousands of taxation levels with a net tax and a surtax on everybody over $30,000. Both of those taxes have been eliminated. We have three brackets now, and the thresholds in all those brackets have gone up. So there's more money in the pockets of Manitobans. Provincial Population Decline Government Response Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Well, Mr. Speaker, the minister's so far behind he thinks he's catching up. As Manitobans, we all want sustainable opportunities in our province for our youth.

We want our sons and daughters to stay in Manitoba, build their lives, start their families here. Unfortunately, we're still seeing an outflow of people in Manitoba to other provinces. In 2007, according to Stats Canada's interprovincial migration numbers, we saw almost a net loss of 1,400 people pack their bags and go to other provinces, Mr. Speaker. In virtually every category Manitobans pay the highest tax in the west. Why doesn't the Minister of Competitiveness, Training and Trade take action to make Manitoba more competitive and stop the exodus of people from this province? Hon.

Andrew Swan (Minister of Competi- tiveness, Traini ng and Trade): Well, indeed, I thank the member opposite for the question. You know, being in charge of Competitiveness, we can talk about wins and losses. Let's talk about losses in the '90s. In the '90s, 16,094 people, more people left– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I remind members that we do have some rules in this House and one of them is when the Speaker is standing that all members should be seated and the Sp eaker should be heard in silence. I ask the co-operation of all honourable members. Let's have some decorum.

The honourable Minister of Competitiveness, Training and Trade has the floor. Mr. Swan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe it was the Premier (Mr. Doer) who quite correctly said, you can't handle the truth. In the '90s, this province lost 16,094 people to other provinces. Since 1999, Manitoba has gained 17,164 people. The policies of this government are growing our economy, growing our population and making this a better place to live. Mr. Maguire: I'm sort of disappointed, you know, Mr. Speaker. Being a new minister I thought he'd at least start in the right century, never mind the right decade. Mr.

Speaker, in 2008 a Manitoba family of four making a combined total of $60,000 will pay more tax in Manitoba than any other western province. They pay $445 less in Saskatchewan. They would pay $1,460 less in Alberta, $1,906 less in British Columbia and $2,069 less than Ontario. That money goes a long way for a young family. Mr. Speaker, how can this Minister of Competitiveness continue to support his government when his Premier and his Minister of Finance are gouging Manitoba taxpayers, particularly families and seniors? Doesn't the minister have any say in this Cabinet whatsoever? Mr. Swan: Mr.

Speaker, I know my friend referenced young Manitobans. I'm quite happy as well to talk about this government's policies which have actually increased the number of young people in Manitoba. Let's look again at the win-loss column. In the 1990s, Manitoba lost 5,246 young people; shameful, people leaving this prov ince because they saw no future with the Progressive Conservative Party in charge. Since 1999, Manitoba has seen a net gain of 12,537 young people and every year since 1999 more young people have moved to Manitoba than have left. Sir, those are the facts. Bail Monitoring Police Resources Mr.

Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, time and time agai n, criminals are being released on bail into the community, and time and time again, they create more and more victims. So I ask the Minister of Justice: If he won't keep them in jail, why does he refuse to provide sufficient police resources to monitor those who are released on bail? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): The member will know in our co-operation with the federal government, the

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1401 Criminal Code is going to be amended to ensure the people have longer [inaudible] Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: –and have less opportunity [inaudible] Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: May I also remind the member that he was at the same event I was on Saturday night where the head of the Polic e Association said, when provinces sit by the table, they all look with envy on Manitoba as the most generous province for police officers in the entire country, quoting the head of the Winnipeg Police Association on Saturday night. He was there; he heard it.

Vic Toews praised us as well. I don't know where the member was at that particular time but I think he ought to recognize they voted against every increas e in police officers we've had in this Legislature since 1999. * (14:40) Mr. Hawranik: The minister is continuing to sound like a broken record here in this Chamber. Because the minister refuses to provide sufficient resources to monitor offenders on bail, the police are forced to follow a trail of victims before apprehending the offender. The minister is responsible for creating this catch-and-release justice system in Manitoba.

I ask the Minister of Justice: Since he refuses to provide sufficient resources to moni tor offenders, why does he refuse to keep them in jail? Mr. Chomiak: I think we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the country. The member knows that; he's got the stats. In addition, Mr. Speaker, with our partners in Ottawa who make the Crimin al Code, they are going along with our recommendations. They've made changes effective May 1; they've made changes effective July 1 with resp ect to dangerous weapons, et cetera, which will have mandatory minimum sentences.

We're happy to see that and we'll see more people in jail. I wish members opposite would put their money where their mouths are and vote in favour of additional police officers ra ther than voting against it, as they do in every single budget, and then complain. They voted against the additional 150 officers we have, and they voted against the additional 20 that we're putting in. They can't have it both ways, Mr. Speaker; they try. Mr. Hawranik: I'll provide the minister with an example of his failed policies. Two gang associates stormed into a Winnipeg home last month, shot six people; three are dead.

These were gang members who were on bail. This is a stark reminder of the catch-and-release justice system created by this NDP government, Mr. Speaker. Three people died because of the incompetence of this government. I ask the Minister of Justice: It's time for a review of bail in this province. Will he call one? Mr. Chomiak: That has already been done. We have already gone to the legislators who make bail provisions, the federal government. We did it in 2006; we did it in 2007. Some provisions are in place. The minister is coming here to Manitoba soon to make other discussions and changes. We welcome that.

The member knows we have no jurisdiction over bail provisions and criminal law; he knows that. He knows we worked hard and he should know that the member responsible, the Minister of Justice, invited me to come to Ottawa to stand beside him, to invoke tougher sanctions. We support that; we always will, Mr. Speaker. I wish he'd get on side and support our efforts. Child and Family Services Legislation Government Initiatives Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): The Child and Family Services legislation introduced by the minister yesterday is a day late and a dollar short, and it doesn't go far enough.

So far, it's nothing more than words on paper. The legislation will be meaningless, if it's not backed up with real changes to the way the system works. Will the minister back up his words with action or is this just another case of NDP spin? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Housing): It's my hope that members opposite will actually support that bill because I know, Mr. Speaker, that they used to support the idea that we should have increased powers for the Children's Advocate, then stood up in this House and voted against it.

They, at one time, said that they were in favour of broader powers for child death reviews and then they stood in this House and voted against it.

