LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
OF
Tuesday, December 1,
1992
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
PRAYERS
Speaker's
Statement
Mr.
Speaker: Prior to Routine Proceedings, I have a
statementfor the House.
I must inform the House that Elijah Harper, the honourablemember for
Rupertsland, has resigned his seat in the Houseeffective November 30, 1992. I am therefore tabling hisresignation
and my letter to the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Counciladvising of the vacancy thus
created in the membership of theHouse.
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING
PETITIONS
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
(
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, I beg to presentthe
petition of Marie‑Jeanne Buccini, Alice Szarkiewicz, MaureenMonk and others
urging the government of
Mr. George Hickes
(Point
Ms. Judy
Wasylycia‑Leis (
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present
thepetition of Monica Linklater, Sylvia Spence, Eileen Moody andothers
requesting the government of
*
(1335)
TABLING OF
REPORTS
Hon. Jim Ernst
(Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I wouldlike to table the
Annual Report of the Department of UrbanAffairs.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.Speaker, I am pleased to table the
report of the Teachers'Retirement Allowances Fund Board, the Annual Report,
1991.
Introduction of
Guests
Mr.
Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct
the attentionof honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us
thisafternoon, from the
Also, from the
On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcomeyou here this
afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION
PERIOD
Poverty
Rate
Provincial
Increase
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader
of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we havebeen saying for some
time now that the government is out of touchand this Premier is out of
touch. Unfortunately, today
thepoverty figures have been released for the
Mr. Speaker, the Premier stated two weeks ago, in a speech hemade to his
own faithful, that all Manitobans are better offunder Conservative
government. Given the fact that the
number ofpeople in poverty between 1988 when this Premier took office and1990
has grown by 10,000 Manitobans, can the Premier pleaseexplain to us and to all
Manitobans, if they are better off, whythere are 10,000 more people
unfortunately in poverty today?
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, certainly we as
agovernment, as I believe all people in elected office ought tobe, are concerned
about the trends for continued poverty in oursociety, and we as a government
have taken some very determinedaction since these figures, which relate to 1990,
have indeedbeen collected.
I am sure that the member opposite knows that we continued toincrease our
social allowance rates at, for instance, 3.6 percentlast year, which was the
second highest rate of increase in thecountry, and this year again at the rate
of inflation. We addedincome
assistance for disabled at $60 per month, which is risingto $70 per month as of
next month, and a monthly supplement toreplace the provincial tax credit. It is also one of the reasonswhy we are
placing great emphasis on economic priorities to getthe economy rolling
again.
Mr. Speaker, we take no solace in these figures. In fact, weare very, very
concerned. I would say that I would
hope themember opposite would recognize that this is not a partisanissue. If it were so, it would have been
settled and it wouldhave been addressed during the time when the member
opposite'sadministration was in government, because the figure that ispublished
in this report for 1990 is lower than it was in 1982,'83, '84, '85 and '86 and
at the same level that it was in '87.
That is not good news, but we are doing things that arewithin our power,
and we would hope that the members oppositewould continue to work with us to try
and improve the lot ofthose who indeed have to live in poverty in this province
andright across the country.
Mr. Doer:
Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Premier to
look at thetrends and look at the numbers.
The amount of people thatdecreased in the poverty list between '82 and
'88 was a 40,000decrease in the number of people living below the poverty line
inthe previous government, and now we see a 10,000‑person increasein people
living in poverty in the
Mr. Speaker, the government said that they remain committedto
strengthening and supporting
*
(1340)
Mr.
Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the figure is 17.8 percent
of peopleliving below the poverty line.
In 1982 it was 20.5 percent in
We are working as well on the economic side because we knowthat
ultimately, as the report indicates, that the ultimatesolution to this, of
course, is to ensure that we restore theeconomy to economic health, because that
is the long‑termsolution that we have to address in this issue. That is why thethrone speech deals with
the economy as the central focus,because it is jobs, it is a healthy economy
that is the long‑termsolution to improving the lot of these
people.
Poverty Rate
Provincial
Increase
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader
of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, thePremier is right. It was 20 percent in 1982, and it went
down to16.6 percent in '88, a decrease of 40,000 people. From 1988 to1990, it went up to 17.8
percent, an increase of 10,000 people inthe poverty rate. That is exactly the point. You know, you donot have to listen to
these statistics. The Premier could
go 200yards across from his office, across the street, to really seewhat is
going on in this province, and we have been saying thatthis Premier and this
government are totally out of touch withwhat is going on in terms of the
realities of people in thisprovince.
Mr. Speaker, in the last couple of months, this governmentchose to
offload millions of dollars on social assistancepayments to municipalities or
the larger
Hon. Harold
Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr.Speaker, I would like to point out to
the Leader of theOpposition that the number of recipients on social allowances
isa small component or a partial component of the people living inpoverty that
this study reflects, and I think that what happenswith statistics like this is
that you draw a national povertyline based on the cost of living in some of the
urban centreslike
Manitoba Public
Insurance Corporation
Autopac Rate
Increase
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I would like toaddress a
question to the minister responsible for Autopac (Mr.Cummings). The Conservative‑appointed Public
Utilities Board hasnow approved the request of the Conservative‑appointed board
ofMPIC for the highest real increase of Autopac rates in thehistory of this
province. Non‑merit private
passenger vehiclesapproval is 13.5 percent which is 10 times the rate
ofinflation. The average increase
of 9.7 percent is about seventimes the rate of inflation.
Mr. Speaker, how can this minister who led the charge a fewyears ago, how
can this minister sit there complacently andjustify these unconscionable
increases?
Hon. Glen Cummings
(Minister charged with the administration ofThe Manitoba Public Insurance
Corporation Act): First of all,Mr. Speaker, I reject the
member's reference to the quality andthe standard of the work being done by the
PUB. We deliberatelymade sure that
the Public Utilities Board was given theopportunity to look at the rate
structure and make sure that itwas properly reflecting the costs and the real
cost of coveragethat the corporation was taking on.
Mr. Speaker, in looking at the recommendations of the PublicUtilities
Board, it very clearly demonstrates to us why it wasthe proper thing to do in
referring these types of rates to thePublic Utilities Board, because it clearly
references the factthat we need to make sure of what is required, that the level
ofcoverage in this province is correct and adequate and make surethat no
increases are brought forward that do not reflect theactual costs of the claims
that have been incurred.
*
(1345)
Mr. Leonard
Evans: Mr. Speaker, my next question is,
talkingabout costs, why did the government interfere in the MPIC requestto limit
agency fees? How can you interfere
on behalf of thebrokers, but not on behalf of the consumers of
Mr.
Cummings: Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the
corporation isundergoing a major review of the Autopac agents
compensationpackage as we bring forward Autopac 2000. That is the fair andpractical manner in
which they have brought forward theirpresentation to the agents, so that as they
review thatcompensation package and as they change the entire method ofwhich we
do business with the public and with the agents, thosechanges will be
incorporated.
Mr. Leonard
Evans: Mr. Speaker, my final question is for
theMinister of Consumer Affairs (Mrs. McIntosh). I would ask theMinister of Consumer
Affairs if she at least will act on behalfof the consumers of
Mr.
Cummings: Mr. Speaker, that demonstrates the lack
of acumenon that side of the House.
They are asking that we now run thecorporation into the ground in order
that we not reflect the realcost of insurance.
Poverty
Rate
Provincial
Increase
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.Speaker, I want to ask some questions
on behalf of those peoplewho cannot afford an automobile, the genuine poor of
the provinceof
On December 13, 1991, the Premier, in his speech to thisHouse, said that
he was willing to work co‑operatively with alllevels of government on any
programs designed to eradicatepoverty with respect to the children of our
province, anyprograms whatsoever.
Can the First Minister of the province tell us, if that washis genuine
desire less than a year ago, why was child poverty,which for two years in a row
is worst in this province of anyother province in this nation, including
(1350)
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, I would point out thatthe
figures which the Leader of the third party is referring toas being for two
years in a row date back to 1990, before thespeech that I gave that she
references. As I said earlier,
thisgovernment took action during the past year and raised welfarerates in this
province at a rate of 3.6 percent last year, whichwas greater than any province
but one in the country and, inaddition to that, brought in additional income
assistance fordisabled, $60 a month, which is rising to $70 a month
inJanuary. In addition to that, we
used a monthly supplement toreplace the provincial tax credit, but we know that
this is notenough, and we have said‑‑[interjection]
Mr. Speaker, the member for
We on this side have indicated that we must continue tosearch for ways to
improve the economy so that we do not justhave people relying on government
social programs for support,and that is in the report that was released that she
is quotingfrom the newspaper article on, the report by the National Councilof
Welfare that the long‑term goal has to be work on the
economy.
That is what the throne speech is all about, is improving theeconomy so
that people do not need only to be dependent onwelfare, social allowances and
provincial government for theirsubsistence, that they must have the opportunity
to go andimprove their own circumstances, and only through a healthiereconomy
will we be able to accomplish that.
Social
Assistance
Food
Allowance
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.Speaker, the Premier likes
projections. Well, I think that
heshould take a look at the projection of the National Council onWelfare. The projection of the National Council
on Welfare isthat the figures on poverty will be worse for '91 and worse againin
1992 than they were in 1990. At the
same time, thisgovernment has made it an unfortunate circumstance that
foodbudgets will be cut for those 93 percent more people on welfarein the city
of
How can this Premier justify less money for food for thechildren already
suffering and living below the poverty line?
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): As I indicated, our provincialgovernment
increased welfare rates by some 3.6 percent, which wasthe second highest in the
country last year, and again by therate of inflation this year. In addition to that, the member maybe
aware of the national program, the federal program, entitled:Brighter Futures,
which is to add support to the children.[interjection]
Mr. Speaker, the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) is on hiscampaign box,
and perhaps he would like to give the answer to hisLeader because he does not
seem to want to listen to my answers.
Social
Assistance
Food
Allowance
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.Speaker, the government's offloading
to the City of
How does the Premier of this province think that singleparent moms, who
suffer from the greatest poverty levels in thisnation and in this province, are
supposed to feed their kids?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson
(Minister responsible for the Status ofWomen): I would really like to respond and ask
the Leader of theSecond Opposition party to get her facts
straight.
There is not one single mom who will receive any less underthe new system
that has been put in place than before.
Allsingle mothers in the
Bill 70 Impact on the City of
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Mr. Speaker, there is no limit tothe
hypocrisy of the Filmon government who in their throne speechcriticized the
federal government for offloading expenses to theProvince of
Now that the minister has announced the regulations to Bill70, will this
minister admit that is the effect of Bill 70,offloading millions of dollars of
expenses to the City of
Hon. Harold
Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Theintent of Bill 70 is to standardize
the intake procedures and therates across this province. We have many municipal corporationswhere
the rate was below the provincial rate.
We had twomunicipal jurisdictions where the rate was higher. Bill 70 willallow for one rate across
the province, and municipalcorporations at their own expense have the ability to
give higherrates if they wish.
I would like to point out the many other enhancements that wehave added
to the social allowances program in addition to the3.6 percent. Recently we announced the ability for
certainrecipients to keep their health card as they make their way fromsocial
assistance into the work force, I think a very progressiveway of allowing people
to leave social allowances and get intothe work force, something that my
honourable friend has failed tocomment on.
We have also increased the supplement for the disabled. Thiswas a new initiative last year. We have been able to increasethat by $10
a month this year. These are just
two of the manyreforms that we have brought in in the last two
years.
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Speaker, why has this minister
offloadedexpenses and forced the City of
How can this minister offload millions of dollars of expensesto the City
of
Mr.
Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, the number of people living
indifficult circumstances in
Again I would point out that we have the third lowestincidence of
citizens accessing social allowances across thecountry. We also have the sixth highest social
allowance ratesacross the country.
If the member is suggesting that Manitobashould have the highest rate,
that is not in keeping with thecost of living across this country.
At the same time, we have also addressed many other issuesthat the member
has raised in the last two years.
We haveincreased the liquid assets exemption, something that has
beendiscussed by poverty groups and something we were able to act onlast
year. As well, we have dealt with
the head of the householdissue, something that was a long‑standing issue that
had not beendealt with through the '70s or the '80s, but something that wehave
been able to deal with in recent months.
Those are againtwo more of the reforms that we have brought in in the
last twoyears.
Mr.
Martindale: Why has this Minister of Family
Services, byoffloading $5.6 million of expenses, forced the City of Winnipegto
choose between cutting rates, especially for people infamilies, many of their
rates were higher, especially forinfants, or to increase property taxes when
everyone knows thatproperty taxes are a regressive form of
taxation?
Why is this minister forcing the City of
Mr. Gilleshammer:
I can tell you that this government has
haddifficult choices on raising taxes, and we have made thosedifficult decisions
over the last five budgets. I think
that theCity of
Again, I would point out that besides increasing the rates by3.6 percent
we have also dealt with a tremendous volumeincrease. Last year we put an additional $40
million into oursocial allowances budget which we expended, and we
overexpendedthat by another $40 million.
The rates would seem to be appropriate when you compare themwith other
provinces across
(1400)
Grain Transportation
Proposal
Tabling
Request
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, the Crow benefit
hashistorically been put in place to provide a level playing fieldfor producers
to ship their grain to export markets, but thereare enemies to this proposal,
some of them right here in thisLegislature. The latest effort to dismantle this
historicbenefit was made in an alarming proposal by the federalgovernment at the
Agriculture ministers' meeting in
I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture whether he receiveda copy of a
draft proposal on grain transportation reform and, ifso, will the minister table
that proposal in this Legislature sothat we all can see what is being proposed
by the federalgovernment on this important issue?
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, thequestion the member
raises is an issue of grave importance to thegrain industry of western
Certainly we also have issues like the pooling of the costson the
A proposal was brought to the Ministers of Agriculture acrossthe country
called the Whithers proposal, commissioned by thefederal government, which we
received at a meeting not too longago in
Government
Support
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): This minister continues to use GATTas an
excuse for change, Mr. Speaker. The
fact is that we have acopy of that draft and he should have tabled it in this
Housewith the opposition in this House as well. If he is going toconsult, consult with
the opposition in this Legislature.
I havea copy to table.
Does the minister support the proposal that would see thelifting of
protection on the branchlines according to thatproposal and a tripling of the
grain transportation rates on railover the next four years? Does the minister support thoseproposals
in that draft that was proposed to the ministers?
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): As I indicated, Mr.Speaker, in my first
response, we have asked our stakeholders,many and varied across
We have grave concern about what that impact will be, so weare in due
process of analysis and the discussion will continue.We will continue to consult
with the stakeholders in the provinceof
Consultations
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, the minister talksabout due
process. Then will he support the
government of
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, as Ihave indicated in both
my answers previously, we are involved inextensive consultations in an ongoing
way and many groups havethanked us for that opportunity. We do not take a knee‑jerkreaction this
way or that way. We are in
continuousconsultation. That
process will not stop. We will not
take aknee‑jerk reaction like that member would like us to
take.
Health Care
System
Community-Based
Services
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is forthe
Minister of Health. When the
minister released the ActionPlan for Health Reform last May, we said it was
better late thannever. We supported
that plan in principle. We in this
partywanted the health care reform to succeed and therefore we wantedthe
minister to succeed. The progress
has been very slow and wehave many more questions for the minister. In fact, we gave theminister an advance
copy of a question last week when we releasedthe report to the
media.
My first question is: Will
the minister provide more detailson the new community‑based services that will
replace the bedswhich are going to be closed at St. Boniface as well as
HealthSciences Centre?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I verymuch appreciate my
honourable friend's continued support for theprocess of change in the health
care system of
Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend makes the case thatprogress to date has
been quite slow. I simply say that
that isa matter of perspective, because in fact I have been buffeted atrecent
occasions that the process is moving much too quickly bysome of those involved
in the shift of services from our teachinghospitals to the community. So I take my honourable
friend'sobservation seriously, but I would suggest to him that theprocess of
change is on target as we had announced May 14 in thetabling of our action plan
document.
The announcement 10 days ago of the 246 beds and theidentification of
those beds at our two teaching hospitalsinvolve a process of retirement from
service over the next fourmonths approximately, with replacement services being
enhanced inthree community hospitals and the concurrent provision
ofcommunity‑based services which my honourable friend I will sharewith him as
they are in place and as the beds are retired fromservice.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Speaker, the health care reform has
to succeed,because in this province and in this country we have no choicethan to
have the health care reform. The
question is that tohave that success, we have to have an alternate way of
services.
Can the minister tell this House exactly what new servicesare going to be
put in place to make sure those patients who aredisplaced will be provided care
in the community?
Mr.