1402 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 I know that at one time they said that the Ombudsman should have some review mechanism for the recommendations from child death reviews, and they stood in this House then and voted against it. So I know, Mr. Speaker, they like to say one thing one day and another thing another day. I hope they will support this bill; that's very important, we think, to put an exclama tion mark on the need to ensure that child safety, indeed, is job one. Mr. Briese: This NDP government has a long history of saying one thing and doing another.

When the lives of chil dren, like Gage Guimond and Tracia Owen are at stake, this is simply not acceptable. Is this just another PR gesture from the NDP, or is the minister going to back it up with real changes to the structure and accountability of the system? Mr. Mackintosh: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think those words would be louder, quite frankly, if in fact the record of members opposite sort of went along with what they're professing today, because I noticed here I just had a note from the department that showed that the investments and the strengthening of the child welfare system has gone up by 152 percent since we came into office, but I also notice there's a little bar graph there showing that that was done over the course of eight successive budgets. I don't know what members opposite recall, but I recall them voting against eight successive budgets. I say shame on them. Mr. Briese: Mr.

Speaker, this NDP government, it's too often all talk and no action. If the minister fails to back this legislation with real changes, we will see more tragedies. More children like Gage Guimond who died because his safety was not put first. So I'll ask the minister again: Is he going to back up the legislation with real changes to the system or is the legislation supposed to fix the system all on its own? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, of course the legislation will be backed up by the changes that are underway: Changes for Children, a further strengthening of the standards and training.

But I remember distinctly, Mr. Speaker, a record of cuts to foster children, to their recreational opportunities, to their food, to their transportation by 15 percent. That's the kind of people members opposite showed themselves to be when they had the ability to make decisions that would affect the most vulnerable children. We've increased those supports to foster children. We've increased them by at least 23 percent; 15 percent down, them; 23 percent up, us. That's the record. It speaks for itself. Child Welfare System Caseload Standards Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think that they should look at the record of the number of children that have died in the child welfare system since they took office. Mr. Speaker, this CFS legislation introduced yesterday missed an opportunity to address one of the biggest problems in the system, and that is the sky-high caseloads. This NDP government cannot ensure the safety of children when the front-line caseloads are more than twice that recommended by the Child Welfare League of America. Why has the minister ignored this critical issue in this legislation? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr.

Speaker, since coming into office there was a very serious record of– extremely high caseloads is determined not by members in this House but by inquest judges. Caseloads of 40, 50 and more– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Mackintosh: But Mr.

Speaker, over the period of time we have been in office and as a result of the investments that members opposite continually and consistently voted against, we've been able over successive ministers to increase the investment in front-line resources, and most recently, under Changes for Children, the department advises that we have added 92 more positions for front-line relief. That's going to work for children. Mrs. Taillieu: But in 2003, the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell), who was the Minister of Family Services then, promised to set workload standards.

Five years later, three ministers later, still not done, Mr. Speaker. Since then we've seen the tragic deaths of too many children that this government has failed to protect.

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1403 Why is this minister failing front-line workers and failing children by refusing to take this issue in hand and put it in the legislation? Mr. Mackintosh: Well, first of all, the members opposite, I know, have researched this enough to know that caseloads don't always measure workload, and that's why there's a workload relief initiative underway, Mr. Speaker.

But also, a part of the relief for front-line workers, aside from our adding of 150 more staff resources, under Changes for Children over the three-year mandate of Ch anges for Children, it's important that there be enhancements to the information management system. That is happening, Mr. Speaker. But, very importantly, today I would like to announce for the House, because I don't think we have made this announcement in the House. Last time we reported that there was an increase of 500 more foster beds for Manitoba children.

Today I am pleased that Manitobans have come forward for 900 more foster beds. * (14:50) Mrs. Taillieu: Well, Mr. Speaker, in a survey of social workers conducted by Viewpoints Research in March, 46 percent of social workers said their single biggest concern was caseloads; 35 percent said they had caseloads of over 30 children. Another 14 percent said they had caseloads of over 40. The Child Welfare League of America recommends caseloads between 12 and 15. The NDP have broken their promise and have failed to protect those of our vulnerable children in our province, Mr. Speaker.

When is this minister going to implement caseload standards? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, what's important is that workloads be distributed fairly. The member wants to quote from the Child Welfare League of America. [interjection] I think she already asked the question but I know she's worked up. Currently, no universa lly accepted formula for computing caseloads exists, Mr. Speaker. That's the Child Welfare League of America. What we're doing is putting front-line workers in place–[interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Mackintosh: You'd think they would learn about heckling in this House, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, with the Changes for Children initiative under way, there is relief for the front-line workers in child welfare. I know, when they were in office, there was a document produced by the government employees union called crises in child welfare. We are bound and determined to provide that relief, provide help in terms of the information management system, more foster resources. That's– Mr. Speaker: Order. Brain Injury Patients Rehabilitation Services Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, one of the most serious injuries is a brain injury.

It's a physical injury, and it can have long recovery times and often life-long sequelae. Yet support for individuals with brain injuries, to help them return to their community to recover, to reintegrate into society, to have productive lives, has been minimal under this government. When will the Premier act to ensure adequate support in the community for those individuals who've had brain injuries? Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Healthy Living): We have been working on this diligently for a number of years. The firs t thing that we can point to is the investment into Selkirk Mental Health.

In that redevelopment of Selkirk Mental Health, there will be 30 beds for rehabilitation. There will be a five-bed facility for acquire d brain injury which will help the individuals go back out into the community, will provide the supports around them so they can continue to contribute in the community and have the adequate services that are necessary. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, that is precisely the point that I'm making. They're providing support in institutions but they're not providing support in the community to help people integrate.

David Sullivan, who is the executive director of the Manitoba Brain Injury Association, is here today in the gallery. He has approached the government numerous times. They have failed to understand the importance of supports for people with brain injuries in the community. When will the Premier (Mr. Doer) act to make sure those supports are there? Ms. Irvin-Ross: Mr. Speaker, we meet with community groups all the time to discuss what we are doing and when we discuss these issues with them, we listen to them. That's why we've developed acquired brain injury centres in Selkirk and in Thompson.

These services will help provide the

1404 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 individuals with the support they need to get into the community with the acquired support. This is essential that we work together, but we also have to talk about the 30 beds of rehabilitation at Selkirk Mental Health which will provide services as well and also help to encourage to move them back out into the community. Those services are available. Bike-Helmet Legislation Government Support Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): The problem with patients with acquired brain injuries is support in the community.