Orchard: Mr. Speaker, depending on the type of
service beingprovided, the new services range from a reinforcement of
ourContinuing Care program, a reinforcement of mental health serviceprovision in
the community through enhancement to the crisisstabilization unit which is
proposed for early next year, anincrease in the number of mobile crisis team
individuals inservice to provide early intervention at the place of
residencerather than admission to an acute psychiatric
facility.
Those types of services, although new to the system, are notnew in
concept and build upon a success that we know is availablefrom a community‑based
services basis, the redirection of somemillion dollars from our departmental
expenditures in mentalhealth services three years ago to invest in
community‑basedsupports which we know work and will serve the system well as,for
instance, it changes to more community‑based,
orientatedservices.
Obstetric
Services
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, one of the majorconcerns
from the parents as well as the physicians and the otherhealth care providers is
that when you are transferring servicesfrom the teaching hospital to a given
community hospital whatback‑up services for neonatal, for anesthesiology, for
emergencytransfers will be put in place to make sure, for people who needthese
services in their teaching hospital, they will beprovided? Finally, who will be paying for those
transfers?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I presumemy honourable
friend is referring primarily to the issue ofobstetrics. I think there has been a substantial
amount of quiteopen discussion around the safety of obstetrics, both within
ourteaching hospital environment and in the three communityhospitals, the
Victoria, Grace and Misericordia.
Mr. Speaker, I can say it no more eloquently than theadministration of
The second piece of information that I know my honourablefriend will want
and I will share with him is the review of theLDRP program at
Mr. Speaker, the important point to remember here with
*
(1410)
Tourism
Promotion
Mr. Gregory Dewar
(Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my question is for
theMinister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.
Stefanson).
It now appears that the
My question to the minister is:
What action is he preparedto take to promote the tourism industry in the
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation):Mr. Speaker, I want to
indicate to the member that we are stillproceeding with negotiations with the
federal government in termsof seeing whether we can get a plan in place. The problem thatwe have faced as a
province is that Public Works Canada has notapprised us of all the information
that we require and certainlythat the merchants' association requires out
there.
We have ongoing meetings that are taking place as of todayand some more
following this week, and we will try and resolvethe issue.
Tourism
Promotion
Mr. Gregory Dewar
(Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my question was to
theMinister of Industry, Trade and Tourism.
What is he prepared to do to help the tourism industry in
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism):Mr. Speaker, obviously
the honourable member did not listen tothe answer from the Minister of Highways
as it relates to theprospect of the bridge closing.
In terms of particular programs that are available to theindividuals and
businesses in the
Mr. Dewar:
The government has already failed Selkirk
very, verymiserably, Mr. Speaker.
Bridge
Closure
Mr. Gregory Dewar
(Selkirk): Will this minister then demand,
incabinet, that his colleague the Minister of Highways (Mr.Driedger) meet soon
with the Minister of Public Works to resolvethis issue?
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation):Mr. Speaker, not to
belittle the concern that the member has forhis constituents, but if he had
really checked this out, two ofmy colleagues, along with representatives from
the merchants'association, flew to
Mr. Speaker, further to that, I thought that the member mighthave gotten
up and sort of given accolades to my department fordoing the bridge job in his
town of
As we did with Selkirk, we will try and do with
Education
System
Program Reduction
Criteria
Ms. Avis Gray
(Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, my question is forthe
Premier.
The throne speech said that education and training are thekeys to unlock
a world of opportunities and a future of economicgrowth and prosperity. Yesterday on a TV news program,
thePremier was justifying the proposed cuts to the Educationdepartment with the
argument that he had not cut anything inEducation for five years. Mr. Speaker, one can only assume
thatthis is the serious discussion that goes around the cabinet tablein
determining the priorities for cuts.
My question is straightforward.
What is the criteria thecabinet is using to determine which programs and
services will becut?
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, the‑‑[interjection] Iwonder
if the member for
Some Honourable
Members: Oh, oh.
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please.
Mr.
Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I am just trying to answer
thequestions. The members opposite
do not show a great deal ofrespect for their colleague and her question. It is a legitimatequestion, and I would
like to answer it.
The fact of the matter is that my response was that thisgovernment has
not cut in Education, that despite all of thestatements to the contrary by
members opposite we haveconsistently given increases to Education that are well
beyondincreases in inflation even, that we have consistently shown thatEducation
is a priority in our administration, and that when welook at serious financial
issues as we do with lowering transfersfrom
Nobody has suggested at this point that any figures that havebeen put out
in a speculative story are accurate, and trying toanswer a question based on
inaccurate speculation is not the wayto try and develop policy. So the point that I was making andthe
point that I will make is that until we come forward with atotal and complete
analysis and review of all governmentdepartments, it is very foolish to
speculate about cuts which arenot necessarily what the policy of this government
will be.
Mr. Speaker:
Time for Oral Questions has
expired.
NONPOLITICAL
STATEMENTS
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, may I have leave tomake a
nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
December 1 is World AIDS Day.
Mr. Speaker, this year theWorld Health Organization has declared the
theme for the WorldDay, A Community Commitment, to stress the need for
communityaction in response to HIV infection and AIDS.
It was only 10 years ago when HIV infected about nine to 11million people
worldwide. Mr. Speaker, by the year
2000 at least30 to 40 million persons will be infected with HIV infection. Itis a very, very serious threat to the
health of all the nations.
Mr. Speaker, I would encourage all the members to getinvolved and do
whatever they can to make sure that this reallybecomes a community involvement
and make sure that the people whohave this disease and their families and their
friends and theirhealth care providers are given their due respect to make
surethat we can achieve the real commitment, and also that willjustify the team
for the WHO. Thank
you.
Ms. Judy
Wasylycia‑Leis (
Mr. Speaker, I too would like to acknowledge on behalf of ourcaucus that
today is World AIDS Day and ask all members to joinin publicly declaring our
resolve to increase public awarenessabout HIV and AIDS and to strengthen our
commitment to fightagainst this devastating epidemic.
The red ribbon I am wearing today, Mr. Speaker, is anacknowledgment of
today's special occasion, and it demonstrates acommitment to work with
caregivers, community organizations andpeople with AIDS. We know about the worldwide
figures. Here in
*
(1420)
Mr. Speaker, HIV and AIDS continue on an increasing basis toaffect people
of all ages from all walks of life and to haveprofound implications for
individuals, their families andfriends, communities and the full range of health
and humanservices.
Mr. Speaker, community commitment, the theme of World AIDSDay, is alive
and well here in
Mr. Speaker, the world is a better place because of peoplelike Rick
Koebel. It is our job today and
every day torededicate ourselves to the fight against AIDS, to supportindividual
and community spirit that is determined to eradicateour world of this
devastating and deadly disease.
Thank you, Mr.Speaker.
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I wonderif I might have
leave for a nonpolitical statement. [agreed]
Mr. Speaker, as all of us endorse World AIDS Day of December1, I think it
is particularly relevant for us in North Americaand indeed in the European
community, where we have, I think,significant opportunities to involve the
community inunderstanding the disease, in understanding how the infection
isspread and in understanding how to mitigate against risk ofcontracting the
virus. That has been very important
to us inNorth
Mr. Speaker, I think we need to reflect on how we can assistthose people
in
I reflect upon the story of one religious leader in, Ibelieve,
I cannot help but reflect how that individual would be wellserved with
the kind of electronic communications and the moderntechnologies that we use in
I think, as we approach this World AIDS Day, it would nothurt for all of
us to consider on how we might become smallpartners in that information and
education campaign in continentsoutside of
ORDERS OF THE
DAY
THRONE SPEECH
DEBATE
(Third Day of
Debate)
Mr. Speaker:
On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for
Mr. Conrad Santos
(Broadway): I would like to express my welcometo the
new members of the House, the member for Crescentwood (Ms.Gray) and the member
for
I would like to focus on the economy in total. The Speechfrom the Throne had stated in
the first page that the winds ofchange are sweeping the globe. This was true two years ago.Today the
world economy has already changed.
As early as 1986, Peter Drucker, a well‑known author inbusiness
management and writer, had stated that the world economyhas already changed in
its foundation and in its structure, achange which in all likelihood is
irreversible.
The most fundamental change that had taken place in the worldeconomy is
the emergence of what is known as the transnationalfinancial economy of monetary
flows, credit flows, exchange ratefluctuations, capital investment directions as
influenced byeconomic variables and as influenced by political events as wellas
government policies and government practices.
If there is one fundamental action in economic theory in thewestern world
to which we have been educated, it is whether theeconomy is classified as
Keynesian, monetarist or supply side.They all have one commonality, in general
they agree at least onone thing.
The basic macro‑economic assumption is that it is thenation state economy
that is controlling the economic events, andtherefore they use the individual
national economy of the nationstate as the basis for economic analysis and for
policyformulation. This is followed
by the
However, such macro-economic axiom of the primacy of thenational economy
is not accepted by all economists.
For example,
We have seen the outcome.
While the
On the contrary, those who rejected this basic axiom, Japanand
What is the lesson for this in terms of our country Canadaand in terms of
this province
(1430)
Before we can understand the workings of our economy, we mustreview some
of the basic concepts and basic notions ininternational economics. For example, what do we mean byexchange
rate? What do we mean by foreign
exchange markets?What do we mean by portfolio investments? What do we mean bydirect foreign
investments? What do we mean by
floating exchangerate system?
Unless we have some kind of a general overview ofall the workings of
these concepts and these variables, we willnot understand why we are sinking
down in our internationalcompetitiveness in the world
economy.
The exchange rate simply means the price of one country'scurrency in
terms of a currency of another country.
It is thenumber of units of one currency that is exchangeable with
oneunit of another currency per unit of time. Thus, if we need$1.25 of our Canadian
money to buy a U.S. dollar, that is theexchange value of the Canadian
dollar. The trouble with
thisconcept is that it has its own inverse value. It means that youonly need about 80
cents to buy the Canadian dollar.
The foreign exchange market is the market in which thevarious
international currencies are exchanged, where thehouseholds, individuals, firms,
banks buy and sell their foreigncurrencies in connection with transactions
involving the exchangeof one type of assets, and by assets here we mean the
intangibleassets like stocks, bonds, bank accounts, in exchange for othertypes
of assets. This is the
international exchange market.
Where the owner of such intangible assets has no control inthe operation
of the foreign company wherein the holder assetslike bonds and stocks and
accounts, that is known as portfolioinvestments. On the other hand, direct foreign
investment is themechanism by which the owner of such assets will have
directcontrol over the operation of the company which owned the assetsthat they
own, such as for example by setting up foreignsubsidiaries. If a Canadian company, for example,
established asubsidiary company in another country, that is a form of
directforeign investment.
Since the Bretton Woods conference, we have deviated from thefixed
exchange rate system. The world is
practically nowoperating on what is known as the floating exchange rate
system,where the exchange value of one currency is permitted by thegovernment to
fluctuate freely according to the forces of demandand supply in the
international market. However,
there is amodification to the extent that central banks of nation
statessometimes intervene in the working of the supply‑and‑demandforces in the
international market and so we sometimes have whatis known as the managed float
system.
Now, money is not a commodity.
We do not eat money. We
donot use money per se, because money has symbolic value. How comethere is demand for money? There is supply of money, supply
offoreign currency. Our Canadian
desire, for example, to acquireand purchase American goods or, in general, any
foreign goods andour desire to travel abroad means that we are making out
paymentsand the Canadian international transaction statement will showthat as
out‑payments of our reserves. On
the other hand, when weexport commodities to the United States, or when United
Statescitizens come to this country as tourists, what we are getting isan inflow
of U.S. accounts, and this is the supply of ourinternational foreign currency in
the form of the U.S. dollar.Thus the demand for and supply of currencies are
simply the rightdemand from our desire for foreign goods and foreign
services.
Now, if our exchange position in the exchange rate systemimproves, there
is an appreciation; they call it an appreciationof the exchange value of the
U.S. dollar. That means the valueof
a unit of Canadian money is increasing.
On the other hand, ifthe value of a unit of Canadian money is decreasing,
they call itthe depreciation of the Canadian dollar.
Of course, government policy has some effect on thefluctuating movements
of these international exchanges ofvalues.
If we pursue monetary policy in this country, which isexpansionary in
nature, what we are doing is we are increasingthe supply of money. The effect of an expansionary
monetarypolicy is to increase the supply of money, but with theincreasing supply
of money the effect on interest rates is thatinterest rates will decline, and
with the decline of interestrates there will be a depreciation, a lowering of
the value ofour foreign exchange.
On the contrary, on the other hand, if we pursue monetarycontraction
policy, then the money supply will decrease. Whenthe money supply decreases, it will
be very difficult to getloans, and so interest rates will go up. When the interest ratesgo up and
increases, the foreign exchange rate will also increaseand appreciate. This is the effect of monetary
policy.
Contrast that with the effect of fiscal policy. When ourfiscal policy is expansionary in
nature, that means the demandfor money is increasing. With the increasing for the demand
ofmoney, the interest will also rise and increase. When theinterest rate goes up, then the
exchange foreign value of themoney appreciates and
increases.
On the other hand, any contractionary fiscal policy meansthat the demand
for money is declining, is going down, and withthe decline for the demand of
money, the effect on the interestrate is also a decline, a decrease of interest
rate, and ofcourse a decrease in interest rate will bring about adepreciation of
our foreign exchange.
Now, what is the relationship between interest rate and theexchange rate,
and the relationship of the exchange rate with ourinternational
competitiveness? For example, let
me see, if theBank of Canada, as it has been doing, wants to control
inflation,and that has been the primary policy of the federal government inthe
past couple of years, and they decide that they will increaseinterest rates in
Canada, what will happen? It means
that theCanadian dollar will appreciate in value in the exchange rate.In fact,
that is the primary reason why they are trying toincrease the interest
rate. They want to bolster
theinternational exchange rate of the Canadian dollar.
What happened to Canadian exports with an increase in thevalue of the
exchange rate? Well, of course,
Canadian exportswill decline, because it will cost more for the Americans to
getthe Canadian dollars that they need in order to buy Canadiangoods. Canadian import of
*
(1440)
(Mr. Marcel
Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair)
Of course, the relative level of prices which defines theinflation rate
is related to the level of the exchange rate. Forexample, if inflation is higher in
On the other hand, if the inflation rate in the United Statesis higher
than the average inflation rate outside of the UnitedStates, let us say, higher
than the inflation rate in
Thus we see that where price levels are high, the monetarysupply
increases. With the increase in
monetary supply, theinterest rate goes down, the exchange rate goes down and
theinternational competitiveness of the country goes down. On theother hand, when inflation is low,
prices are lower, going down,the supply of money is going down, the interest
rate goes up, theexchange rate appreciates, and our international
competitiveposition improves.
However, with all these relationships, there is a time laginvolved which
makes the price and the wage changes move slowerthan the movement of the
exchange rate itself. In other
words,in the short run, prices are sticky; they are slow in moving.Hence, only
the exchange rate will immediately respond, and thisis known as volatility, and
it will depreciate excessively in theform which economists call
overshooting. However, where
themoney supply increases, in the long run the price level alsoincreases and the
exchange rate will depreciate.
Where a country's inflation rate is above the world's generalaverage
inflation rate, that nation's currency depreciates theexchange rate
continuously, as we have seen in the case of highinflation countries like
So with the overall picture of what is going on in thistransnational
financial symbolic economy of money flow, creditflow, investment flow, we can
imagine economic events takingplace, favourable or unfavourable, productivity
levels of acountry going up or down, changes in the demand going up or
down,changes in government monetary and fiscal policy. All of theseevents are affecting the
price level, the inflation rate, as wellas the interest
rate.
The changes in the price level and the changes in theinterest rate in
turn are bolstered by political factors, bypsychological factors of consumers
and their expectations aboutthe movements of international events, and will
affect the demandand supply of foreign currencies. The demand and supply offoreign
currencies in turn will affect whether the exchange ratewill go up or down, and
whether the exchange rate will go up ordown will in turn determine whether our
international competitiveposition will improve or will deteriorate. That is the generalpicture in this
transnational economy of symbolic financialeconomy of money flow, credit flow,
capital investment flow inthe world states.
Now, if it is the case that it is the transnational economythat is now
dominant and is shaping and is driving the economy,and it is not the real
economy of trade flow of goods andservices, we have to understand that these
internationaltransactions are much more voluminous in terms of the
amountsinvolved, compared to just the volume of trade in real goods
andservices. For example, the
foreign exchange markets involve atleast an amount 25 times more than what is
involved in the worldtrade of goods and services.
According to Drucker, the well-known management and businessauthor, these
changes are more or less irreversible and havetaken place. There is an uncoupling, a separation of
the globaleconomy of primary non‑oil product items, of goods, forestproducts,
metals and minerals from the industrial economy of theworld. The two are separating ways and they are
no longerrelated.
Second, within the world industrial economy, themanufacturing production
sector has uncoupled itself and hassplit from the manufacturing employment
sector, and to beinternationally competitive, any country must now
continuallyshrink its blue‑collar manufacturing employment sector because ofthe
fact of the changes and shifts in productive processes. Forexample, it means that our
manufacturing process is now a lesslabour intensive and more knowledge‑based,
information intensiveprocess.
Let me give you an example.
To manufacture a computer chip,the one that is the heart and brain of the
computer, you knowwhere it came from?
It came from the common lowly materialcalled sand‑from the sand. Because of technological processes,we
can extract silicon from the sand and from silicon we cancreate the silicon
chips. The silicon chip in its
productionrequires a 70 percent component of knowledge out of
research,information, technological and scientific knowledge‑70 percent.The
materials involved there is about 2 percent.
*
(1450)
The material grows product from the physical matter itself.The labour
component is only about 12 percent.
That is how themanufacturing process now has changed. It is now a society ofinformation,
knowledge, technology, and therefore many of ourindustrial, blue‑collar workers
are no longer needed in theproductive process as much as we needed them several
decadesago. The same changes have
taken place in the changes in theworld economy.
There is another third uncoupling or separation takingplace. The real economy of tangible and visible
goods and theintangible, invisible services are now being separated from
thistransnational financial symbolic economy of money, credit,exchanges, and
they are no longer concurrently working in thesame
direction.
Why is this so? Because we
have changed our internationalexchange rate system from what is known as the
Bretton Woodsagreement system of fixed monetary parity rates into what isknown
as the floating exchange rate system that is now prevalentall across the
globe.
Now, what do we mean by this shift in the exchange ratesystem? In the olden days, under the Bretton
Woods agreement,they nominated the U.S. dollar as the international
monetarycurrency of world trade.
Every country had a fixed ratioattached to the value of the dollar. For example, the Britishpound was fixed
at $2.80. This was backed by the
gold reserve inthe world. The value
of the gold reserve, regardless of supplyand demand, had been fixed at the time
at $35 per troy ounce.Therefore, everybody knew exactly where they were in
thisexchange of assets, intangibles, values, credits, money. At anytime, you can always demand and
convert the dollar if you wantto, but this has already
changed.
Nowadays, they allow the fluctuations in the foreign exchangerate to
freely flow according to the international forces ofsupply and demand, but they
did not do so completely, because thecentral banks of many national states are
intervening in thatnatural process in the free market in the international
monetaryworld. They are trying to
influence the direction of the forces,such as the intervention of the Central
Bank of Canada in orderto protect and bolster the international exchange rate
value ofthe Canadian dollar. So
what we have seen here are actuallythese kinds of changes.
Let me illustrate why technology has contributed to thischanged condition
of the world economy, and we are part of theworld. We cannot just isolate ourselves and say
we want tocontrol our own economy, we want to do this. We cannot be aclosed system. We cannot do that.
We live in a globalized economy.
It means an economy oftransnational corporations, multinational
corporations,straddling more than one country. They use production methodssource in one
country or set of countries. They
market theproduct in another set of countries. They effectively link allthese
categories in the form of nation states, regional economicblocs, such as the
European Economic Community, and we are nowforming a North American bloc very
soon after the emergence ofthe EEC in
According to Pilzer, the demand can take the form ofquantity‑oriented
type of demand for more and more of whatconsumers want, what they already
have. For example, in 1960,
90percent of American homes had at least one TV. Now thatincreased in 1980 to at least 98
percent. At this point, thenature
of the demand itself has changed from a quantity‑orientedtype of demand to a
quality‑oriented type of demand.
Instead ofhaving just one TV, black and white, we now want colour
TV. Wenow want stereo TV. We now want the wide‑screen TV. That is thekind of demand that people
are now wanting. [interjection] Well,you can find so many homes nowadays with at
least three TVs, inevery room.
The changing nature of the productive process also changesthe kinds of
products that are available in the market.
It usedto be that when you wanted vinyl records, they were still good.Who
buys nowadays the turntable record player?
Nobody, becausewith the invention of the compact disk, that has
actuallyreplaced and superseded the old record player, and the demand forCD
players now has practically dominated the entire market.
An Honourable Member:
What is a CD
player?
Mr. Santos:
Compact disc.
There are many other examples.
Because of our technologicalknowledge and technological processes we have
invented, forexample, synthetic rubber.
That means that the demand fornatural rubber is no longer there. It has been replaced.Synthetic fibres
like nylon and all kinds of manufacturedfibers‑‑the demand for natural cotton is
no longer there. Theinvention of
vinyl has replaced our desire and demand for leatherand, with the invention of
hard plastics, the demand, of course,for steel and tin and all natural minerals
has gone down. Thatis the reason
why copper is no longer as much in demandworldwide. What happened to our workers in
Thompson, and whathappened to the economy in Thompson? Of course, all of these areaffected by
international events outside of our small sphere ofour
economy.
It used to be that we used copper wires in order to put uptelephone
lines. Nowadays they use what is
known as fibre opticcables.
A mere 100 pounds of fibre optic cables used as telephonelines will carry
as much information and messages as one tonne ofcopper wire, and they are
relatively very cheap to manufactureand to install compared to the copper
wire. Hence, the demandfor copper
has gone down.
You can see now the collapse of the world demand for naturalmetals and
natural minerals. So even a country
like
*
(1500)
Now, in the form of all these changes, what do we need todo? What can we do? In order to prosper, we need primarily
tobear in mind our international competitive position. We have tostrengthen that international
competitive position or at leastnot impair such international competitive
positions.
How do we do that? Well, we
know that this is now aknowledge‑based society. It is an information‑based society. Itis a technology‑based world
economy.
What are some of the primary, traditional, neoclassicalfactors of
production? People, material, land,
labour, capital.
What is the most important resource that we can contribute inthere if the
physical resources coming from the land are nolonger valuable? [interjection] Do
you know what is the mostimportant resource? People. Therefore, we have to have thishuman
resource developed at a very high level of literacy withtechnical, scientific,
computer-oriented skills, as well as humansentiments and concern for the welfare
of human beings. Thereshould be a
balancing in there of technical skills and concernfor human
welfare.
Sometimes our organized unions are fighting to protect theirjobs in the
manufacturing industry, but because of thisuncoupling, of employment going down
and the number of
Blue-collar workers
diminishing despite the fact thatmanufacturing goods are increasing because of
the robotization ofthe productive process, what is to be done? This is a verycontroversial and
contentious issue, and ideology can enter intothis. The most difficult choice that any
government can make isof course to allow its industrial working force to be
taken overby robots and computerized devices and throw them out of
work.
Now, if a person, a worker, loses his job to a machine, isthat good or
bad? Of course, it is bad for the
worker, but ifthere is a national training and retraining program that takescare
of the worker, that is not bad because after the worker isretrained, there will
be two kinds of jobs, the job that is beingproduced by the robot and the job,
probably a service job that isthe growing sector of the employment industry
which the workerwill also enjoy. So
we have two kinds of jobs, and we willproduce twice as much, and we will enjoy
the prosperity that weare trying to enjoy.
Therefore, the modern economy should redefine success.Success means
flexibility. Flexibility can come
about only if wehave the right kind of worker who has the basic skills
inwriting, in calculating, in speaking, in listening, in decisionmaking, as well
as in technical skills, computer skills, inscientific and technical-oriented
skills.
Therefore our educational policy, as you see, is related toour
international competitiveness. If
we allow our schools to godown and deteriorate, we allow our human resources to
deterioratewith it. We allow our
economy to deteriorate, and we lose ourinternational competitive position. We need to more than educateand graduate
people in our educational institutions, in ourschools, in our colleges, in our
universities. Indeed, the callof
the hour is for people to continue to go back to school atleast one day a week
for the rest of their working lives, so thatthey will be
up‑to‑date‑‑
The Acting Speaker
(Mr. Laurendeau): Order, please. Thehonourable member's time has
expired.
Mr. Gerry McAlpine
(Sturgeon Creek): It is a pleasure to standbefore this
House today and to offer my reply to the Speech fromthe
Throne.
Mr. Acting Speaker, since being elected, I have spoken onevery throne
speech and every budget speech. It
is interesting,as I look back over the past years, how overwhelmed we felt asnew
members at the thought of speaking for 40 minutes. Now it isjust a short time ago we have
begun to feel that 40 minutes isnot enough.
On this occasion, Mr. Acting Speaker, I want to take adifferent direction
in addressing this Chamber and myconstituents, and the reason is not because
anything is changed,but because of what I have been hearing Manitobans think of
thesedifficult times and what they think government should be doing.This really
hit home to me when I saw a video of a lecturer andeducator, Joel Barker, whose
comments made a lasting impressionbecause what he was saying can apply to every
one of us, to everyManitoban as we set out to build a stronger Manitoba. I sharemuch of what I remember of this
lesson throughout my speech today.
Although I do want to take the high road, I may stray fromtime to time
just to make a point. I do believe
the member forNiakwa (Mr. Reimer) said it very well in his remarks last
eveningso I will leave it at that level.
I would like to begin by welcoming the members back to thisnew session,
and I would also like to extend my best wishes tothe Pages who are joining us
this year. I hope this
introductionto the legislative process is a good learning experience for
you.
I would also like to offer my congratulations to the two newmembers, the
member for
I would like to add my congratulations to my colleagues ontheir
accomplishments in their respective constituencies sincethe last session, and to
you it is reassuring to see Mr. Speakeronce again occupy the Chair. May this session be a rewarding onefor
you and to you, Mr. Acting Speaker.
I would also like to offer my best wishes to ourLieutenant‑Governor who
was missed during the throne speech.
Iwould wish him a quick recovery and good health for many moreyears to
come.
Too often we do not appreciate the importance of good healthuntil we
suddenly do not have it anymore. Health care is apre‑eminent issue for
this government. We understand
theimportance of good health. It is
a fundamental value that unitesus as Manitobans. The health care system of choice is one
thatcreates a balance between prevention, community‑based andinstitutional
services.
Because our government believes a strong sense of communityis a valuable
resource in the delivery of health care services inManitoba, our government is
placing more emphasis oncommunity‑based care. What is being achieved through this
changeis a redirection of the responsibility where ultimately those whoare able
to do so can accept more responsibility, thus a savingof tax dollars without
sacrificing patient care. This is
an areaof interest to both myself and my constituents.
The availability of health care in the community is ofextreme importance
to the people of Sturgeon Creek. As
themember from a constituency in which approximately 37 percent ofthe population
are 55 years of age and over, the necessity ofavailable health care is well
known to me. A vital part of
thiscare is the existence of personal care homes. These facilitiesenable our elderly to
remain in their communities and among theirpeers and among their
families.
The Sturgeon Creek area is indicative of the changingdemographics of
Mr. Acting Speaker, we owe it to ourselves and to the futuregenerations
of Manitobans to take care of our aged.
I was proudto represent the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) this fall
atthe sod turning for the construction at the new municipalhospital, a
long-awaited initiative which is just another exampleof this minister's
commitment to health care in Manitoba.
I amdeeply committed to our government's action plan which will
makepositive inroads to a national health care delivery
system.
*
(1510)
Mr. Acting Speaker, fortunately over the summer recess, I wasable to
spend a lot of time in my constituency talking to thepeople. In speaking to my constituents at one of
my coffeeparties last fall, I was able to determine the concerns of theseniors
in this area. I was proud to be
able to, in thisinstance, assist these constituents in obtaining a new
sidewalkand approach in front of their seniors residence at 22
StraussDrive. My constituents had
previously been forced to navigate anoften dangerous path along the roadside as
well as an approachwhich was not easily wheelchair
accessible.
These hazards were undermining our efforts to maintain andpreserve the
well‑being of this senior population.
I am pleasedto announce that the sidewalk was built this summer, and I
wouldlike to thank the minister and his Department of Housing for hissupport in
addressing the concerns of the residents of thisseniors home. They have really appreciated what we
have beenable to do for them.
I would like also to pay tribute at this time, Mr. ActingSpeaker, to
another valuable asset to the Sturgeon Creekconstituency, and that is the
Canadian Forces base of Winnipeg.The air forces's connection with the city goes
back to 1922 whena station of the old Air Board was opened here to serve as
awinter base for detachments which operated in northern Manitobaduring the rest
of the year. RCAF Station Winnipeg
officiallyopened in April 1925 and was one of the first air force bases
inCanada.
During World War II, RCAF Station Winnipeg became a major airforce base
as part of the British Commonwealth air training planwhich trained more than
130,000 pilots, observers and wirelessoperators across various locations in
After the war, RCAF Station Winnipeg saw an increase intraining
activities. Over 5,000 aircrew from
foreign countriesgraduated there from No. 2 Air Observer School and
From such humble beginnings in 1966 grew a base which is nowone of the
country's largest, employing over 3,700 people. Ofthese approximately 1,000 are local
civilians. The importance ofsuch a
large employer in the constituency of Sturgeon Creekcannot be
overstated.
It was with pride that I accepted a recent invitation to tourthe base and
to speak with some of their personnel.
As a resultof my extremely positive meeting with base commander
personnel,particularly base commander Colonel Bert Proulx, LieutenantColonel
Rick St. Germain, Lieutenant Colonel Birt Meindel, MajorJim McMullin, Major
Denny Carpenter and Captain Dan Lachance, Ilearned of the value of this facility
to all Manitobans.
The role of CFB Winnipeg is to provide support to regular andreserve
units. In addition, they operate
the five militarytraining schools that are based in
These schools provide training to many Manitobans. In fact,the role of Canadian Forces Air
Navigation School is to train allnavigators for the Canadian Forces on the brand
new, Canadianbuilt CT 142 Dash 8, of which there are six here in
Winnipeg.
(Mr. Speaker in the Chair)
CFB Winnipeg has been an integral part of the city for over45 years and
has become a very important element in the economyof this city. CFB Winnipeg injects more than $210
millionannually in the economy of the city and is currently the fourthlargest
employer in
As well, the base is very much involved in the localcommunity. They support various charitable events
and areinvolved in many humanitarian relief projects. We are all veryproud of the contribution
that CFB Winnipeg is making to theconstituency of Sturgeon Creek, to the city of
We congratulate them on leading the way in technologicaladvances for
aviation schools throughout the world.
I would liketo offer my personal thanks to Colonel Proulx and the staff
ofCFB Winnipeg for their graciousness in allowing me to tour theirfine
facilities, to learn more about the base and the personnel,and a special thanks
to an outstanding gentleman, who, as fatewould have it, shares my name, Major
Gerry MacAlpine. The onlydifference
is that his name is spelt M-a-c.
Major MacAlpine isalso a part of the command along with base commander
ColonelProulx.
I am extremely pleased to count CFB Winnipeg as one of themany fine
organizations in the Sturgeon Creek constituency.
There are many other organizations that fall in thiscategory, but I would
like to draw the Chamber's attention to yetanother facility located in the
Sturgeon Creek area of which Iwill speak.
It is a longstanding facility that has affected thelives of many families
in the area, the Sturgeon Creek UnitedChurch, which was recently the site of a
tragic occurrence. Itall happened
within an hour of the end of the Sunday worshipservice. The sanctuary was completely gutted by
fire.
Estimated damage has been placed at over $1 million. Thoughthe building was destroyed by
fire, this church lives on, and itcontinues to worship in the Sturgeon Creek
area. The couragedemonstrated by
these members in the face of adversity should benoted and
applauded.
The history of the
It is believed, Mr. Speaker, that the small wooden churchthat first came
to rest south of
After 26 years of fundraising, a church was finally builtwhich could
accommodate the 250-member-strong congregation. In1963, a new sanctuary was built which
was large enough to hold450 members and offered a beautiful new home for
worship. Anaddition completed later
united the two church buildings into onelarge facility, and the church of 1949
was used as a Christianeducation building.
Tragically, it was the sanctuary built in1963 that was destroyed in the
recent fire.
*
(1520)
However, once again as throughout history, a buildingcommittee has been
formed by the Sturgeon Creek United Churchmembership, this time to rebuild the
church. This task isparticularly
important to the congregation, as the church willcelebrate its centennial next
June. A committee has already
beenformed to co‑ordinate the celebration of 100 years of worship inthe
Although efforts have already begun to rebuild this historicchurch, the
congregation was left homeless after the fire. Themembership was definitely in need of
a temporary home for itsservices. I
was proud to have been able to participate inassisting in finding a temporary
place to worship for themembership of some 600 families. They were able to worship bythe Sunday
following that of the fire.