That's what the government should address, but we also need to prevent brain injuries. An effective way to do this is to have mandatory bike-helmet legislation. The Warda report said current promotion activities are not resulting in an increase in helmeted cyclists nor reduction in head and facial injuries, supporting a need for helmet legislation. Why has the Premier (Mr. Doer) failed to support bike-helmet legislation? This has clearly been shown to reduce injuries, reduce brain injuries, reduce costs to government and the taxpayers and is well supported by the Manitoba Medical Association.

On a year -to-date basis, Manitoba's weekly earnings have increased by [inaudible] percent, which is not second, but the top growth among all provinces in Canada, well above national earnings. So, indeed, I know the Member for Brandon West is hungry, we are continuing to eat Saskatchewan's lunch, and we will continue to do so working in partnership with business, with universities, colleges and all Manitobans. When will the government support mandatory bike-helmet legislation? Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Healthy Living): Mr.

Speaker, we have a strong campaign on injury prevention, specifically around bike helmets. I am proud to stand up in this House to say up to 2006 we have distributed 31,000 bike helmets to Manitobans. I know over 1,500 of those helmets have gone to low-income families that can't afford these bike helmets, but we ensure that they have access to them. Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): The 2,500 residents of the Ebb and Flow First Nation and Bacon Ridge are concerned about EM S services.

There are approximately 200 EMS calls per year, and most residents are transported in private vehicles because of the length of wait time. This is a serious safety concern for the residents of the area. This is only one part of the strategy. We have a robust public campaign called Protect Your Noggin. We continue to work with the community as well as with service providers to ensure that these helmets and the importance of wearing helmets is known by all Manitobans. Economic Growth Government Record Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to note that Manitoba's economy remains strong.

Social programs are reducing social deficits. We have a balanced approach. Statistics Canada has released figures that show Manitoba is doing well in terms of wage increases and employee growth. Would the Minister of Competitiveness, Training and Trade advise the House of what this means to Manitobans? Hon. Andrew Swan (Minis ter of Competitiveness, Training and Trade): Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member that it means more jobs, it means higher wages, a better standard of living and a brighter future for Manitoban families. You know, we are indeed doing well.

Just yesterday StatsCan released some data on payroll and employment and noted in the last 12 months Manitoba with a 4.5 percent increase had the second-strongest year-over-year earnings among the provinces. To use the favourite terminology of the Member for Brandon West (Mr. Borotsik), we are eating Saskatchewan's lunch. Ebb and Flow Community Emergency Services I ask the minister: When will the government do the right thing and provide the people of Ebb and Flow and Bacon Ridge with timely, safe ambulance services? Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, certainly we want to ensure, as we work with our communities, municipalities, that we have services available to all Manitobans in a timely way. That's why our investments over time have not only been of the capital nature, we know that we have spent millions of dollars over the last several years to replace 160 ambulances on the road. We know that we, last year, invested 1.3 million to begin a primary care paramedic program, the first of its kind in Manitoba, to ensure we have the human resources,

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1405 but we recently announced our investment of 4.4 million to broaden the health human resources in the area, to gather our data from the Medical Transportation Coordination Centre located in B r a n d o n t o g e t t h e b e s t d a t a t h a t w e c a n t o e n s u r e that our response times are the best that they can be. * (15:00) Teulon Personal Care Home Renovation Needs Mr.

Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): The Interlake Regional Health Authority has recommended to this government that the proposed addition to the Teulon personal care home be moved forward as a No. 1 priority for the past number of years, and we have not seen any movement from this government. Families are being taken out of their community and moved into a new one. Will the Minister of Health tell this House when the seniors of our community can expect the addition to the personal care home in Teulon? Ms. Oswald: Mr.

Speaker, of course we work very diligently in partnership with the regional health authorities and with communities to do the best that we can for each community on the capital investment side. That's why we have improved or renovated, you know, some upwards of over 80 medical facilities in the province since taking government. We are going to continue to work with the region to discuss priorities. I think the member might find it opposite that about six months ago the leader of his party suggested we were spending too much on capital. He might want to talk about that in their next caucus meeting. Mr.

Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Minnedosa Husky Energy Ethanol Plant Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, today I rise to congratulate the Minnedosa community and the MLA for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat), along with Husky Energy, on the opening last Saturday of the Husky Energy ethanol plant in Minnedosa. Now, why do I rise to do that today? This type of industry, as rural development critic, I have to tell you that this is the very type of industry that our party worked very hard at when we were in government.

Today, I am pleased to say that rural Manitoba is alive and growing despite the lack of attention that it is paid by the government. Today, I want to congratulate the community of Minnedosa, its mayor, the farming community around Minnedosa who formed an organization to ensure the grain procurement was in place. I want to congratulate Husky Energy for taking that leap of faith and investing in Manitoba and ensuring that its plant is one of the largest, one of the cleanest in this country. I also want to say co ngratulations to Husky Energy for the contributions that it made to the community of Minnedosa.

But, most importantly, I want to talk about and thank the MLA for Minnedosa for her persistent efforts in not only meeting and encouraging the community and working with the community but, indeed, working with the farmers in the area and working with the Husky Energy plant. But at the opening, I want to say something about the way that this member was ignored by the government of the day. Now the representative for the government, on that particular day, was the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk).

Now, if she had any decency, any kind of respect, any kind of dignity in her position as the Deputy Premier and the Minister of Agriculture in this province, she would have at least acknowledged the work that was done by another member of the Legislature in bringing this project to fruition, Mr. Speaker. But she didn't have the dignity, she didn't have the respect, in fact, her comments were almost malicious. I think that this is despicable, and I feel– Mr. Speaker: Order. Osborne House Mr. Doug Marti ndale (Burrows): Mr.

Speaker, I rise to highlight the fundraising breakfast held by Osborne House at the Fort Garry Hotel last month, and the important work Osborne House does to respond to the needs of women and their children who've experienced domestic violence. The breakfast, with guest speaker Tanya Brown, was a very successful event that I along with the ministers of Healthy Living (Ms. Irvin-Ross), Family Services and Housing (Mr. Mack intosh) and MLAs for Kirkfield Park (Ms. Blady) , Rossmere (Ms. Braun) and Wellington (Ms. Marcelino) were privileged to support.