Though a new home for the congregation is at least a yearaway, they have
been fortunate to find a willing partner toassist in continuing worship
service. The St.
James-AssiniboiaSchool Division came forward with a very generous offer to
thecongregation because of the emergency situation of the
The school gymnasium has been turned into a beautifulsanctuary complete
with donated items from churches all over thecity. I would like at this time to commend
both the congregationof the
While I mention the St. James-Assiniboia School Division, Iwould like to
commend the division for being such caring citizenson this matter and also to
the larger community, theirconstituents.
There is much that can be said of theaccomplishments of the St.
James-Assiniboia School Division.This is a division that I have had the pleasure
of working withclosely, and I can attest that the education of our young
peopleis the primary concern of this school division. Toward this end,the St. James-Assiniboia
School Division trustees have formulatedplanning guidelines which echo the
priorities of our government,such priorities as education reform that this
division is alreadypractising. They
demonstrate leadership at its fullest which youwill agree with after hearing my
remarks.
The St. James-Assiniboia School Division has placed strongemphasis on
total quality education and total qualityleadership. Therefore, it is no accident or stroke
of luck thatthis division prides itself in having more students with goldmedal
awards and other top awards earned by its students than anyother division in
These include gold in such areas as a high quality of studentlearning
experience; instructional excellence; co0operative learning; the teaching of
thinking skills; student learningstyles and other components promoting a high
quality of education.
The division believes that planning which focuses on studentself-esteem,
student self-discipline and responsibility, studentproblem solving and
goal‑setting skills should be emphasized.Not only is the school division
concerned with the quality ofeducation it provides, it is also actively
increasing its role inthe community.
At last count, the division had developedpartnerships with 172 businesses
and organizations across thecity in order to offer their students opportunity to
work on-the-job while attending school.
The St. James-Assiniboia School Division trustees recognizethe importance
of career education to the community as well as tothe students. Though the commitment of the division
remainsstrong, it has had to face difficult times over the past decade.They have
had to manage the effects of school population declineunprecedented elsewhere in
The impact of this decline is currently being felt in thecommunity at
large. In large measure, this
situation isattributable to the location of the urban development line, whichhas
restricted housing development in the St. James‑Assiniboiaarea while permitting
development in other areas.
The residents of Sturgeon Creek who want newer housing orwhose lives have
changed with families growing up and leavinghome have to leave the area to get
suitable housing. This hashad a
drastic impact on retaining young families in the area,consequently, no other
metropolitan area school division hasexperienced such drastic decline in student
population.
Though the division has sought to soften the impact ofdeclining
enrollment, it is clear that there is an urgent needfor new urban development,
particularly in this area. There is
ahigh degree of support among my constituents for such
residentialdevelopment. Therefore,
I will continue to work together with myconstituents toward the continued growth
and vitality of ourcommunity and our school. This can be best accomplished
byattracting new businesses and new families to our
community.
The Sturgeon Creek community has much to offer. It is myduty and that of my government
to maintain the quality ofeducation and the quality of life currently enjoyed by
myconstituents. Our government is
deeply committed to the growthand prosperity of
I am certainly aware, Mr. Speaker, that without the supportof my
constituents I would not enjoy the success that I have hadto date. It is therefore very important to me to
be informed ofthe issues that affect them and to address these
concerns.
As I travel throughout my constituency and am able to meetand talk with
people, one comment is frequently raised.
Peoplecontinue to let me know that they do not want more taxes. I amtold time and time again that our
government is heading in theright direction in holding the line on taxes. I commend ourgovernment on this
position. It is clear to me, Mr.
Speaker,that the people of
Our government is firmly committed to the growth ofManitoba's
economy. This is quite unlike the
members across theway, who have no vision of the role of business in
strengtheningour economy. Their
vision is a vision of short‑term jobs withlong‑term pain. Their vision is to tax people and
businesses sothat government can do for the people what they can do
forthemselves. When will they learn
that if you expect governmentsto do everything, it is going to cost more
money? All thatequates to is more
taxes, 10 times out of 10.
I believe it is incumbent upon me to inform my constituentsand to remind
my fellow members across the way, as they seem tohave forgotten, of the pain of
which I speak.
In 1981, when the NDP came into government, it cost $90million per year
in interest to service the government debt. In1988, when our government came into
office, it cost $550 millionto pay the interest on this debt. Why? Because the NDP in lessthan eight years
and with revenues at 16 percent, went out andcreated make‑work jobs that barely
lasted for one full shift, andall that Manitobans were left with was the
debt.
Business development and economic issues are going to play akey role in
*
(1530)
Mr. Speaker, the role of government in the economy is onethat is often
explored deeply and with great consideration, butwe as individuals also have
responsibility. We as
individualsare the only ones who, if we want to control our futures,
mustact. The way we must act is to
take responsibility forourselves.
We cannot blame the ills of destinies on governmentalone, which we have
been hearing far too much these days as welisten to the opposition and the
media. We as individuals havethe
freedoms in this province and in this country that are notfound anywhere else in
this world.
Our God‑given talents are immeasurable. The limitationsplaced on our talents
hold us back. Too often I hear
thenegative side of life when I listen to our opposition members andthe
headlines of the media. Is that
what you like, I ask you.Do you like living in a negative world? You must, because thatis all that comes
out of your mouths. Too often, what
comes outof your mouths are only words.
It would appear that the member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer) wascorrect when
he referred to the members across the way asdinosaurs because they are living in
the past. They do not seemto be
able to look ahead as successful and forward thinkersshould but, then again, we
are not looking at successful andforward thinkers. As they would say in
Here is a quote that you should heed, and may I suggest tothe honourable
members across the way, pay attention to ourfuture, your future, because that is
where you are going to spendthe rest of your lives. Mind you, I do believe that your
futureis to stay in opposition and ours is to stay in government. Isay this for you who believe in
government doing everything forthe people‑‑the people who are saying no more
taxes, the peoplewho are saying, let us have less
government.
More government just costs more money, and instead of havingpeople work
for themselves, they end up working more for thegovernment by paying more
taxes. That discourages
people. Itdiscourages
businesses. The effects are that
people are hearingthis negativism, think only about the present and only dream
ofthe future. When we dream about
the future too often, and Irefer to the opposition members across the way, we
think that ourgoals are unattainable, which is not only unfortunate, it
isdevastating.
Positive thoughts are so important in building a future, notonly to
individuals but to businesses and nations, corporations.Each and every one of us
want to make a difference in this world,Mr. Speaker. I observed a tape with the words offered
by ascholar recently that had a profound impression on me. He toldof economies around the
world. In 1973 OPEC was taking
controlof oil. Watergate was just
beginning, and inflation was out ofcontrol. Many believed it was worthless to think
of the future.
Positive attitudes are important, especially now throughtough times. Think, dream about the future. This is our mostforceful motivator for
change. When I look across the
floor andlisten to those members, I believe that they have lost completesight of
the future. When they criticize the
throne speech, Iwould ask them this question that I heard someone ask. I believethe media could take a lesson
from this as well. The questionwent
this way: Is a nation's positive
image of its future aconsequence of its success, or is the nation's success
aconsequence of its future?
I want to share with you a series of stories that I had theprivilege of
hearing and which had a profound impact on me. Ihope it will do the same for my
colleagues and for all Manitobans.
(Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Speaker, in the Chair)
A Dutch scholar by the name of Polock who studied nations andcorporations
on the degree of positivity with which they wroteabout their future and how they
lived up to their expectations.He found the answer at the Parthenon in
So too did the Greeks envision their culture. How did allthis happen? The Greeks believed in dreams, and they
transformedthose dreams into something much more positive‑‑vision. Vision is the result of dreams in
action. Polock found that
significantvision preceded success.
In example after example the samepattern emerged. Success was achieved by the significant
visionof leaders who communicated that vision to the
people.
First, a compelling vision of the future was offered by theleaders, and
that image was shared with their community, and theyagreed to accept it. In acting in concert, they made the
visiona reality. It was true in
What is particularly interesting about Polock's research isthat these
nations that were studied did not have the rightresources or any other strategic
advantage against the odds asthey began their climb to greatness. What they did have was aprofound vision
of their future. This was not the
only keyingredient but was the first and most important.
Nations and people with vision are powerful. Nations andpeople without are at
risk. This can even apply to
children ifwe take this into a lower denominator. A researcher named Singerfound that
children were profoundly affected by their visions.The most successful students
are those with vision; those hearingonly about difficulty could care less about
the future and liveonly for today.
What does that tell us about doom and gloom fromthe opposition and the
media? It was also found that high
IQsand family backgrounds were not the key indicators in determiningsuccessful
people or nations. Do you know what
the keydifferentiator was? It was
vision. What the successful
studentshad in common was that they all had a profound and positivevision of
their future.
Another scholar and researcher, Joel Arthur Barker, tookSinger's research
to
What he offered them was vision.
This offering changed thelives of each of these students forever. He told them of dreamsof other
well‑known successful people that they could identifywith. He told them that everyone must have a
dream. He toldthem of the
importance of having a dream, and that the key totheir future was
education.
He spoke of their future years, going through junior highschool, high
school and college. When he spoke
about college, itoccurred to him that this goal was hardly attainable by
themajority of these students. So
he offered each of the GradeSixers a full scholarship to college upon completion
of theirhigh school graduation. He
worked with students, teachers andsupport staff to instill in the minds of these
students a visionthat each of these students could attain a college
education.
*
(1540)
Of the previous students at this school, almost none of themhad gone on
to college after graduation from the elementaryschool before. Of those 52 students that Eugene Lang
addressed,48 graduated from high school, and of those 48, 40 went on
tocollege. This supports, in just
another way, what researchershave told us, that people's and nations' success
can be measuredby their visions.
What does that tell us about high schooldropouts?
When we examine the future of our province, our people andour children,
and we listen to what they are saying, we heardreams, dreams that shape their
confidence, visions that shapetheir own futures, and collectively, the futures
of ourprovince. For nations, for
children, you can see the samepattern in the power of
vision.
Another place in history where vision played an importantrole in survival
and success was in
We can only survive the present by living toward a positivefuture. That is our salvation, like the crossing
of a turbulentriver where our future lies beyond the far shore. Can we applythat to us as a
government? Yes, I believe we
can. I believethat not only can it
be applied to our government, but that itcan also apply to this throne
speech. This throne speech
hasvision.
Firstly, to be considered a vision, it must be developed byleadership,
which it has. Visions are not
discovered by themasses. The
visions of the leadership must be supported by theteam, and the team must agree
to support them, which we will dowhen we vote next Monday. In order to be successful, a visionmust
be comprehensive and detailed for everyone to interpret andact upon. With this throne speech, that will
follow.
A vision must be positive and inspiring, encouraging us toreach beyond
our grasp. Values are essential in
establishing ourvision. Values are
established by our experiences of the past.Now the past is behind us, and the
future is what counts the mostfor this government. As I speak today, not only do I speak
tothe members in this Chamber, I speak also to the people ofSturgeon Creek. As I have always said to my
constituents, yes,we are going through hard times, we are probably going
throughthe toughest times governments have seen in many years. However,we will pull through if we all
work together. As little as
thecontribution we as individuals can make may seem, it is possibleto
achieve. Let us not wait for
governments to do it. Let usnot
wait for corporations to do it. Let
us take what we asindividuals can accomplish on our own.
This reminds me of a story I saw recently that I would liketo share with
you. It is a story told by a Lorne
Isley, ascientist and poet, and it is worth sharing with this Chamber andmy
constituents.
He told of his experience this one time, observing a youngman on a beach
throwing a starfish into the ocean.
He asked theyoung man, what are you doing? The young man told him that thesun was
hot and the tide was going out, and if I do not throwthis starfish back into the
water, it will die. The man
replied,young man, do you not realize that there are miles and miles ofbeach out
there with starfish all along it?
What do you hope toachieve?
What difference do you expect to make? The young manlooked down, picked up a
starfish and ran down to the water andthrew the starfish into the water beyond
the breakers. When heran back up
the beach he said, well, it will make a difference tothat
one.
The response shocked the elderly man and for days the visionhaunted
him. We can learn from this story
just as it made animpression on me.
As insignificant as it may seem, regardless ofwhat we ever do to improve
life, we can make a difference.
Thatvision is among all of us.
We all have the ability to make adifference. We only have to find our own starfish to
make thatdifference and when we do we all become aware of our gifts. Thefuture of this province and this
country will be within the powerof all of us. No recession, no hard times need control
us. Wewill make this province and
this country a better place to live.Thank you, Mr. Acting
Speaker.
Ms. Avis Gray
(Crescentwood): Mr. Acting Speaker, government isa trust
and the officers of government are trustees. Both arecreated for the benefit of the
people. Since the beginning
ofdemocracy in the new world, this has been the traditional view
ofgovernment. It is unfortunate
that over the last decade thattrust in governments and government officials has
crumbled, and Iam not referring to this government in particular, but I
amtalking about governments in general.
We have certainly seencynicism in regards to politics and
politicians.
This cynicism probably reached a crescendo on November 26, inour country
of
I have certainly heard at the doors of people in Crescentwoodduring the
by‑election this summer that cynicism and thatfrustration. I heard it again in the civic elections
following.Frustration probably masked a lot of that
cynicism.
I remember a story of our federal leader, Mr. Chretien,telling about a
colleague of his who was a Member of Parliament.He told the story one day in
caucus about his young son who wasin school in the classroom and at recess a
number of his friendswere teasing him about his father's occupation. They weretaunting him and saying, your
dad's a politician.
I think that speaks volumes in terms of what the people inCanada and here
in
When I was growing up in rural
The other positions that tended to be revered in those daysas well was
the local agriculture representative or the localhome economist. I remember very well thinking and
growing upmeeting those people and meeting politicians as well, and theywere
considered to be very much esteemed positions.
*
(1550)
I think it is important to note, and I think we have to moveaway from the
idea of politicians as a revered profession. Wehave to have a happy medium between
that reverence and the factthat politicians are on the bottom of the rung in
terms of theprofession, and there has to be that happy medium between
thatreverence and that disdain.
I think that women have brought a change to the politicalscene as well,
Mr. Acting Speaker. I think we do
bring adifferent perspective to the Legislature. I think oftentimes webring one of
conciliation and mediation and negotiation.
My Leader, the member for
I believe that we do bring a different perspective to thisLegislature; no
matter what political stripe, we do bring thatperspective. I think that it is important that we
continue tosee more women who are elected to the Manitoba Legislature fromall
parties. I was certainly pleased to
see the increase in thenumber of women who were elected in the 1990 election,
and I hopeto see more of that in the 1994 election.
I would like to take this time to also talk about a specialwoman,
certainly in regard to Manitoba politics and, I wouldsuggest, politics in
western Canada, and that is our Leader,Sharon Carstairs, who certainly made
inroads into the politicalarena in her last nine years here in
Manitoba.
Here is an individual, here is a woman who certainly is avery principled
individual, who had very much integrity andhonesty. In fact, she was probably too principled
and too honestin some respects. She
will admit herself, will sometimes admitthat that was oftentimes a weakness in
the arena of politics,that her honesty sometimes got her into trouble with
theelectorate and her principleness sometimes got her into trouble,but she does
not have any regrets about her principles and wouldnot change, I believe, a
thing that she has done.
There is no question that we will miss
We will only know how much we miss her once she is gonebecause that is
oftentimes when you recognize the greatcontributions that an individual has made
to a political forum.
I am sure all members in the House would agree, politicalstripes aside,
that in fact she has made a wonderful contributionhere in
Let me say that I am pleased to be here once again in theLegislative
Assembly, this time representing the people ofCrescentwood and, of course, to
promote the Liberal view of howwe feel our province should be
governed.
I certainly welcome my colleague the member for
Thank you as well to the members of the House, new membersand some not so
new, who have welcomed me here on my return. Thewishes were very sincere and very
much appreciated.
(Mr. Speaker in the
Chair)
I would also like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I would liketo thank you
for your usual grace and charm as Speaker of theLegislative Assembly. Your welcome has been very warm, and
Ilook forward to your leadership as Speaker throughout thesession. My colleagues in the caucus have assured
me that theskill with which you have managed the Speaker's role in the
pastcontinues on and that your belief in fairness, justice and a deeprespect for
all members of this House prevails as you carry outyour role as Speaker of the
Manitoba Legislative Assembly.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank a numberof
individuals who are civil servants and who, at their request,shall remain
nameless. When I was last here in
the LegislativeAssembly as the member for Ellice, after the 1990 election I
wentback to a position within the Department of Health. I had theopportunity to work with a
number of individuals in the ManitobaWinnipeg Region Department of Health and
Family Services.