Osborne House provides a safe and supportive environment for abused women and their children on a 24-hour basis, seven days a week. Last year alone, Osborne House answered nearly 8,000 crisis telephone calls, provided crisis accommodation to

1406 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 523 women and 355 children, and a further 326 and four children accessed th eir non-residential and follow-up services. Osborne House not only provides a safe place to stay for women and their children who are in flight from danger, but also provides counselling and much needed support as women step away from violence and step towards rebuilding their lives. The Manitoba government believes in the importance of organizations like Osborne House.

That's why I'm proud that under our government, the Department of Family Services and Housing has increased funding for women's shelters by nearly 70 percent since 1999 in order to enable these organizations to continue the vital work they do. Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend the staff, volunteers and board members of Osborne House for their ongoing work toward the elimination of domestic violence. Through the safety and support they provide, Osborne House empowers women and their children, enabling them to take a brave step toward a life free of domestic violence. Romeo Club Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr.

Speaker, it's a pleasure for me to rise this afternoon to pay honour to a special group of individuals from my constituency. Yesterday morning, my wife, Kim, and my son Malachi and I had the opportunity to host a group of 70 seniors from southeastern Manitoba here in the Manitoba Legislature for breakfast. This club is made up of seniors from around the region. They're known as the Romeo Club.

They're a seniors' breakfast group that meet weekly throughout southeastern Manitoba in a variety of different settings and in a variety of different restaurants for breakfast to have fellowship and to meet with others in the regions. They have, through their lives, contributed greatly to the province of Manitoba and to the region which I am fortunate to represent. They make up pastors, some of them are former mayors, farmers, business owners, and really from all different walks of life.

I think it's fair to say, and certainly wouldn't be an overstatement to say, that they really are and have been the backbone of the communities of southeastern Manitoba. Today, they remain active not only in their breakfast club that they have weekly but also in charities and many commun ity events throughout southeastern Manitoba. They've offered me personal advice and personal support through their words of encouragement and through their prayers during my time in elected office, and certainly I have always appreciated their support and their kind advice on my role here in the Manitoba Legislature. Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of all the members of this Legislature and on behalf of all Manitobans, I want to thank these seniors, this group of men and women, for their personal support, but, really, more importantly and more distinctly, for the work that they've done in building our great province and all of southeastern Manitoba. They truly are great Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. World Press Freedom Day Ms. Erin Selby (Southdale): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight World Press Freedom Day, which will take place this Satu rday.

Adopted by the UNESCO General Conference in 1991, and subsequently proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in 1993, World Press Freedom Day reminds all of us of the important role a free press plays in strengthening democracies and fostering development around the world. The media not only informs people of what is going on in their world, but it also empowers individuals to participate in the life of their community by encouraging debate and enabling citizens to hold government accountable for their actions.

Journalists are also one of the many important voices upholding the fundamental principle of freedom of speech, which is enshrined in

article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Mr. Speaker, journalists often place themselves at incredible risk to do so and, sadly, they often pay the price when the right to free speech is denied by governments or other groups around the world. It is therefore appropriate in this 60th anniversary year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that we all take World Press Freedom Day to reflect on the crucial role a free press plays in upholding the fundamental principles of democracy.

I would ask that all honourable members join me in recognizing members of media locally and around the world for the excellent work they do. They provide us with a forum for debate and discussion and are truly an essential part of defining who we are here in Manitoba.

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1407 Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (15:10) Plastic Checkout Bags Proposed Ban Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, plastic checkout bags have worn out their welcome. On Tuesday, our bill to ban single-use checkout plastic bags will reach second reading and be debated, and it's my hope that we will have all-party support to move forward on this policy, which would have long-lasting and far-reaching beneficial environmental effects. An average family of four uses some 1,040 plastic bags annually.

This means that each year, hundreds of millions of plas tic bags are dumped into landfills in Manitoba. Many bags litter our streets, hang in trees and end up in our waterways. Plastic bags take hundreds of years to break down, and when they disintegrate they leach toxins into our soils and waterways, which eventually end up in our food supply. There are many alternatives readily available, ranging from biodegradable to reusable bags to boxes and crates. Many retailers, like Mountain Equipment Co-op, Safeway and even Manitoba Liquor Marts have adopted alternatives in an effort to be environmentally conscious.

China, a country of 1.3 billion people, will become plastic bag-free as of June 1, 2008. It is estimated that China will save 37 million barrels of oil annually by simply eliminating plastic bags. In a time with high gas prices and dwindling supplies, it makes sense to conserve fossil fuels for where they are most needed. Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I asked a question yesterday in regard to the situation of the speed limit increases and what the minister's thoughts were, and what he proposes to do to the Perimeter Highway before any recommendation moves forward in that area.

I stated that there was no speed limit increase recommended by the traffic board east of Winnipeg on No. 1 and I'm assuming that's because of the poor condition of that road as well. But can the minister give me any indication of what types of paved shoulders, turn-offs, that sort of thing, he would see needed on No. 1 from Winnipeg to the Saskatchewan border prior to implementing any speed limit increase to 110 as has been recommended, or can he give me his views on that? Hon.

Ron Lemieux (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): As the member knows, this was something that we went to the Highway Traffic Board with and they made a ruling and they deemed it advisable to increase the speed limit to 110 based on a number of recommendations. Some of those recommendations really talk about what needs to be done to the road, either surface or intersections or different parts of the highway itself in order to enable 110. Plastic bag reduction campaigns also exist in Mumbai, a city of 18 million, as well as in countries like Ireland and South Africa.

In January 2008, South Australia planned a ban on plastic bags. The rest of Australia placed a fee on the use of plastic bags and is moving toward phasing out plastic bag use by January 1, 2009. I hope that this bill will be supported and that the members of the Legislature will show the environmental leadership that's needed in adopting a law that will put Manitoba at the forefront of environmental stewardship.

ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORTATION * (15:20) Madam Chairperson (Marilyn Brick): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will now resume consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Infrastructure and Transportation. As had been previously agreed, questioning for this department will proceed in a global manner. The floor is now open for questions.

Really, the final set of criteria used to assess was talking about the ability or the highway sections have to provide for: for example, transitional length is significant to address driver adaptation; avoid frequent add-grade intersections if possible and accesses to ensure stopping distances are maintained; looking at exhibiting an appropriate design speed, not introduce unacceptable compromises for stakeholders. Our engineers are certainly looking at all of these recommendations and wanting to ensure

1408 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 that 110 is a speed that would be safe for people who are travelling on our highways. Alberta and Saskatchewan have it, and I know many people travelling into Manitoba look forward to entering Manitoba at the 110 speed limit. Mr. Maguire: May I just remind the minister that they built No. 1 out by my way so the 635 people that went to Saskatchewan last year could have a road to go on. But would he be able to indicate to us how soon that they would make some of the shoulder changes? I'm assuming that they will.

I mean I don't want to put ideas in the minister's head that aren't there, but will he be making improvements to No. 1's shoulders and accesses–to shoulders particularly in regard to any speed limit increase? I don't want to forget about 75 highway. There is work going on there, as the minister pointed out the other day, and I'm assuming that that work would include shoulders prior to any increase in speed limit there as well. Then a final supplement to this area, and then I'll move on, is when does the minister propose to announce the increase. Mr.

Lemieux: I mentioned some of the criteria in my previous answer, some of the things that the board really looked at and some of the criteria that are basing the changes.

But, just to complete my answer with regard to what needs to be done, the member did talk about paving the shoulders, implementing rumble strips, review signs and pavement markings, entrance points, removing obstacles or roadside objects in the area immediately adjacent to the roadside, replacement of sign posts with breakaway posts, replacement of inappropriate bridge and guardrail ends, relocation of hydro poles too close to the edge of the highway. All of these things are part and parcel of making sure that the road is safe. I know the member on occasion has gone to the United States.

I think the speed limit in the United States is 75 miles an hour. I'm not sure what that converts to–120 kilometres an hour, I guess, in North Dakota. So there are a number of things they've done there too, but the speed limit–with regard to our neighbours–many of the safety issues are and have been addressed, or continue to be addressed. I don't want to necessarily comment. I did the other day with regard to how the federal government in the United States provides for about 90 percent of the funding for state highways and so on.

That has been helpful, but, you know, to conclude, it's something I believe that Manitobans want. There are a lot of good reasons for it, and this government is going to deliver it. I know that people wanting to harmonize the speed in Alberta and Saskatchewan also will f eel very positive about increasing the speed to 110. Mr. Maguire: I know my colleague from Russell has a question, but before I do that, I'd like to ask the minister if he can tell me. We've got some pretty major infrastructure projects that are on the books for Manitoba, one of them being Bipole III.

One of the large infrastructure projects in Manitoba will be Bipole III, the transmission line from the north when it comes whatever circuitous route that it can take to get back to the east side of Winnipeg. Can the minister inform me as to whether he had any input into direction of this particular line, given its importance as an infrastructure project in Manitoba and whether or not he was supportive of it going down the west side? Mr.

Lemieux: Well, what I'm supportive of is providing an opportunity for First Nations people to really be able to have and play an important role in the province and providing economic development opportunities for them, improving employment opportunities, I guess, for them as well, and also tourism, and also, if you take a look at possible logging and other opportunities that they'll have or may not have as a result of not having a road. The east-side road has already begun on the east side of the province of Manitoba, north of Hollow Water or Manigotagan. We've replaced a couple of bridges as we speak.

So we're starting to make some inroads, no pun intended, on the Rice River road, which is truly important. Now our government has participated, I would say, in about 80 meetings, I think, with a good percentage of the communities on the east side participating in those meetings, indeed possibly all. This government has really been proactive, trying to get an east-side road on the east side of the lake on the east side of this province for a number of years now. I was recently up in Gods Lake Narrows taking a look at where the new bridge is going to go to join those communities up.

Actually, I should say, I'd like to compliment the department at this time. They did a lot of good work to be able to get that material up on the winter-road system this year. I guess we spent about $9 million on the winter-road system right now. If you take a look at where that winter-road

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1409 system exists, the winter-ro ad system already exists on the east side. There needs to be a route selection study done, a more comprehensive one, to determine exactly where an east-side road would go. You already have roads that are travelling throughout the east side.

Whether or not those roads are the ones that would be followed, possibly, but this study that we're looking at, we're looking at cost-sharing it with INAC, with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, or possibly even with Minister Cannon's department of transportation, infrastructure, and I think it's called community development. I may be corrected on the name of the department. But we're looking at cost-sharing a more comprehensive route selection study on the east side. I'm just wondering if the MLA for Arthur-Virden is in favour of a road on the east side of the province. * (15:30) Mr.

Maguire: Well, Madam Chairperson, we've been in favour of an east-side line coming down the east side of Lake Winnipeg; that's very obvious. I'm challenging the minister to say that, you know, I mean, he's saying he wants to see a road coming down the east side for the very reasons that he's pointed out: providing support for the First Nations people on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. Madam Chairperson: Order, please. I would like to remind all honourable members that their remarks should be kept relevant to the matter before the committee.

As our rule 75(3) states, "Speeches in the Committee of the Whole House must be strictly relevant to the item or clause under discussion." Further, as it is noted, on page 527 of Marleau and Montpetit, "The requirement of relevance is necessary in order that the House might exercise its right to reach a decision and to exclude from debate any discussion which does not contribute to that process." Mr. Maguire: Well, Madam Chair, we're going to be here a long time, I think, if this minister can't answer simple questions like this, and if you're going to make rulings like that.

I mean, nothing could be more relative to this discussion than a road on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, access to the northern corridor, the gateway corridor, the northern corridor, the Midwest corridor, the Asia-Pacific corridor, and the mid-continent corridor going all the way to Mexico. These are all relevant questions in regard to the kind of industry and development that needs to be done in this province and this government's not doing them. So I want to ask the minister questions about the winter road situation. He's referred to it. We've got 1,600 kilometres that we had before.

He's bulldozed down enough trees to have 600 more kilometres. Those are his numbers, Madam Chair, and I just feel that it's very, very relevant that we have access to the eastern side of Lake Winnipeg so that the First Nations people, as you allowed the minister to reply, that he was looking at going in there to provide access to have opportunities for those people on the east side of Lake Winnipeg to do better and that's all–I'm only replying to say that that's exactly what we would support, the roads that are being built in that area at the present time.

So I'm saying, you know, the Rice River road is proceeding. Can the minister tell me how soon it will be proceeding, the bridges that he had pointed out, whether they'll be finished this year, and how soon he feels that that road will be finished to Berens River? Mr. Lemieux: Thank you, Madam Chairperson, and I know you certainly don't need me to defend you or any position you take. That's for sure. What the relevancy is, and I just want to put also this on the record, is that I'm not th e Minister responsible for Hydro, and I never have been.