I used to say to them that if I ever did come back to theLegislature, I
thought it was important to recognize the valuethat civil servants do have in
providing services to the peopleof
I sometimes think that it would be a good opportunity for allhonourable
members of the House to have worked in the CivilService at some point to
actually gain an appreciation of thedifficulties that one can encompass in the
Civil Service, thehard work that is necessary and the fact that they actually
arethere to provide a service to the people of Manitoba. Their onlygoal and their main goal is to
provide a quality service, andthey are a very dedicated group of
individuals.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the voters ofCrescentwood
for their confidence in me in the by‑election thissummer. It was certainly an exciting
by‑election, and there weresix worthy candidates. I am grateful that the voters
hadconfidence in me and my abilities to represent the
Crescentwoodinterests.
Crescentwood as the name of a constituency is actuallysomewhat of a
misnomer. There is a unique
community ofCrescentwood according to the city of
The constituency of Crescentwood is actually much larger andincludes a
number of unique and distinct communities.
Itincludes the distinct community of the north
It was certainly very interesting for me to campaign in theCrescentwood
area and to represent the Crescentwood area becauseI feel that is where, since
coming to Winnipeg, my roots havecertainly been. I live in the Crescentwood area and also
myfirst work experiences in
One notes in the Crescentwood area many older homes that havebeen
refurbished over the last few years.
What I really noticedas I was travelling down the streets of Jessie,
Warsaw and Mulveywas certainly the older homes where young families have moved
inand again are spending a lot of time renovating those homes. Ithink that is a credit to those
individuals who live there. Itis
very nice to see that we are starting to see the core or themiddle part of our
city that is actually being developed and thatfamilies are living in these
areas.
It is also interesting as we move further west on Jessie andWarsaw
streets, one is not a long‑time resident of Jessie orWarsaw unless you have
lived in your house for at least 40 years.A lot of the individuals who live on
those streets have livedthere for 40 years, have lived in the community. It is a verystable neighbourhood. The first house that I bought in the
cityof
It is a very interesting community in that we have a numberof
professionals who live in the community, business people,artists. There are a lot of artists who live in
the constituencyof Crescentwood.
We also have the
*
(1600)
I think the business association, the Crescentwood BIZAssociation should
certainly take some credit for the work thatthey have done to really make
I trust that the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst) isalso supportive
on a provincial level of ensuring that we seeneighbourhoods being
revitalized. I hope that the
Minister ofUrban Affairs will also be ensuring that he is trying torenegotiate a
third core area initiative so that as well we dosee some dollars that can be put
into infrastructure into ourolder neighbourhoods here in
Winnipeg.
One of the things as one looks through the constituency ofCrescentwood,
however, although you can walk along WellingtonCrescent and walk by the
condominiums there, which are certainlyover a quarter‑of‑a‑million dollars, you
can also walk throughsome of the areas where you do find businesses that
arestruggling. You can find a food
bank just on the corner, justoutside the constituency of Crescentwood which is
certainly used,the Stradbrook‑Nassau area, which is certainly used by
theresidents of Crescentwood.
One thinks of Crescentwood as an affluent area, but that isnot
necessarily so. Crescentwood is
representative of the manyproblems and concerns that we have facing people in
the city ofWinnipeg, those issues of lack of jobs, unemployment,difficulties
with getting health care in some respects, and justthe migration of people out
of the Crescentwood area and actuallyout of the city of Winnipeg. All of these problems I faced atthe door
during the campaign, and all of these issues people arewanting answers
for.
(Mrs. Louise Dacquay,
Deputy Speaker, in the Chair)
Speaking of answers to people's questions, I would like toturn my
attention now to the throne speech.
Although I hate tomake a comment from the paper, I must admit that one of
thereporter's comments talked about the throne speech as being a"drone
speech." I thought that there
really was some truth tothat, unfortunately.
When we look at this throne speech again, it is another vaguedocument
which is really just a lot of nice flowery words andrhetoric, but when you
remove that rhetoric and when you removethe flowery words, there is really
nothing there. You remove allthe
petals and there is absolutely nothing there. There is nomeat. There is really basically a commentary
on similar thronespeeches from the past.
I guess what I found that really came to mind as I wassitting and
listening to Question Period today, in response toquestions about the rising
poverty rate here in Manitoba, we hadthree separate ministers respond to a
number of questions, thePremier (Mr. Filmon), the Minister responsible for
Culture (Mrs.Mitchelson) and the Minister of Family Services
(Mr.Gilleshammer). They all talked
about how they had increased thesocial assistance rate some 3.6 percent and
seemed to take a lotof delight and pride in the fact that they had accomplished
thesethings. My concern was, here
is a government who is saying, hereis what we have done in response to the
questions that wereasked, but their solutions have not solved the
problems.
What good are solutions if they have not dealt with theproblems of child
poverty? Yes, you have increased
the socialassistance rates 3.6 percent, but those solutions have not dealtwith
the rising child poverty rates and the rising unemploymentin this province. What does that say about a government
thatseems to provide these fragmented solutions but yet it is noteven dealing
with the problems?
When the government gave the throne speech, I was actuallyquite looking
forward to hearing some information on what the newplans would be for education
reform here in this province, thisbeing an area that is of interest to myself as
a critic, and itcertainly was an interest to people in the area of
Crescentwoodas well, as we went door to door campaigning. Even in the civicelection, people talked
about the economy and people talked abouteducation.
Again, I was very concerned when I heard the Premier speak ontelevision
the other day. He basically talked
about the factthat there was going to be a $17‑million cutback to theDepartment
of Education and basically said, well, there has notbeen a cut for five years so
it seems logical that we might lookat cutting that particular department. I thought that was a verypoor way to do
things.
I would hope that around the cabinet table decisions are notmade or
criteria are not developed as to how you will look atprograms and services based
on which department has the biggestbudget and which department maybe has not had
a slash or a cut,so we will try this one.
I would hope that decisions are notmade in that way, because if the
government is really true andreally believes in their statement about economic
reform andeconomic growth being tied into education and that education isthe key
to unlocking the future of opportunities, how can theylook at slashing dollars
in the Education budget? Perhaps
theyshould look at ensuring that in fact there were adequate dollarsin the
Education budget, because in five and 10 years from nowthat is where we are
going to be able to show some results, ifthe government is prepared to put some
dollars and look at thatparticular department.
When we look at the education‑‑I was quite interested, theMinister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey)
spoke the other day in theHouse, and she talked about the importance of
parentalinvolvement. She had said
that, yes, parental involvement isimportant and almost intimated that in fact
there would be aparent bill of rights.
I hope that is an accurate statement, andI hope we do see a parent bill
of rights here in this House,because we would be glad, as members of the
opposition, tosupport that type of parental involvement.
Too many times do we have parents who feel that they are nota part of the
education of their children. I do
not think thatthat is a negative against the teachers and against
theprofessionals who work in the system.
They too are very, veryfrustrated by the education system that they see
today. They toofeel that they do
not necessarily have control over what they doin the classroom. Classroom sizes are very large. They feelthat they are asked to do
things that are not part of theteaching role, that they are now becoming
paramedics in somerespects. They
are asked to do medical procedures which they donot feel are
appropriate.
There has been this plan, supposedly, by the government,which was
actually supposedly started by the former government,to actually co‑ordinate the
services amongst Health, Justice,Education and Family Services. This plan has now been moved to adeputy
minister level, where four deputy ministers are going todecide on a protocol as
to: How do they handle some of
thechildren who are finding themselves really falling through thecracks in terms
of any department willing to pick up and provideservices for
them?
Unfortunately, I would like to see with that deputyministers' group some
input from people who worked at thegrassroots level, whether that be the
front‑line childdevelopment worker, whether that be the elementary
schoolteacher, or whether that be the person in the Department ofJustice, the
probation officer, whoever that individual is. Iwould like to see some of those people
sit on that committee sothat the protocols that are going to be developed are
actuallyvery much grassroots and are based in reality, because with alldue
respect to deputy ministers, they do not necessarily knowwhat it is like on the
front lines. Sometimes it is very
goodfor them to be able to get opinions from people who are workingon the front
lines and who are working in the schools.
So wewould like to see that from this Minister of
Education.
What we are still finding, however, is that for families,even though
there is supposed to be more of a co‑ordination,particularly amongst Family
Services, Health and the educationsystem, families are still falling through the
cracks. There isstill this
territorial warfare amongst the various programs ofthe individual departments,
whether it is Programs Branch inFamily Services, whether it is Home Care in the
Department ofHealth, whether it is Child and Family Services in the Departmentof
Family Services or whether it is Mental Health Services in theDepartment of
Health. We are finding this
territorialnessbecause these branches are saying, well, we do not have
thedollars to service these individuals.
So, if someone comes forward who perhaps needs some home careservices and
child home care services, they say, well, no, we donot provide that because this
child has a mental health problem.Let Mental Health provide the dollars. This goes back and fortha lot, whereas
it is the parents and the children who get caughtin the middle. It is the workers as well who get
frustrated,because they feel that they need to take direction from
theirdirectorates, so even though they might like to get out there andactually
provide the service, they feel that they cannot do that.
*
(1610)
I say that as something that has gone on in government, andit has not
happened in the last four years. It
has gone on inthe last 10 and 12 years.
There is some recognition that thereis a problem, and I hope that there
can be some movement so thatin fact we are able to provide the best common‑sense
service tothat individual out there, because in the long run, it all comesout of
the same pot of money, and that is the taxpayers' pockets.
So, even though it may‑‑who really cares? I mean, that childout there, that family
out there does not care whether it iscoming out of a line in Health or Family
Services. They justwant the service
for their child. I think if the
ministers wereable to actually allow some latitude to some of their
middlemanagers, some of the directors, a lot of the managers areprepared to make
those kinds of decisions and are prepared to beaccountable for them, providing
they are not going to get flakfrom the program directorates. So I think that is something thatcould
be looked at, because, of course, we all have the same goaland that is to
provide quality service for people.
One of the other issues in the area of education, and it wasquite
interesting, since I came into the Legislature, I startedto receive very many
calls on, and that is in the area of specialneeds funding for children in the
school system. It is a
verydifficult area. There are not a
lot of easy solutions tochildren with special needs. We have vulnerable children whohave
mental handicaps who are now integrated into mainstreamsociety in the
schools. That was done perhaps with
the rightintention but perhaps not the right amount of planning andforethought
as to how that was actually going to occur. Some ofthese children were moved and
integrated into the school systembefore the schools were actually able and
prepared to deal withthese children, and that is unfortunate that that has
happened.
But there are other special needs areas where we havechildren with
behaviourial problems who are very difficult todeal with by teachers, by
resource teachers, by the schoolsystem, and even by, sometimes, their parents,
and how do we dealwith those children?
It is not an easy answer because I think ifthere was a simple solution,
the government would haveimplemented it, that they would have looked at
that. But what itdoes take though,
what we need is to have teachers and schooltrustees and parents actually look at
some of these problems andlook at some innovative, creative solutions as to what
we mightdo.
My Leader talked about maybe we need to look at some type ofa time‑out
school, some place where these individuals withbehaviourial problems can spend
some time with resource people orwhatever, because there has to be a point where
you can continueto teach the other members in the classroom, the other
childrenin the classroom while this one child is having a
behaviouralepisode. So we have to
look at some ways we can deal with thatin the school
system.
One of the other issues, and it was very interesting‑‑I givecredit to the
River East parents, their advisory council, whohave actually written a recent
letter to the Minister ofEducation (Mrs. Vodrey) and have expressed their
concern as wehave here in the Liberal caucus, and concern about thede‑streaming
of some of the classes in high school.
Theirconcern is that we now will have generic subjects in areas
ofgeography and history and they feel that that is a veryregressive step, it is
a step backwards, and they are going to becirculating a petition in the River
East School Division, intheir school, and will be presenting it to the Minister
ofEducation to express their concern.
I certainly will be getting in contact with this advisorygroup because I
think it is important that not only do oppositionmembers express to the
ministers what our concerns are, but whenparents in the community are starting
to express these concerns,then hopefully the minister will take a look and
perhapsreconsider what some of the decisions are. Although I have nothad the opportunity
to get to know the Minister of Education verywell, I certainly am very
optimistic that here is a person who isflexible, willing to make changes and
willing to listen to whatthe people have to say, and if in fact an idea is
definitely notworking or is not in the best interests, well then, let us changea
policy. Let us be flexible, let us
do the right thing for thepeople of
I think oftentimes politicians and governments do what ispolitically
expedient, but we do not necessarily do the rightthing, and it is important that
we consider that.
I find it is quite interesting when I listen to theopposition party talk
about education and how we must worktogether. I always remember when I was in the
Civil Service howthe former NDP government espoused fairness in the system
andco‑operation and how we needed to promote people based on merit.I find it
quite interesting that here we have a situation‑‑andthis relates to education in
a sense‑‑where we have a group ofpeople in the Winnipeg School Division No. 1, a
group of schooltrustees, all carrying a political card of one particular
stripewho have decided that it is in their best interests and thepeople's best
interests to all be put on these boards andcommittees and they are then going to
make the decisions.
They have actually shut out some school trustees who carry nopolitical
card that I am aware of, of any particular affiliation,who have done a good job
in the past who were re-elected by theirconstituents, and they have decided
that, no, they can make thebest decisions as a group and they can get through
the work muchfaster when they have six people who are all thinking the
sameway.
I have concerns about that, because I know that the party onthe left
espouses a lot about fairness, and I know they talk alot about merit and how it
is very important that we co-operateand do the right thing. The words are there, but the
actionsoftentimes do not follow through and that concerns me. For acollective group to think that
because we are all of like mindsand we think the same, we are going to get the
best solutions. Iwould suggest to
you that oftentimes is not the case and, infact, when you have people sitting in
a group or an organizationwho may come from different philosophies or
backgrounds,sometimes you get the best solution with people who come fromthose
varying backgrounds, because you have to really be creativein your thinking in
your decision-making process. So I
wouldsuggest that in fact you could be more creative that
way.
I could continue on and on about education. I know that Iwill have opportunities
during the response to the budget and aswell other debates on resolutions and
bills that are presented inthis House.
I would like to talk a little bit about the Urban Affairsportfolio very
briefly, and I certainly very much look forward tobeing the critic of Urban
Affairs. It is a very
interestingportfolio. The part of
the city that I live in and the part ofthe city that I represent is certainly
very much interested inCore Area Initiative and in looking at a renewal of that,
becauseit is important that we revitalize these
neighbourhoods.
One of the issues that has certainly affected theCrescentwood area and
also affects the
*
(1620)
I hope that these individuals, as well, because of theirconcerns with the
development in the southwest quadrant‑‑I assumethey will be lobbying the
Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst)on this. I certainly will be speaking to the
Minister of UrbanAffairs about the development because although we are not
againstdevelopment of the city, I think it is important to recognize wecannot
continue to develop in the city of
One of the other critic areas that I am responsible for isthe Civil
Service Commission, and I know that we will beanxiously awaiting the report from
the Minister responsible forthe Civil Service Commission (Mr. Praznik) of the
Hay audit. Irecognize that because
of the untimely passing of the Chair ofthat committee, Ms. Gerrie Hammond, that
in fact we probably havea delay in that particular report of the
implementationcommittee, but I certainly urge the Minister responsible for
theCivil Service, because that report is about at least a yearoverdue, that we
get on track and look at exactly what theimplementation is going to be. I know the Women in Governmentgroup are
very anxious to find out what exactly the changes willbe in the Civil Service
Commission.
One of the interesting areas that I have an opportunity tospend some time
meeting with my constituents on is in the area ofculture and arts. I feel very fortunate to live in
aconstituency which is frequented by a number of artists, not onlyin businesses
on
Certainly a number of them have met with me to talk about therecent Sun
articles in regard to arts and arts funding, and therecertainly seems to be a
majority opinion that it is importantthat we maintain objectivity in the arts
community by havingpeers adjudicate peers.
That was certainly a message that camevery strong and clear to me from
artists, not just in myconstituency, but others as well.
I think culture is a very, very important area and oftentimesgets
overlooked, particularly in times of recession and in timeswhere there are large
deficits. Oftentimes, it is very
easy tolook at an area such as culture and say, well, that is where weare going
to have to slash and that is where we are going to haveto cut, because it is
difficult to say that we can keep thefunding there when we are looking at
feeding children. Itbecomes a very
difficult dilemma for governments of any stripe todeal with, but it is important
to recognize that culture is anintegral part of our
society.