You know, any discussions related to east side, west side, bipole, maybe those questions are better posed to the Minister responsible for Hydro. I can talk about highways and roads. As I mentioned, approximately $9 million were invested in winter roads this year. That's a huge increase from eight years ago and certainly more than double. We're very proud of that record. We've taken over 25 percent of the winter roads off of the ice and rivers and lakes, which is a huge safety issue. Also, by doing that, we have, I believe, come up with a better road system.

With regard to the east-side road that the MLA for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguir e), my critic, refers to is that the objective overall isn't to improve the current road network in order to assure access to all these communities all-year round. Current winter road system makes use of ice crossings that disappear with warm weather. It's a frustration. You invest $9 million, it melts away. Invest another $9 million, melts away. Invest another $9 million, melts away. The logic of that is that an all-weather road system is what is necessary. The challenges are

1410 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 where should the road go? Having community consultations to ensure that residents on the east side have input into where the road goes. Also, the cost. The cost is very expensive and will be very expensive to build the all-weather road system on the east side. There's already a current road or established road system with many legs and sections spanning a wide geographical area on the eastside communities. There's no existing, as far as I know, any bipole corridor there.

Why an east-side road is really important is that the construction work and the development of the related employment, training, sustainable economic development opportunities, it'll take place with full participation of First Nations communities. Work is currently under way on the fi rst leg, as I mentioned, of the all-weather road system, Hollow Water to Bloodvein, and maybe Manigotagan, from Manigotagan, really. I think it's 304 to Bloodvein, and, with $2-million bridges, which have been installed this past winter. We've committed about another–I think it's $15 million or so–to begin this construction.

Route selection is under way for the second leg to Berens River. Design work, environmental approvals and efforts, of course, to seek federal funding partnership with the entire road continues. I mentioned before that this road, not counting the road to Nunavut, the Nunavut highway road, a study that was cost-shared three ways between the Kivalliq Region, Manitoba and the federal government–which the federal government should be congratulated as well as Nunavut for cost-sharing the study–is now out. I guess it's on-line if people want to tap in to see exactly where it is.

Essentially the road heads north to Churchill, a road branches off this road to the town of Churchill but continues to go up into Nunavut and to the Kivalliq Region. The estimated cost, about $1.2 billion, for that stretch. The cost, I don't believe, will be that much for the southern piece or the east-side road

section that we are going to be building, but again, it's hugely expensive, and it would be very difficult for a provincial government to do it alone. So we're looking for partnerships with Minister Cannon and Minister Strahl and the federal government to do so–I have to congratulate Prime Minister Harper; they did put some money into improving the rail system going up to Churchill, which we are really grateful for–to work in partnership with a private corporation on the tracks and the federal government, to not only do that but improve the port itself.

So, overall, our goal is to have an east-side, all-weather road. But, agai n, hugely expensive costs related to it, even at the beginning stages to go past Bloodvein, the intensive, more comprehensive route selection study, which is very expensive, but has to be really cost-shared, I believe, with the federal government in order to do this. Mr. Maguire: The minister mentioned the Port of Churchill and the northern ocean route bringing goods into Churchill, and, of course, last fall there was an announcement of fertilizer coming into the Port of Churchill and to be brought down the Hudson Bay rail.

OmniTRAX is a division of that area. Can the minister indicate to me whether that product has actually moved out of Churchill, and has it been delivered? Mr. Lemieux: Well, thank you for the question. I'll endeavour to ask my department. Let me, first of all, take two steps back. This is a huge success story in the sense that Churchill has always been used for exporting. Exporting could be durum wheat to Africa, or in the recent shipments that have come into Churchill, you had a Russian ship come in with a load of fertilizer which they offloaded.

Then they on-loaded, or put a load onto the ship, of durum wheat that went to Italy, I believe. This is really important about the Port of Churchill, because if you can get this two-way traffic and the backhaul having those ships full, not only coming to Churchill but going back to another country with something is really important. Now, a lot of work has to take place with regard to the infrastructure in the Port of Churchill. Container traffic which I believe will be, certainly in the foreseeable future, the way of transporting goods–we have to improve the container port there in Churchill.

But I can tell the member that most of the fertilizer has been distributed, as I understand. A small amount still remains and the cars are on their way to move the remainder of the fertilizer south. I know that seeding is just around the corner. We hear all the ads on the radio and TV about fertilizers and chemicals that are going to be necessary for farmers to use, but this fertilizer, I believe, will be moving south very shortly. * (15:40)

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1411 But Russian companies should be really congratulated. This is part of our Arctic Bridge concept where you have the Port of Churchill being used, not specifically this particular shipment, but what we're looking at is increasing the traffic into the Port of Churchill from, for example, Murmansk, Russia. We're also wanting to increase air traffic from Krasnogorsk, Russia, into our great Richardson airport we have here as well. It's all part of our vision into our Manitoba International Gateway Strategy vision that this Province has put forward.

The fertilizer, again, to reiterate, most of the fertilizer has been distributed. A small amount remains, and the cars are on their way to move the rest. Mr. Maguire: The whole vision of the Manitoba International Gateway Strategy–I know the minister's had many meetings on the Asia-Pacific corridor. We talked about that the other day, the mid-continent movement of product from the south to the north, using Winnipeg as the hub. We've just seen the Mayor's Trade Council report come out in regard to direction here in the city and beyond.

The Province would be involved in any bypass from the Perimeter Highway onto Highway 75, so they don't have to go through St. Norbert in the future. Can the minister give me an update as to where his thoughts are on that, and what the government's participation will be in that project? Mr. Lemieux: When you have a vision, sometimes you think of the vision and you don't necessarily think of the price tag that comes with the vision. I certainly would not want to leave on the record that this is just the MLA for LaVerendrye's (Mr. Lemieux) vision.

This is something that I have to thank people within my department for helping to pull along and put a lot of meat on the bone with regard to this vision. I'm also pleased to see that the mayor's task force also believes in this vision of having, not only sustainable transportation, but also an inland port and developing the Winnipeg airport and developing our highways and our transportation routes going around the city, through the city, whether they're going north or south. The MLA for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire) mentions a good point.

If you're having a lot of this traffic and if we do develop this inland port or, quite frankly, transform Manitoba into this super multi-modal hub, there are going to be more trucks running around the city of Winnipeg, hopefully, not just through the city, but around. If that happens, the question is, do you really want these large trucks going through St. Norbert when they're having their friendly market days?