I thought that Margaret Mead who, of course, was a famousanthropologist
of the 20th Century‑‑she spoke of culture when shesaid, and I quote: As the traveller who has once been from
homeis wiser than he who has never left his own doorstep, so aknowledge of one
another's culture should sharpen our ability toscrutinize more steadily, to
appreciate more lovingly our own.
I think those words by Margaret were very true, that cultureis very, very
important, so that we not only have an insight intoourselves, but that we have
insight into our neighbours as well.
When I read the throne speech, I guess one of the things thatI was
looking for, particularly because of my background infamilies and Family
Services, was what is this throne speechgoing to do for families in my
constituency, for families inManitoba?
I was very concerned to see a lack of any type ofsolution as to what are
we going to do about the fact that wehave the second highest poverty rate in
We have seen over the last couple of years a slow but steadyerosion of a
child care system here in
We see a government that believes that services to ourvulnerable
citizens, particularly our handicapped, are oftentimesones that can be frozen or
cut. We know that we currently have
afreeze right now of dollars in the Department of Family Services,and that
freeze is for mentally handicapped children inparticular who would normally need
to receive services. Workersout
there and their families are terribly, terribly frustratedbecause there are no
dollars available that can put some type ofplan into place to provide services
for mentally handicappedchildren. It is a great frustration, because there
is nothingout there.
I think if the government actually looked beyond the factthat they think
they are saving short‑term dollars, they wouldfind that if they had a few
dollars that were well placed andwhere they provided services for these
children, in the long runthey would save dollars, because there would be more
time for theworkers to go out and spend with other families, there would beless
stress on the families so that those families would beutilizing less other
services, whether they are counsellingservices, whether they are home care
services, whether they aremental health services.
In fact, they could probably be more efficient in the use oftheir dollars
if they actually said, let us spend some money upfront for some of these
mentally handicapped children, put a planin place so that they have reasonable
services, because we willsave dollars in the long run, but not only that, we
will increasethe quality of life of these individuals and families, becausewhen
families break down and can no longer care for individualswho are handicapped,
what happens is, it ends up costing thehealth care system far more dollars than
what it would havebefore.
So I would like to see the government and particularly theMinister of
Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer), who is willing tolook at that‑‑I see that
the 40 minutes is running out. That
isunfortunate, because I wanted an opportunity to comment onHealth, but I know I
will have other opportunities to do that.
Let me just finish by saying that I hope in this session ofthe
Legislature that we will see a more kinder, a gentler type ofsession in the
sense that we begin to work together and that wereally start thinking
about. Everyone should have a sign
ontheir desk that says, my goal is to service the people ofManitoba, regardless
of the political stripe. That is
our goal,and let us all work together to achieve that. Thank you.
Hon. Jim Ernst
(Minister of Urban Affairs): Madam DeputySpeaker, in deference to my
good friend from Thompson, I willgive half of it in Greek and the other half in
English.
I want to, before I get into my remarks, welcome firstly mynew colleague
from
I would also say, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the formermember for
I still would like to welcome, Madam Deputy Speaker, themember for
Crescentwood (Ms. Gray). She is not
exactly themember we had anticipated welcoming from Crescentwood. We hadplanned something just a little
different.
An Honourable Member:
And it was not Tim Sale
either.
Mr.
Ernst: No, that is for sure. It was another person who ranin that
election, but nonetheless, democracy was at work, and themember for Crescentwood
received obviously the appropriate numberof votes in order to be present here in
the House. So I welcomeher and wish
her well in her endeavours.
The former member for Crescentwood, Mr. Carr, Madam DeputySpeaker, was a
fine gentleman and one whom I had as a critic ontwo separate ministries during
my time here in government, bothTourism and Urban Affairs. I always found him to be very willingto
listen, to be co‑operative, to work together for whatultimately would be for the
best interests of the people ofManitoba.
I know that, well, from time to time, we haddifferences of opinion, which
is only normal in this kind of asetting.
Nonetheless, he was very co‑operative and very easy towork with, and I
appreciated his openness, his frankness and hiswillingness to try and work
toward good, common goals.
*
(1630)
There was no partisan‑‑well, I should not say there was nopartisan,
because that is not entirely true.
I would like to saythat, but unfortunately, I cannot. Nonetheless, it is to beexpected
certainly, but when it came down to issues for whichthere really was no partisan
side, one or the other, even thoughmy honourable friends sometimes, in the New
Democratic Party,tend to find partisan issues where there are none present, or
atleast seek one out or try and manufacture one, I must say thatMr. Carr was
very easy to work with. I was
pleased to have hadthe opportunity to work with him here in the
House.
It is unfortunate, Madam Deputy Speaker, that from time totime, people
who have had a long period of time in public lifeseek other avenues, seek other
ways of fulfillment in their ownendeavours. I know that the member for Rupertsland,
forinstance, is suffering some trauma at the present time, and Ifeel for
him. The loss of a family member,
particularly a motheror father, is an inevitable circumstance in your life,
butnotwithstanding the fact it is inevitable, it really does notsoften the blow
that much. I know from
experience. I know thatthe Minister
of Consumer Affairs (Mrs. McIntosh), having lost hermother just recently‑‑Mr.
Harper now is undergoing that trauma.I feel for him, and I send my regards to
him and hope that he canfind some comfort in whatever he does in the
future.
The Leader of the third opposition party has also chosen adifferent path
in recent weeks. She has indicated
that she hasin her view provided whatever she could to the political party ofher
choice and to the Legislature of Manitoba.
We respect herfor that and wish her well and hope that she finds
happiness andfulfillment in whatever she chooses to do over the next monthsand
years. We also wish her family
well, who are generallyaround her and are very supportive of her activities
certainlythrough the time that she was here.
I also want to offer my welcome and best wishes to the Pageswho are here
present in the Chamber. I am sure
the Speaker, orwhomever it is who engages the Pages to come into the
House,provides a much more dramatic picture than really what ultimatelyhappens,
at least certainly in the first few days of their workhere. I notice, Madam Deputy Speaker, one of
the Pages noddingin agreement that I am sure it was glamourized to some
greatextent to be able to participate in the democratic process in
theHouse.
While initially I am sure they seem to suspect that maybe notall of the
facts were laid on the table when they were engagedfor this job, if they pay
attention and if they learn and if theyunderstand what is going on here they
will learn a great dealover the period.
I suspect that if they listen to members onthis side of the House they
will learn a great deal more thanthey will if they listen to that side of the
House.
I think it is important for them to understand that they dohave an
opportunity here to listen, to hear various points ofview from the members
opposite and from this side of the House ona variety of issues. While from time to time their
dutiesperhaps seem somewhat menial, certainly the opportunity is therefor them
to learn. I wish them well and I
hope that theexperience that they have here over the next year is of benefitto
them in their future lives. I am
certain that it will be.
Madam Deputy Speaker, over the past couple of years, I guess,three years
now, I have had an opportunity to invite to theopening of the session some
students from my constituency.
Wetry and spread the invitations around to as many schools aspossible to
allow those young people to be able to come andwitness a little bit at least of
the pageantry associated withthe Manitoba Legislature.
Very often, and we saw again today, we had a couple of schoolclasses
present and unfortunately they tend to see the worst.When you come and sit in
Question Period they tend to see theworst of what goes on in this place as
opposed to the best. Thefact of the
matter is that there is a bit of history, a bit ofpageantry, a long tradition
associated with the Legislature and Ithink it is an important opportunity for
them to see those kindsof things. I
think I would encourage all members of theLegislature to do that in order to
expose as many young people aspossible to the kind of things that go on here in
the ManitobaLegislature.
I also want to give my thanks and best wishes to myconstituents, Madam
Deputy Speaker. There is no one, I
think, weshould be more grateful to nor should we ever forget than thepeople who
put us in this place. We are the
ones who come hereto represent them, to provide good government in
whateverpolitical form one wishes to subscribe. Nonetheless, we comehere on their
behalf. It is important that we
recognize that weare here on their behalf, that we are here because they voted
forus or at least the majority of them voted for us. We are alsohere to listen to what they
have to say. So, Madam
DeputySpeaker, we must all be ever mindful.
As I think one of my colleagues said yesterday, it is adistinct honour to
be elected as a member of the Legislature.There are only 57 of us here, out of a
million some odd people,who are privileged to serve in the Legislature of
Manitoba, so weought to take that job very seriously, and we ought to ensurethat
we do the best that we possibly can to provide the bestgovernment that is
possible. I certainly know from
members onthis side that we are doing that very thing.
(Mr. Speaker in the
Chair)
The throne speech paraphrases that great eminent Americanphilosopher and
poet, Willie Nelson: When the winds
of changeare blowing. Certainly, we
have experienced in
We have seen political upheavals in the world over the pastwhile, Mr.
Speaker, where countries like the Soviet bloc have nowbroken up into a loose
confederation of states where they havetried to switch from a centralized
economy to a market economy,realizing that the centralized economy to which they
havesubscribed for the past 60 or 70 years as a matter of fact hasnot worked,
has been a dismal failure and that centralized,socialist philosophy has been
recognized by those people as nothaving worked.
It has been a dismal failure.
They have tried for 70 yearsand have failed year after year after
year. So now we see thosepeople now
switching to a market economy. We
see them attemptingin an extremely short period of time to try and switch to
theeconomy that has succeeded year after year after year elsewherein the free
world. But there has been
associated with that freemarket economy, even in those countries where it has
beensuccessful for a very long period of time, economic restructuringgoing on,
the likes of which no one has ever seen in the past.
*
(1640)
We have seen economic restructuring in the EuropeanCommunity. We have seen it in
Mr. Speaker, in the throne speech someone accused us of using"innovation"
on a number of occasions in the throne speech. Thatis exactly what is required. Everyone, everyone, not just themembers
of the government, but the members of the opposition, themembers of every
government in this country, municipal, schoolboard, federal government,
provincial governments, all of uscollectively spend too much money. We spend more than we takein,
dramatically more. The time has
come, the day of reckoninghas come.
We now are here to say that we have to look at how wespend our
money. We have to look at new and
better ways ofspending our money, if we are not going to cut services. We canno longer afford to tax. We can no longer afford to
tax.
An Honourable
Member: So why are you raising the
deficit?
Mr. Ernst:
Mr. Speaker, we will give the Leader of
theOpposition (Mr. Doer) a lesson in economics any time he wishes.The fact of
the matter is, day after day after day in this Houseit is he and his party who
are demanding more and more and moreexpenditures. They are demanding it daily in the
House. We havegone through four
sessions now over the past four years, and wehave heard that constant barrage
every day, coming from membersopposite, "spend, spend, spend, spend," and
followed closelybehind or perhaps even led by members of the Liberal Party
here,whose philosophy also is "back up the Brinks truck." We haveheard that in the past as
well.
Mr. Speaker, the time has come for all of us to stop, to takea real hard
look at how government does things, how business doesthings, and how all of us
have to look at different, moreinnovative, more effective ways of spending the
taxpayers' money.
Mr. Speaker, the private sector has been doing this for someperiod of
time. This is not something that
has dramaticallyhappened overnight.
This has been building over the last five,six, seven, eight years, where
the private sector has had torestructure it own operations in order to be
competitive, becauseif we are going to deal with companies in other countries
who areattempting to compete in a world market with us, then we have tobe
competitive. We cannot all of a
sudden just decide that weare going to put up barriers around
Mr. Speaker, that will not work.
Technologies, Mr. Speaker, such as Teshmount Consultants, whoare doing
direct current hydro transmission engineering work overthe world,
world‑renowned, created virtually the kind oftechnologies that hydro systems
benefit from today in conjunctionwith Manitoba Hydro over a long period of
time.
Our government has been on that path as well, Mr. Speaker,over the past
four years. We have recognized that
we have thesekinds of problems. We
have recognized the kinds of issues thathave been coming forward because of that
restructuring that hasbeen going on.
Unfortunately, it kind of landed at the same timeas the recession that
hit the world's economy. So we have
had akind of double whammy all of a sudden in our economy here inManitoba, but
we have recognized the fact that we have to havesome innovation, we have to have
some new ideas, some new ways ofdoing things. My colleague from Pembina the Minister
of Health(Mr. Orchard) occasionally refers to it as new‑think as opposedto what
has gone on in the past.
The fact of the matter is, we do need to innovate. If we donot innovate, Mr. Speaker, we
are not going to survive; we arenot going to have a medicare system in this
country that we haveenjoyed up to this point. My honourable friends opposite's ideaof
dealing with this issue is to throw more money at it, createmore beds, do not
look at innovative ways and means of doingthings.
At least the Liberal Party has recognized the fact that thoseinnovations
are required and that the system will not surviveunless we do that
innovation. So I compliment my
colleague theMinister of Health for the initiatives that he has undertaken.They
have not been easy issues to deal with.
Until largelyunderstood by the public, they will not be readily
acceptedacross the width and breadth of this province. The fact of thematter is, they must be
done, and he has had the courage atleast, Mr. Speaker, to undertake those kinds
of changes thatother people heretofore have not. They have simply dumped moneyonto the
problem and taxed for it, as opposed to looking fordifferent, new, innovative
ways of dealing with things.
Thosekinds of things are necessary, not just in the Department ofHealth,
but in virtually every aspect of our economy and everyaspect of this
government.
We have to look at ways and means of dealing with the FamilyServices
problems and service delivery modules in this governmentas well. We have to look at education. I know my colleague theMinister of
Education (Mrs. Vodrey) is looking at a number ofinitiatives, attempting to find
better ways of providing aneducation to the young people of our province. If we do not havethose new, innovative
ways, if we do not start looking at some ofthe problem areas that are contained
within our education system,we are going to fall dramatically
behind.
It is not just good enough to say, well, hire more teachers,build more
schools, throw more money at it. We
have to deliver abetter quality product.
We have to deliver a better qualityproduct than we have been doing in the
past. We have to havesome sound
learning principles, and we have to have some kind ofmeasure. We have to understand what kind of an
education systemwe have and how we are compared to others in the same kind
ofsystem. How are we compared to
the
Economic development, we have heard a lot about that over thepast while
and certainly an extremely important issue that mustbe dealt with over the next
period of time. We have,
Mr.Speaker, through the Departments of Industry, Trade and Tourismand Rural
Development, a number of initiatives underway which areimportant, I think, in
terms of assisting new economicdevelopment in our
province.
The fact of the matter is, when you look globally at whatgovernments can
do in terms of overall economic development, itis very small, what any
government can do. I do not care
whatpolitical stripe you have, you are very, very limited in terms ofwhat
governments can influence in the overall scheme of things.You have to provide a
fertile ground for a business to survive.That is the underlying essence of all
of the things thatgovernment can do.
Governments can have programs, Mr. Speaker, to providefinancial
assistance. They can have make‑work
programs; we haveseen those in past governments. We can really do something very,very
small in the overall scheme of things, because it isultimately the success, the
competitiveness of the company thatwill ultimately gauge whether it will employ
people or not,whether it will pay taxes or not and whether it will contributeto
the coffers of government to provide the kind of safety netsthat we have enjoyed
for a number of years and will continue toenjoy, I am sure, into the
future. Without that fertile
ground,without a solid base for them to operate from, it is not going
tohappen.
*
(1650)
We have seen what has happened in the past, so what we needto do, and our
government has embarked upon this road some timeago when we first came into
office, was to provide that basicfertile ground for companies to be able to
survive and thrive anddo business and create those kinds of jobs and create the
kind oftax revenues that ultimately are necessary for any government
tosurvive.
All that has gone on before is not bad. There are all kindsof good things that
we need to capitalize on, that we need tobuild upon, strengths that have been
created in the past bypeople, by pioneers, by governments, by a whole host of
playersin the economic field.
Certainly we must build upon those strengths and, of course,one of the
primary strengths of this province has been and willcontinue to be for many,
many years to come is agriculture.
Weare accused from time to time to hear that with a"rural‑dominated"
caucus that is the only issue that we areprepared to look at. It is an important issue and one facet
ofour economy here. All of my
colleagues recognize that andrecognize that because it is a major part of our
economy and doesdrive a great many of the businesses associated in Manitoba
aswell as the on‑farm income, Mr. Speaker, we know that much has tobe done. We can build upon that
strength.
We have over the past three or four years stronglyrepresented the
position of
Mr. Speaker, we need to find a resolution to GATT obviously,but we also
need to encourage our farm community to diversify asmuch as possible. It is very easy and very comforting,
Isuppose, not ever having been a farmer I cannot say for sure, butI can say
this, it would appear at least to me that knowing justa little bit about the
farm economy it is reasonably comfortableto be able to say, well, I can go and I
can plant my wheat in thespring and harvest it in the fall and spray it in
between andthen that is good enough in terms of bringing me a reasonableincome
for my family. Those days, I think,
are slowly drawing toa close and farmers today are going to have to look
atdiversification a lot more than they ever have in the past ifthey are going to
survive in the kind of economy that we foreseein the future, but not just
diversification on the farm front,but diversification on an industrial front to
add value‑addedprocessing to the kind of products that we do produce
here.
There is no reason on God's green earth in my mind why‑‑wegrow the best
durum wheat in the world here in
We are fortunate, Mr. Speaker, to have French fry plants, forinstance,
here in Manitoba by McCain and Carnation that areshipping worldwide. We could have other kinds of plants
similarto those I think if we put our minds to it and try and determineexactly
what can be done and how it can be done, and I think weshould all work toward
that end.
We have also in the agriculture community, Mr. Speaker, beenable to I
think, at least in the short term, help stabilize farmincomes in this province
through our participation and the hardwork of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr.
Findlay) in the GRIP andNISA programs.
They are not the be all and the end all,certainly, to any long‑term
solution, but they are a stop-gapmeasure to try and stabilize farm incomes so
that the people inrural Manitoba know at least where they can head into the
futureand try and work toward that diversification and that
value-addedprocessing and other kinds of things that will ultimately assistthem
in their business ventures in the future.
As I indicated, Mr. Speaker, in the past, health careindustries has been
I think a real boon to this province.
Wehave seen some significant changes in the health careindustries. They are not readily evident. I mean, you do notsee the flashing neon
signs necessarily, but what you see is thatin 1988 when we signed an agreement
with the federal government‑‑and I had the privilege personally of signing
thatagreement in August of 1988 with Minister Epp at that time‑‑abouta dozen or
so businesses in the health care product developmentfield.
Today, we have five and six times that number of companiesinvolved in the
health care product field. I do not
take 100percent credit. The
government prior to our taking office in1988 had embarked upon this path as well
and rightly so. Thefact of the
matter is that they had built a small foundation uponwhich we were able to
expand and to grow, and I compliment themfor that as something that I think in
We have had some successes over the past while particularlyin the
pharmaceutical area where there have been a number of newinitiatives announced
for
We hope to be able to see that sod turning take place, as amatter of
fact, as much work as possible done on that project asquickly as possible to
ensure that it ultimately gets finallybuilt in Manitoba where we think it
belongs and where we haveworked very hard.
All of us I think‑‑
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader
of the Opposition): You better build itbefore the next
election.
Mr. Ernst:
Well, exactly. Mr. Speaker, the Leader of theOpposition
is correct. We need to have it
substantially builtbecause I do not think it is any secret that the bureaucrats
inOttawa would dearly love not to have it built in
*
(1700)
We have first‑hand information in telecommunications work,Mr.
Speaker. That is another niche
market that
Mr. Speaker, I think we have some good benefits on thehorizon there. Hughes Acoustic Technology is another
goodexample of the kind of thing that can be done in
Mr. Speaker, we have tourism.
For instance, The Forks justreceived an international award. I was privileged to be ableto‑‑I did not
have very much to do with what The Forks receivedthe award for. I happened to be in the right place at
the righttime in terms of being the minister. Nonetheless, I was pleased,on behalf of
the people of
At that meeting there was recognition of events and placesand projects in
countries all around the world. So
this was notsimply a North American kind of situation but one of a
trulyinternational nature, and I was pleased to be able to
We do have a number of attractions here and things we have towork
on. We have to revamp our
Convention Centre, and ourgovernment has committed funding toward that so that
ourConvention Centre can be competitive.
You know, when it wasbuilt in 1975, it was one of two convention centres
in all ofCanada, and now every major city and many not‑so‑major citieshave
convention centres and facilities that are trying to attractpeople, recognizing
the kind of draw that centre has for majorconventions. So we need to keep up to date. We need to spendsome money to refurbish
our Convention Centre in order to make uscompetitive again with other convention
centres and facilities,not just in
As I said, Mr. Speaker, we have to have a stable taxenvironment, and
particularly for companies that wish to come toinvest in
What he did talk about was the union line. He talked aboutthe union wages. He talked about the union benefits,
theirworkers, those workers who are out there supporting the unionleaders who
are the ones who are really the beneficiaries of whatgoes on in the union
movement. That is their priority;
they havemade that choice. They
have decided that they are going to godown the road with the union leaders, and
that is their choice.They are fully free and able to do that and make that
decision.
Mr. Speaker, the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) quoted,saying that
there were a great many jobs lost in northernManitoba, which had been announced
on the same day as the Houseopened, and there is not one person in this building
who is happyabout that. There is
not one person certainly on this side ofthe House and, I am sure, on that side
of the House who isthrilled that these people have found that the ore has run
out inthe mines that they work in and that there is no more work forthem in that
particular location because the ore has run out.
But then we have the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer)saying, no, we
are going to have the toughest plant closinglegislation. Nobody is going to be able to close
it. That mineis going to operate
whether there is ore there or not.
That, Mr.Speaker, is foolhardy.
That kind of attitude will drive not onlythe businesses that are here
out, it will drive anybody who iseven considering coming to Manitoba so far away
you will neverfind them. Never will
you find anybody associated with that.
I know my time is running short, and I want to make a couplemore
comments. The member for
Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) commentedearlier about a new trilevel agreement for
We have commitments, I have a personal commitment, ourgovernment has a
commitment toward another agreement.
We havedelayed, perhaps longer than would have been wise, in
retrospect,but nonetheless we have delayed in the expectation that we aregoing
to be able to lever a further $25 million‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please.
Point of
Order
Hon. Harry Enns
(Minister of Natural Resources): I wonder if youcould ask my colleague the
Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik) andthe Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr.
Doer) to conduct theirconversation outside the Chamber so that I could listen to
thewords of my colleague.
Mr.
Speaker: On the point of order raised by the
honourableMinister of Natural Resources, all members wishing to carry on
aprivate conversation can do so outside this Chamber.
* * *
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Speaker, thank you and I thank my
colleague fromLakeside (Mr. Enns) for having brought that matter to
yourattention, Sir. The fact of the
matter is that we have beentrying to lever from the federal government over the
past year oryear and a half‑‑[interjection] Pick up the phone, my friend
theLeader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) says. Well, Mr. Speaker, wehave been
attempting to lever real dollars, to lever realbenefits for the people of the
inner city of
We are going to make that decision in the not too distantfuture. I am hopeful that in the period of time
between now andthen they will still be able to lever some funding from
thefederal government that is meaningful and real and that will havereal
benefits for the people of the city of Winnipeg.
Mr. Speaker, that also is really not a partisan issue; it isan important
issue for the people of the inner city of Winnipeg.All of us need to I think be
mindful of the fact that we shouldall be trying, not just yelling at the
Minister of Urban Affairs,but all be trying to determine as much as possible or
work ashard as possible toward that end for the benefit of all of
thosepeople.
The member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) also mentioned thequestion of
urban transportation issues and how they areaffecting her particular
community. I agree they are, but if
youwant to know where the root of the problem lies, it lies in thehands of one
Mr. Joe Borowski, the former NDP transport minister,who in 1970 put a kibosh on
all major transportation routes inthe city of
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk
(
Mr. Speaker, I would first of all like to begin by welcomingyou back as
Speaker of the House. I look
forward to yourguidance. I know
many times you have become very frustrated withsome of the activities in here,
but I am sure we appreciate yourfair treatment to all of
us.
I would also like to extend my congratulations to the newmembers in this
House, both on their re‑election and the electionfor the first time to this
Chamber. I hope you enjoy your
tenurehere. I look forward to
working with you and improving thequality of life for all
Manitobans.
I would also like to welcome the new Pages who are with us inthis
session. I hope that their
experience here is worthwhileand will encourage them perhaps to carry on and
participate inpolitics at some other level. I hope that they also are notdiscouraged
by some of the carryings on in this Chamber.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to at this time recognize oneother member,
and that is the member for Rupertsland (Mr.Harper), who has made the decision to
leave us at this time. Hehas
indicated that he is retiring, and we would like to wish himluck in his future
endeavours.
*
(1710)
Mr. Harper has done much to raise the importance ofaboriginal issues and
cause us all to pay greater respect andlook more closely at what has been
happening to aboriginal peoplein this province and in this country. He has been an example formany
members. It is through his efforts
that we have been ableto encourage other members to run and join us here in
theLegislature.
He was not only respected by members of our caucus andmembers of the
native community, but many Manitobans respectedhim for the stand he took and
will continue to respect him.
Wewish him good luck in his future endeavours.
I want to welcome back all members who are here in theLegislature. I hope that we can all work together and
hear eachother's views and learn from one another what it is and thatgovernment
members will listen to the concerns that we bring tothe Legislature from those
people that we represent.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the throne speech, I and mostManitobans
expected much from this government.
We expectedleadership and new ideas, but unfortunately we got very little
ofthat, other than regurgitated old ideas.
In fact, as many othermembers have outlined, many of the ideas were
brought forward bythe previous government and those are the ideas that we
areseeing now.
We are seeing very little from this government. It is a signof a tired government, a
government that does not show realleadership, a government that is prepared to
drift and ignore thedesperate situation facing Manitobans.
When I look at the throne speech, Mr. Speaker, and I look atthe throne
speech from the previous year, there are many thingsthat are just put in a
second time, but there are also thingsthat were put in the last throne speech
that have not been actedupon and have been left out this time. Those are real concernswhen you make
promises in a throne speech but do not carry themforward.
Mr. Speaker, last week I attended the UMM Convention as didseveral
members from this Chamber, and if the other members werelistening, they would
have heard a great frustration from themajority of the participants. Major concerns were raised thatthis
government continues to say that they are not raisingtaxes. Again we hear it from this government,
saying in each ofthe speeches that they have carried through on their promise
ofnot having raised taxes. But that
is not the message that hascome from the delegates or from rural
Manitobans. There is greatconcern
about the offloading that this government has done andthe amount of taxes that
has been shifted onto a much smaller taxbase.
When we had the roads offloaded onto municipalities, taxeshad to be
picked up at the local level. When
the school fundingformula was changed, school boards were forced to pick up
theseextra costs by passing on special levies. This is an increase intaxes. This government cannot say that they are
not increasingtaxes. It is what
they have been doing that has caused theincrease of taxes.
Mr. Speaker, rural Manitobans said very loud and clear thatthey would
make it known that it was not their responsibilitythat these taxes were
increased. It was because of
theoffloading of this government, and if those members who werethere will
remember hearing that very clearly, that because ofthe cutbacks by this
government and because the school boards arecommitted to the education of rural
Manitobans they have had topass on the taxes because they have to pick up the
slack of thisgovernment.
This government is not prepared to stand up for education inrural
Along with taxes, Mr. Speaker, councillors at the conventionraised
another issue which was not addressed in the throne speechand which we raised
last year. I am hoping that this
governmentwill address it sometime in this year, and that is the concern ofThe
Municipal Assessment Act.
We raised that during the discussions of The MunicipalAssessment Act last
year, and the Minister of Rural Developmentsaid that we were wrong. There was not going to be an increasein
costs on the farmland. Municipal
representatives have againraised this issue on the portioning of the residential
propertiesand amount of tax that has to be collected on farm lands and
farmbuildings.
An Honourable
Member: No, no. You misunderstood
that.
Ms.
Wowchuk: The member across the way says that I
misunderstoodit. Well, I guess all
of the rural people misunderstood him toobecause there is a great increase in
school taxes. Farm land ispicking
up a far greater portion of educational tax, and he canshake his head as much as
he wants, it is not true. They
aretrying to mislead and act as if rural people do not understand,but I have to
tell you, Mr. Speaker, rural people are not thatfoolish. When they see their tax bill and the
increase ineducational tax on farmland, they can see very clearly that theyhave
been misled by this government.
Point of
Order
Mr. Jack Penner
(Emerson): The honourable member for
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not havea
point of order. It is clearly a
dispute over the facts.
* * *
Ms.
Wowchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but just to
correct themember for Emerson, I will read into the record the Whereas. Itsays: Whereas the changes to portioning
implemented in the 1992tax year resulted in a shift of school taxes from
residential tofarm land and buildings, the UMM requests that the Minister
ofRural Development reduce the portioning of class 30 property fromthe present
27 percent to a level which will prevent a shift ofschool taxes from residential
property to farm property.
Mr. Speaker, this government is not listening to ruralManitobans, and
they are shifting more costs onto the farmlandwhich was something they promised
they would not do.
When I look at the government's throne speech on education,they say the
keys that unlock the world of opportunity and thefuture of economic growth and
prosperity. There are manyconcerns
with education, and those children in rural Manitobamust have the same
opportunity for education as the people inurban centres. With the continuing reduction in
population inthe rural areas, we have to look at ways to provide the samelevel
of education in the rural areas as we have in the
urbancentres.
I hope that this government will look at that. I hope theMinister of Education (Mrs.
Vodrey) will look at ways that we canbring quality education to small
schools. The technology isthere,
and all it takes is a little bit of leadership and thewill to provide the same
opportunity to all people.
The other area that was missed out of the education portionof the throne
speech was first‑year distance education.
Again,that was another issue that was raised at the UMM convention.Rural
Manitobans, again, want the same opportunity to have auniversity education in
their communities. It has been a
goodprogram. The first‑year
distance education has been working insome parts of the province. There is a need for that program tobe
expanded.
I am disappointed that we have not seen more initiative toexpand that
program. In particular, Mr.
Speaker, there is agroup of people from
I hope that the minister will seriously consider expandingthe program
into that area of the province as well which is inreality a very important
service that I would like to see becauseit would give those children an
opportunity to stay at home onemore year, but also tremendously reduces the
costs.
Considering the financial situation at the present time,particularly in
rural
I have one concern with the throne speech and that is in thearea of
standard exams. I think that the
goal of educationshould be to prepare our young people to find a place
insociety. Across the province,
education is fought in manydifferent ways and it is not necessary that everybody
work at astandard exam. I do not
see how you can judge everybody the sameway.
I think that we should be very careful when we work in thisdirection in
trying to standardize things. I
have talked to manyteachers on this issue, and they are not in support of
it. So Ithink that we should look
at what we are doing in standardizing,because it seems impossible to test
everybody at the same level.You get teachers then teaching toward an exam rather
thanpreparing people to fit into a world.
I think that you should bethinking very carefully about what we are doing
with that.
(1720)
Mr. Speaker, I also heard a lot of discussion at the UMMconvention about
the video lottery terminals and the amount ofmoney that is being drained out of
rural
Rural Manitobans were told that all money raised in ruralManitoba would
be reinvested in rural
How much money has come out of rural
The Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) talks aboutPartners with
Youth and he talks about the Green Team.
Thoseprograms are not economic development. I am glad that we had theprograms to
help our young people. They are not
long‑term jobs;they are not economic development. They are replacing jobs thatthis
government cut from Natural Resources.
Granted, they helpedstudents for the short term. They helped students for the
summerperiod, but that was not the point of the fund. This governmentis misleading rural
Manitobans, because they are taking all ofthis money out and they are not
reinvesting it.
There are many ways that this growth could be stimulated inrural
Government must show more leadership. They must be preparedto invest in jobs
and stimulate the economy if anything is tohappen, but this government is afraid
to say the word "job." Weonly saw
it once in the throne speech. They
are not prepared toinvest in rural
Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you a little story about afarmer. There was a farmer who said he could not
plant his cropbecause he could not afford to buy seed. He could not afford tobuy seed because
he was using all the money to pay for histractor. He did not realize that if he planted
seed he would beable to pay for the tractor and prosper as well. That is thesame as this government. They are prepared to invest in
welfarerather than to create jobs, and they will get as much as thefarmer did
for their investment‑‑nothing.
People want to work, and if this government showed leadershipand created
jobs you would have rural Manitobans working, youwould have people paying taxes,
you would see the economy grow,but that is not the intention of this
government.
I want to touch on health care reform and some of the thingsthat are in
this throne speech. The member for
Sturgeon Creek(Mr. McAlpine) talked about the number of personal care beds
thatwe are seeing built in this province and the increases, and Icongratulate
the government on going forward and building thosepersonal care home beds. We need them for those people who arenot
well, for our elderly, who built this country. We shouldgive them the care that they
need. However, Mr. Speaker,personal
care beds are very expensive beds.
The minister has talked about reform and other ways that wecan look after
our seniors and our disabled without having thatexpensive a cost. Many seniors would prefer to stay in
theirhome but, unfortunately, many seniors are not able to stay intheir home,
because we have had a reduction in home care.
The Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) has said many times thatthere has
not been a reduction in home care, but I believe therehas been and so do many
other people, particularly in theParkland.
I just want to read a letter on home care, and I will notgive any names,
Mr. Speaker: This is how adequate
home care is,and you be the judge of that.
It is too late for me, but it mayhelp others in the same situation. I fell and broke my hip inMarch this
year, and I was taken by ambulance to
Mr. Speaker, this is the kind of home care we have now. Weare not looking after seniors, and
particularly in the Parklandarea we are seeing cutbacks because we have seen
other examples.I know that there are other communities that are not seeingnearly
the cutbacks that our area of the province is. So this isnot a way to look after our
seniors by only putting them intopersonal care homes. We also have to look after them in
theirhome where they can have quality of life and some pride
inthemselves.
Mr. Speaker, I want to touch on another section of healthcare, and that
is on the mental health and the return of peoplewith mental disorders back to
the community. There is a group
inSwan River that has worked very hard, and the minister is quiteaware of them,
and they have a proposal in to put in a crisiscentre. I am very happy for what has been able
to happen in theParklands. They
have run into some stumbling blocks with theDepartment of Housing as far as
finding the homes, and there hasbeen a deadline put on them for December
15.
*
(1730)
I feel that this deadline is a little bit unfair, becausethey have worked
very hard and found several homes that couldhave been worked for the crisis home
and for the group home, butby the time they got the approval from the Department
of Housingthose homes were sold. So
I hope that this deadline that hasbeen put on them will be a flexible deadline
just in case theycannot meet it.
They have done an awful lot of work. It is agood move to have these people
come back to the community, and Ihope that the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard)
and the Ministerof Housing (Mr. Ernst) will show a little bit of flexibility
whenthey are dealing with these people, particularly the group inSwan River who,
as I said, has worked very hard to establish thekind of care that we need for
these people when they come back tothe community.
Mr. Speaker, one of the areas that I am concerned about,which was in the
last throne speech but not in this one, is therocket range of the
I hope that in the next little while we will see some supportfor this
community because I believe the port is very viable. Itis something that we should be looking
to protect because it doesmake sense to have an inland port that would reduce
the costs forfarmers in
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the government is looking toreview
gasification of rural
As I say, there is interest in the
So I look forward to hearing what this government isproposing and working
along with them to bring this service torural
Mr. Speaker, there are several other areas that I would liketo touch
on. I want to touch on Sunday
shopping. I am surprisedthat the
government would move forward with such a proposalwithout having first discussed
it in this Legislature. I
amsurprised that they would go forward with this kind of proposalwithout giving
rural Manitobans, all Manitobans, an opportunityto make presentations. When we have retroactive
legislation,there is very little that they can do other than accept
it.
I think that this is going to have a very negative impact onrural
communities, particularly those closer to the city. Ithink that it will have an effect on
all communities. I do notthink that
this is going to create new money.
There is only somuch money to be spent, and if you have spent your money,
youspent your money. You can spend
only so much in six days or inseven days.
Why not leave that day for family?
Why not think about thosefamily businesses that now have to stay open an
extra day? Whatabout the small
corner stores, or is this going to put the cornerstores out of business? Is that not important, as long as thebig
stores have the opportunity to make money?
Those corporatefriends, they win.
Do the workers win? No, the
workers have todivide their hours and probably work on Sundays or spread
out.
There are not going to be new jobs here. This is not goingto stimulate the
economy. I am disappointed that the
governmentwould take this initiative, because I do not believe it is goingto
stimulate tourism, nor is it going to be a great benefit tothe businesses,
because, as I said, there are only so manydollars to be spent. I find it disappointing that
governmentwould look at this as a way to attract tourism or to get moremoney
into the economy. The money is not
there.
Mr. Speaker, under Natural Resources, some of them are
veryinteresting. The government
talks about humane trappingtechnology that will stimulate the fur industry, but
to myunderstanding the fur industry will need a lot more than humanetrapping
technology to help it. We will
await to hear what thistechnology is that the government is going to bring
in. I had sohoped that the Minister
of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), if hewas wanting to stimulate the economy,
would be looking atreviewing the bear licence allocation which we raised with
himduring Estimates but have not heard anything on. Many trapperswho have a licence to trap
a bear are wanting to convert thoselicences to guiding licences, and we raised
that with theminister, but we have not heard a response on
that.
There are many guides who are concerned about theconcentration of bear
licences in the hands of a few largeoperators. Again, the small person is getting
squeezed out or isnot having the ability to make a fair living. We do not see thathere, but I hope that
we will.
I am pleased that the government is talking aboutco-management
programs. We have raised this many
times, and wehave asked the minister for information on where they are
withco-management. We have talked
to many people in bands about thisand cannot get very much information, and I
hope that theminister is serious.
There are many problems, and the minister is well aware ofthem. In fact, he was at a meeting in
Mr. Speaker, I am also surprised that the government ismoving toward
expanding the markets for commercial fishermen. Iam not sure how this is going to
benefit fishermen, particularlyin some of the remote areas. I cannot see how they are going
tobenefit, and I also think that there is only a certain market,and if we open
it up, is it going to result in competition, alowered price and a lower
return? That is the concern that
hasbeen raised by many fishermen.
In fact, I was at the fishermen's conference, as was theminister, and the
people there were not unanimous in wanting themarket expanded. In fact, what they were calling for was
areview of the Marketing Board and its powers, although some ofthem were asking
to have the ability to market their fishdirectly to the
retailers.
*
(1740)
I would hope that the government would consider a review.Granted, the
Fish Marketing Board has been in place for manyyears now. We should be looking at it. Since the majority offishermen are
aboriginal, we should be looking at ways that theycan have a broader
representation on that board. At
the presenttime, the board, I believe, is appointed by the
federalgovernment. Fishermen want a
way to elect their own people ontothe board, and I think that is something that
we should belooking at, but I am very concerned that we are thinking that wewill
help fishermen by expanding the market.
I am particularlyconcerned in my constituency where there are no fish,
and I amtalking about
One of them is that the minister is not fulfilling hiscommitment to the
people on that lake by addressing some of theirother concerns, and he has not
addressed the issue of the numberof cormorants on that lake and a way to deal
with that problem.
It is strange that this business of expanding the FishMarketing Board is
one of the minister's priorities,particularly, as I say, when the fish stocks
are so low. Iwonder, when the
minister implements this, how are we going tocontrol? Is there still going to be a quota
system? Who willregulate, or are
the fishermen going to be able to fish as muchas they want and take as much fish
as they want and then comeback to government and say, there is no fish in the
lake? I lookforward to hearing how
we are going to deal with this and whetherthe quota system will stay in place or
whether this is just thegovernment's way of now abandoning a marketing board, a
systemthat has protected many fishermen.
I talked to fishermen who are very concerned about this.They remember the
time when there was no marketing board and theydid not know until June or July
how much their cheque was goingto be.
Mr. Speaker, I also am concerned about agriculture and thelack of
leadership on this government's part as far as research.I am looking at
alternates. We have the problem of
stubbleburning that has been a real issue in the last session, but thereis no
direction, intention or any indication that the governmentis going to do any
research as to possible alternate uses forthat straw. Is there any plan on this in this
government?
In the area of the environment, is the government going to doany research
on how we are going to‑‑we brought in regulationsthat say we cannot burn anymore
and that is good legislation.But it seems to me that is one step ahead of the
game. You havenot got plans in
place on recycling. You have not
got ideas onhow we are going to use up those tires that are piled up atnuisance
grounds, and I see nothing in this throne speech thatgovernment is going to show
leadership in new, innovative ideason how to handle these
things.
It is one thing to bring in legislation, but if you do nothave a way of
dealing with it, if you have not got a way ofdealing with all the glass and
plastic and tires that are pilingup, you have to show leadership. You have to put money intoresearch. You have to get new ideas, and I do not
see thathere. We need new ideas,
and we are not getting them from thisgovernment. They are not here.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, there is nothing new in this thronespeech, and
this government is ignoring the real pain of ruralManitobans. We see an article in today's paper about
the highrate of poverty. We see a
report that the jobs that will lead topoverty are in the service industry, in
farming, in fishing,forestry, clerical sales and construction. This is a very largegroup of people that
could be facing devastating situations, butwe do not see anything from the
government that is going to pullthem out of it.
We do not see the government addressing the farm prices.Farmers are in
desperate need of a cash flow.
There should havebeen money coming from GRIP. They should have had their
finalpayment. The interim payment
is not here, but we do not see apush from the Minister of Agriculture (Mr.
Findlay) to get thatmoney to farmers.
Mr. Speaker, as I say, it is a disappointment, but this iswhat we see
from this government‑‑a government that has broughtin, I believe, six throne
speeches but has not shown realleadership or any creative imagination on how we
can help ruralManitobans.
There are many suggestions that have been put forward. Ihope that they will look at some of
them. I hope, particularly,that in
the area of environment and in the agricultural industrywe will see some money
put into research that will help thecommunities. The Minister of Housing (Mr. Ernst)
says, whatmoney?
I go back to the other story that I told. Sometimes you haveto be prepared to
invest money to create jobs that people canwork and this government is not
prepared to invest. Thisgovernment
is really prepared to spend more.
We are spendingmoney on welfare.
You are spending more money right now. Justredirect that money and give the
people the opportunity to workbecause many of those people who are on welfare
would gladlywork. They want to
work.
Many of them want to work and there are many good ideas thathave come out
of the rural communities and from urban centres. Iknow that there is a group from my
constituency who has been hereand talked to members of government about
converting welfaredollars into work dollars. I hope that the government will
showleadership and negotiate with the federal government, so that wecan convert
some of those dollars into real jobs.
I look forward to working with this government and
offeringsuggestions. As I say, we
will be critical when they are notlistening to rural Manitobans or all
Manitobans. I hope theywill show
leadership and make
Mr.
Speaker: Is it the will of the House to call it
six o'clock?
An Honourable
Member: No.
Mr.
Speaker: No. Okay.
Mr. Edward Helwer
(Gimli): It certainly is great to be back inthe
session again with my colleagues. I
certainly want towelcome the new member for
As well, I want to wish the member for Rupertsland (Mr.Harper) well in
his new endeavours. I am sorry to
see himleave. I also want to send
my regards and best wishes to theHonourable George Johnson, the
Lieutenant‑Governor, who is still,I understand, in hospital. I want to wish him a speedy
recovery.
I am proud to have this opportunity to stand up today beforethis Assembly
and respond to the throne speech.
Let me begin by saying I am certainly pleased with themeasures included
in the Speech from the Throne during thesedifficult times. It is imperative that the government has
astrong plan of action in place which will help make this provincestronger. I believe our government has achieved
this goalthrough the measures that we have outlined in the throne speech.With
our government working together with all Manitobans, we willcome out of these
difficult times in excellent condition.
So I am pleased that this government is implementing its newplan for
economic renewal. I agree we must
focus on new ideasand new ways of thinking‑‑this means every aspect of our
provincefrom the economy to child care, from health care to theenvironment and,
of course, Natural Resources.
A Manitoba that will be prepared for what the Speech from theThrone
described as the winds of change that are sweeping theglobe‑‑well, with the
leadership of our Premier Filmon, I believeManitoba is going to be ready for
future challenges.
Our government's plan for economic renewal will positivelyimpact all
residents of my constituency, the Gimli constituency.They will be able to go
forth with new business ideas, knowing wewill be able to be using a foundation
of tax control andcompetitive climate for investment‑‑local business
development,international marketing initiatives, investment
infrastructure,diversification agriculture and, of course,
resource‑basedactivities.
*
(1750)
It is also encouraging, Mr. Speaker, that there will be aspecial focus on
sectors of the economy where new opportunitiesare emerging, like health care
industries, information andtelecommunications, aerospace, environmental
industries,agriculture and tourism.
Tourism, of course, is very important to many people in myconstituency
and very important to me. The
people in myconstituency rely on this industry, many of them do, for
theirlivelihood, and it is reassuring to know that this government isexploring
new ways of tapping into this important industry. Withthe poor summer that most tourist
operators had this past summerdue to weather conditions, everyone involved in
the industry iscertainly looking forward to next summer and the pent‑up
demandthat is there for next summer, and I hope that the Canadiandollar stays
where it is. This will certainly
help to attractnew tourists to our province.
So I welcome this government's continuing commitment tostrengthen the
rural economy. It does not take a
universitygraduate in economics, of course, to figure out that a strongrural
(Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Speaker, in the Chair)
Programs like the Rural Development Grow Bond program and theRural
Economic Development Initiative have already had a positiveimpact in rural
I am pleased to report that within three weeks, the wholeissue had been
sold out, and through local initiative combinedwith some provincial government
expertise, the Teulon residentswere able to start the ball rolling toward the
creation ofanother local industry.
This means more jobs, of course, which,in turn, means the Teulon economy
will benefit.
Grow Bonds allow Manitobans to invest in their owncommunities, and I am
proud that the people of my constituencyand of Teulon have taken advantage of
this opportunity.[interjection] Yes, that is right. The company, the CareCorporation has
ordered their equipment and hopes to be inproduction by January of
'93.
I understand that just recently, Portage had a new bond issuethere, so
that is just an indication of what the ruraldevelopment bond program is doing
for rural Manitoba and the jobsthat are being created and the investment. I think it is justgreat for
Under the REDI Program, the REDI Green Team, for example, hasjust been
able to put several young people in my constituency towork. They were given the opportunity to earn
some much neededmoney while learning the values of hard work and
repairingfacilities in
A third program that assists urban and rural Manitobans anddeserves
mention is the Manitoba Community Places Program.
(Mr. Speaker in the Chair)
Funding through the Manitoba Community Places Program haspaved the way
for a number of community‑based groups in myconstituency to proceed with
projects that are important to ourlocal residents. For example, the past summer I had the
pleasureof taking part in the official opening of the Air Centre
inStonewall.
The Air Centre prepares adults with disabilities foremployment in the
community. It plays an important
role inStonewall and the surrounding area.
With the help of theCommunity Places Program funding totalling $50,000,
special‑needsadults now have access to a modern facility where they learn
keyskills that they can use in the work force. This also helps myconstituency and the
member for
Community Places also made it possible for ice skaters in thetown of
Balmoral to have a longer season through a CommunityPlaces grant of $40,000 in
assistance. An artificial ice
plantthere had been installed in the Balmoral Recreation Centre. Thearena is always a popular recreation
spot in any Manitobacommunity for both adults and children. Manitobans rely on theirlocal arenas for
sports as well as a meeting place and, by havingartificial ice, Balmoral
residents can now enjoy their facilityfor much longer periods of
time.
The Community Places Program is, I think, an excellentprogram and doing
an excellent job of guaranteeing all Manitobansaccess to well‑maintained
facilities, and I am pleased thisprogram is available for any community
organization.
I am proud of the economic development that was achieved thispast year in
the Gimli constituency in the town of
Gimli is important to
For any of you who have been to Gimli, if you drive down MainStreet, you
will see the nice blue light posts and one thing andanother with the blue and
gray sidewalks. The colour
schemesare‑‑[interjection] That is right.
It worked very well.
LastThursday's Speech from the Throne also included a commitment thatI
welcome and that I know many rural Manitobans welcome as well.This government
will review the feasibility of a new initiativeof rural gasification. This is to help provide a
morediversified energy supply.
There are thousands of Manitobans across the province who donot have the
option of natural gas service in their community,something many urban dwellers
take for granted. As well, withthe
rural gasification many rural communities may soon becomemore attracted to
industries that require this form of industryand energy in order to
operate. I am pleased that
thisgovernment is going to examine this matter, so that there is theopportunity
that natural gas may soon be available across thisprovince. Not only will it help industry, but it
is alsobeneficial to agriculture.
Many forms of agriculture will benefit by providing naturalgas for grain
drying which was important especially this pastfall with the heavy damp
crops. The propane companies kind
oftook advantage of the farmers this past year, just when thedemand was at its
peak they had increased the prices.[interjection] That is right. This will also help the industriesin the
Interlake area such as Northern Goose Processors, who arehigh energy users,
Charison's Turkey Hatchery. This
will givethem an opportunity to develop and grow and be competitive intheir
industries. So this natural gas is
very important to manyof our rural communities. Also, natural gas will give farmers
anopportunity to‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. I am interrupting the memberaccording to
the rules. When this matter is
again before theHouse, the honourable member will have 26 minutes
remaining.
The hour being 6 p.m., this House now adjourns and standsadjourned until
1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Wednesday).