I gue ss I can be corrected on the name of their farmers' market that they have there, with children crossing the road and the street and having pedestrian traffic everywhere, with semis going up and down their street. This question is one of importance for St. Norbert as a community. It's something that we would definitely discuss not only with the city's representative there, not only with the member of Parliament from there, but also, more importantly, I think–or not necessarily more importantly, but equally as important–we would talk to the MLA who does a fine job for the St. Norbert people.

We would m a k e s u r e w e t a l k t o h e r a s w e l l t o e n s u r e t h a t w e have input from the representatives from the area. I have to tell you, it is being considered; there's no question about it. This is something we've heard from the trucking industry, and we've heard from many other groups on how a long-term vision–if we're going to be talking about what we do with the Perimeter running around the city of Winnipeg for truck traffic, we should seriously consider what are we going to do about bypassing a community where there are a lot of pedestrians and a lot of small traffic.

You want to move those trucks because there are a lot of trucks that are actually moving around the city of Winnipeg. They're not necessarily stopping; so they want fast access from the coast, from Vancouver to Chicago, and they're essentially just going around Winnipeg. The question the MLA asks is an important one. Are there dollars in place right now for that bypass? No. Do we have a partnership with the federal government yet in order to do that? No. Are we working on it? Yes. And do we expect to have a partnership with the federal government? Yes.

This is all part of a vision that, we believe, has the potential to make Manitoba a have-province. I believe that, if you have an inland port, a multi-modal hub like this, and, if you're making Manitoba the centre of trade for this country and North America, if you really believe in that, if you think there's that chance, this has huge potential for us. Creating many, many jobs, I would argue, well, in the thousands of jobs. One can't put an exact figure on it.

1412 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 Having taken a look at the inland ports around North America and also in Mexico, GTO and Guanajuato inland port where they have rail, air, truck traffic, a customs sta tion right on site, tax-free zone. These are really important. I'm so pleased to have Arthur Mauro and Arthur DeFehr as the two co-chairs on the Manitoba International Gateway Council., Chris Lorenc is from the Heavy Construction Association, the chair of the mayor's task force dealing with trade and looking at the issue about an inland port and a hub.

All of these people play an important role, and they're working with people like John Spacek in my department. Rich Danis and many others are important to this because I believe that Manitoba has a huge opportunity here. It doesn't come along very often. We spend, let's say, a billion dollars or more to build a hydro dam. A hydro dam initially in the construction creates many jobs, but after that, to actually run the hydro dam, there are not loads and loads of people who will be working there.

But, if you spend a billion dollars on an inland port and you make it what it can be, you're talking about thousands and thousands and thousands of jobs. Not only that, but the spinoffs on those jobs will be there forever. We have a great opportunity here to do something. We're trying to impress upon the federal government, as was mentioned by the Premier (Mr. Doer) the other day when he was in his Estimates. I did meet with Minister Emerson and a number of federal officials, Minister Toews as well, and Minister Swan was part of that meeting.

We had a very, very good discussion with Minister Emerson on gateways and corridors and talking about inland ports and so on. I don't mind sharing this because this really, I believe, is not a partisan issue in the sense of the crass political partisan issue. I think that the Member for Arthur-Virden, as I am, we're both rural MLAs, but I believe that to have your capital city and have a transportation hub like that here, I think he's in favour of it himself. I think his caucus would be. At least I would hope they would be.

I haven't heard them express this, but maybe there's an opportunity for him to comment on it, where maybe he stands on an inland port like that in Winnipeg. Mr. Maguire: I'm just going to call on my colleague from Pembina to ask a quick question. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): A quick question is right. Last week, this is provincial highway 240, and I drove down it and it is in awful shape. I had a call at noon today from one of the residents out there and it's in a state where, in fact, cars are having trouble driving down this highway 240, Provincial Road 240.

I want to bring that to the minister's attention and hope that his department can do something to m a k e i t i n f a c t d r i v e a b l e . I t ' s s o r t o f w o r s e t h a n muddy conditions that we've experienced over the years. This is for information and, hopefully, something can be done. Mr. Lemieux: I thank the Member for Pembina for that question. Sorry, I guess I need clarification on from what community to what community. [interjection] I'm sorry. I didn't catch that. What stretch? It goes all the way from Portage la Prairie to the U.S. border. Mr. Dyck: Sorry. I'm talking towards the U.S. border.

From, I believe, it's LaRivière and then heading south. Mr. Lemieux: I thank the member for the question. This is very helpful because we need to know this, and the sooner we hear about it, but–my department officials have heard it, and they will endeavour to look into it to see what's going on. Not meant to put the member on the spot as far as the exact piece, but the people out of the Portage office we'll make sure we get them the question, and we will see if we can look into the stretch. I thank the MLA for that. * (15:50) Mr. Maguire: Just a reply to th e minister's concern before.

Absolutely, we want to see these trade corridors be developed. From an opposition perspective, I do as well. I believe the non-partisan comment he made is very appropriate. I think our concern is that–or my concern as the critic in this area is that I want to see, and I'll try to make my question as quick as I can in this reply because I do want to move forward with the end of Estimates here for this particular section, but it's a vision that's needed in Manitoba and it's part of the vision.

I know the minister's worked with the western Transportation ministers as well and federal, and there is work going on there. I also know that the Trade Council, the Mayor's Trade Council, has just put out its report. We've got a lot of work being done in both the Asia-Pacific and the Midwest continent corridor as well here– Mid-Continent Trade Corridor–and I know that the Manitoba International Gateway Strategy–the department has done a lot of great work in this whole

April 30, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1413 area, and I know they're continuing to do great work in that area. I want to say how much we appreciate the work your department is doing in these areas right now, up front, and I want to say that I guess the concern I have is just tyin g these all together, and of course your department is key in that area, and can be. Can you provide me with information as to how soon your reports will be out on the mid-Manitoba international–from the International Gateway Council and Strategy, and how soon you can provide more information on that whole package of the vision?

I mean the vision is there; it's been stated. The objectives are stated in previous documents, and I know that you're having reviews and looking at projects. Can you provide me with information as to how soon we can expect that? Mr. Lemieux: Well, I thank the MLA for this, and when I say, of course, it's non-partisan, I would expect that for economic development reasons and all, the opposition would be very much in favour of something happening so I think that there's no argument over that.

There's no question; maybe on approach, or how we do things, you know, we might see some differences, but I'll tell you that the–well, first of all, the Mayor's Trade Council study is done. The Gateway study, we've hired a consultant to look into this now. At least the Council has hired a consultant to look into inland ports, the multi-modal approach to this hub. I don't have a specific date as to when it'll be completed; I'm hoping in the next number of months, certainly by the fall, I hope. I don't have that specifically, but I'm hoping by the fall. The sooner the better, obviously.

Our company is called InterVISTAS and this company–I know Minister Emerson actually knows this company very well, and he has commented that this company is very reputable and would do a good job. So we are looking forward to this study coming back. I don't want to use the word "report," because report conjures up a document of a thousand pages or something, but this is not what's meant to be. This is a study taking a look at using the mayor's task force or trade report or study, I should say, and putting this together and working with the Council on the kind of things that we're looking at as a province.

In fact, let me offer this: Where suitable, I would offer to the MLA, my critic, Transportation critic, if he's not going to be the Transportation critic, if they have changes, tell the Transportation critic, where appropriate, I wouldn't mind the MLA for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire) attending a meeting or two with me to show you th at this is not a partisan issue, is what I'm trying to say here. Where appropriate I would certainly offer that up to the MLA to attend some of these meetings with me, again, where appropriate, and I would make sure I bounce this off of the people I'm meeting with.

But just to show you that we really want all parties working on this kind of a vision. Yes, it's our vision. We have our stamp on it, but it's not just ours. We want to bring more people as partners. And I'm hoping that the MLA for Arthur-Virden would talk to his federal cousins to really get on board and support us. This is where the non-partisanship comes into this. I believe we need all political parties in the province of Manitoba pushing our province as the multi-modal hub and leader in the country.

Unless we're getting this from the Progressive Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party, in one consistent message–and I think that's where his question lies is when is this going to be pulled together. This report we're talking about from InterVISTAS will, hopefully, do all of this, or a lot of it, and pull a lot of this together, and then division that we have will be more concrete with a report like that–or a study like that, I should say. Mr.

Maguire: I appreciate the fact that I've had the opportunity to attend some of these conferences already; don't have any problem meeting with the minister at some of those as well. I'll continue to go to as many of them as I can, given my own

schedule from that end of things. I guess that certainly is a tie to the bigger vision of where we need to go with development in the whole highways infrastructure process. To go back to the rail situation, just a couple of quick questions. There's some branch-line abandonment in southern Manitoba that's taking place. Can the minister indicate to me where he feels his involvement is in that, where that's at? I know the closing process.

I dealt personally with transportation issues of branch-line closur es as a farm leader in western Canada some 10, 15 years ago when we managed to push the federal government towards a closure process. At that point, that involved railroads, federal government, provincial govern- ments and municipal governments to be able to purchase those. So I'm familiar with that, but if, in fact, in the end, the municipalities and the Province can't afford to be able to move in those areas and maintain the

1414 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2008 short lines perhaps–and I won't get into the legislation around short lines that the government's brought down in Manitoba–would he be prepared to look at improving the road infrastructure in those regions, given the heavy loads of traffic and grain and that sort of thing, particularly as the main industries in there? I mean, there may be more processing developed. We would hope there will be. There are signs that there will be.

Would he consider moving that up as a priority on a five-year program along with some of the infrastructure projects in the Mayor's Trade Council that would be provincial responsibility outside the Perimeter Highway in that area for future development in economic development and safety of the citizens in those areas? Madam Chairperson: Honourable minister. [interjection] Sorry. The Member for Arthur-Virden. Mr. Maguire: If I can just add, that would be a long No. 2, No. 3, Madam Chair, Mr. Minister, and some of the north-south roads connecting them. Mr.

Lemieux: Well, first of all, we're putting about $60 million into No. 2 and No. 3 highways which will, hopefully, help this. But, you know, our government is very, very proud of our record. We're one of the first Canadian jurisdictions actually to formally raise the rail line service issue with the federal government. As a result of our work–and I don't want to pat myself too much on the back, but a lot of people worked hard on this to get this done–we have a commitment from Minister Cannon to undertake a special rail service review which was announced April 7 in '08.

That's just a couple of weeks ago, a few weeks ago, but I will take the opportunity to say that we really pushed hard on this, and thank you to Minister Cannon. But, you know, rail line segmentation abandonment is a result of changes, as the MLA knows, made by the federal Liberal government in 1996. We don't relish this at all. The federal government also eliminated subsidies that were really crucial actually to many lines. I think Churchill line actually got–Hudson Bay line, I think, received about a million a y ear from federal support actually. That does bring me to Churchill, quite frankly.

I know I just recently travelled to meet with Minister Cannon in Ottawa to discuss this issue with our federal counterparts. Without going into a lot of confidentiality about it, I know our fight to protect single desk and the Canadian Wheat Board is also a fight to protect transportation routes in rural and northern Manitoba. * (16:00) The Port of Churchill provides a cost advantage to farmers of, roughly, I understand, $15 to $20 a tonne, I think, versus sending grain into the St. Lawrence system.

Even though that whole Carrot River Valley or that valley is in Saskatchewan, a lot of what's produced there–actually, they're the ones who are shipping through Churchill. That's really important to us. I'm not a farmer, I've never been a farmer, but I know I've heard a lot from farmers about how important Churchill is. This is not the time or place to get into the debate of the Canadian Wheat Board, but I know that and the MLA for Arthur-Virden knows the issues well.

He was, I believe–I stand to be corrected, maybe he'll correct me when he asks another question–I think he was a board member on the Canadian Wheat Board at one time, I think– [interjection] On the advisory board, yes. I'm just going by memory, but I know that given 75 percent of what Churchill's business is is the Canadian Wheat Board grain. That's 75 percent of their business right now. That's a real concern for me because the loss of the Wheat Board would make it really difficult for Churchill maybe to survive in the short term. I have real concerns about that.

That's why if anyone asks me about the Canadian Wheat Board, even though I'm not a farmer, I'm not a producer in the agri-business, my concern is more related to the Port of Churchill because 75 percent of their business is part of that grain business. It's a real concern. Let me just conclude by saying that this government has h

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-2-33
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 2nd hansardpdf 33.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ffc719759e087da59af0b7eac1a76cccf211ca2f

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