* (1335)
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Manitoba Lotteries Corporation
Revenues
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, last fall the provincial government had public consultation meetings about the budget, where they released material indicating that there was $180 million in projected revenue in the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation. Of course, in 1988 the revenues to that corporation or the net profits were $53 million. In 1990, the net profits were $52 million, and since 1992 it has gone from $71 million to almost three times that, to $210 million.
Mr. Speaker, given the fact that the government did not call the Lotteries Corporation before the committee of the Legislature, I would like to ask the Premier whether the $210-million figure is on, or is the number higher as we have seen with changing estimates in the past on Lotteries Corporation revenue?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, given that the Leader of the Opposition has promised that he would have an additional casino and perhaps more given to First Nations' bands such as The Pas, I know he is very concerned with increasing lotteries revenues and gaming revenues in this province, but I can tell him that the information he has is as up to date as the information I have. Therefore, I would say to him that, as information is available, we will continue to make it available.
The third-quarter statement was released earlier this week by the Minister responsible for Lotteries (Mr. Ernst), and I believe the most up-to-date information was contained within that statement.
Accountability
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the NDP proposed private members' legislation in this session called The Lotteries Accountability Act, where it required the government to break down by community how much revenue was being gained by the provincial government from the gambling activity, the massive expansion of gambling that has been entered into by the Filmon government.
Since the legislation was introduced, communities in Brandon, Selkirk, Flin Flon, Portage la Prairie, Treherne, Gimli have all supported this legislation. In fact, the mayor of Brandon goes on to say that they have been frustrated over the possessive and reluctant attitude of the provincial government in releasing any information on the amount of revenue being earned from video lottery terminals throughout Manitoba.
Will this provincial Premier agree to the NDP legislation and make public the information by community, so all the people of Manitoba can know the actual facts on lottery revenues here in the province of Manitoba?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I know that the mayor of Brandon was enjoying hearing his words repeated.
I just say to the Leader of the Opposition, firstly let us remind ourselves that the first lotteries in Manitoba began under the New Democrats 25 years ago. Let us remind ourselves that the New Democrats took over the bingos in this province and set up the first two major bingo emporiums. Let us remind ourselves that the New Democrats set up the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation and in fact expanded and started the first casino in this province. Let us also remind ourselves that this Leader of the Opposition has made a commitment to First Nations' bands in Manitoba to give them casinos. With all of those things, I find his criticisms more than a little hollow.
Mr. Speaker, despite accusations from members opposite, the Provincial Auditor has indicated that all of the money that comes in is properly accounted for. She is satisfied with the accountability, and he will have an opportunity ultimately, through the vehicle of this Legislature, when the Lotteries Corporation comes before committee--[interjection]
* (1340)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I just ask the members opposite to bear with me.
He will eventually have an opportunity to ask those questions directly and to have whatever information he seeks provided for him by the Lotteries Corporation.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed. The Premier did not answer the question. I am disappointed again the Premier would turn his back on all the communities in Manitoba. All they want to know is the facts about how much money this government is gaining from these communities.
Report Release
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The government released the Volberg criterion report the other day. When we go through it, the pages are whited out in very many of the sections--the demographics on gambling, the type of population using gambling, the favourite type of gaming activity, the characteristics of gamblers, how much money they are spending, the amount of money by community, blank page here, distribution of expenditures by game.
Would the Premier please tell us why they are censoring this report, Mr. Speaker, and will he give us the full and complete report which has been paid for by the Lotteries Corporation and the people of Manitoba? Why are we having this kind of censorship?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that we have made a commitment to assemble the information that has been asked for vis-à-vis the revenues on a community basis for the VLTs, as they have been asked for, and the expenditures in the communities that the Lotteries Corporation is engaged in.
I would also say that the information that has been released has been released in accordance with The Freedom of Information Act, that was drafted and passed by the New Democrats, Mr. Speaker.
In accordance with that act, we have given out the information as The Freedom of Information Act provides for.
Health Sciences Centre
Pediatric Cardiac Centre
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
Over the past few weeks, a controversy has raged over the deaths at the Health Sciences Centre, questions about how parents were given information regarding the deaths, the autopsy reports, the role of the medical examiner, why doctors have left the province, the facilities at Health Sciences Centre, the role of government and the effect of cutbacks on all of this.
My question to the Minister of Health is: Why is the government not listening to the parents and to the doctors from that facility who have asked for it? Why has the minister not called a public inquiry into this entire affair?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as the honourable member has referred to the families of the children involved, I think it is appropriate that we do everything we can in as timely a fashion as we can to get to the bottom of all matters related to the pediatric cardiac program at Health Sciences Centre.
The system of inquiry set out under The Fatality Inquiries Act allows an independent judicial person to preside over a hearing in the form of an inquest which has the capacity and scope and breadth to answer all issues the honourable member might raise, including the role of all the players, including the hospital, the doctors, the Chief Medical Examiner's office and the government itself, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, will the minister or the Premier (Mr. Filmon), who is responsible for federal-provincial relations, table in this House the documents that the Deputy Minister of Health said were missing from departmental files referring to Dr. John Wade's recommendation back in 1990 to perhaps consolidate the surgery somewhere else? Will he table those missing documents, according to the Deputy Minister of Health?
Mr. McCrae: The hearing officer, Mr. Speaker, at an inquest, who is a judge, is empowered with the ability to subpoena witnesses, documents, to allow standing for people who come before the inquest, to allow for examination and cross-examination of witnesses.
There is no question but that any document that is relevant to all of these matters will form part of such an inquiry. Indeed, any documents that might exist pursuant to the operation of the program back in 1983, Mr. Speaker, might also be relevant to this. Those documents too would be subject to review by the hearing officer.
* (1345)
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary: Can the minister tell the House today when his department first learned of the difficulties at Children's Hospital, in light of the fact that they have letters on file from doctors at the hospital dated December 1991 and December 1992 outlining difficulties?
Can he tell the House today when his department first heard and found out about the difficulties at Children's Hospital concerning the deaths of these children?
Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Health, whether it was presided over by the Honourable Larry Desjardins as he then was or the Honourable Willy Parasiuk as he then was or my predecessor or myself, the department has worked with all of the players throughout.
With respect to documents and information, I cannot really answer so much for 1983, when the New Democrats were in power, but certainly, back in 1991, when the doctors raised issues with the hospital and copied the department, the department and the hospital administration met with the physicians involved and a number of the issues that were raised in the letter back in 1991 were addressed.
Again, though, I say that the quantity and the quality of actions taken over the years and whether they were the right ones and whether they were the wrong ones will all be the subject, Mr. Speaker, of a very independent and a very thorough review.
My wish is that that review be very thorough too, because I have had conversations with family members and other Manitobans who simply want what I want, and that is to get to the truth so that we can make decisions about how best to look after the children of this province in the future.
Manitoba Lotteries Corporation
Gambling Policy Review
Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, regardless of what the final numbers are on Lotteries revenues for the '94-95 year, it is clear that they are increasingly significant in this government's budget plans and fiscal planning. We expect they will come in at approximately $220 million, as was predicted two days ago.
Mr. Speaker, two days ago the government also announced a long-awaited review, stepping back and looking at the role of Lotteries, which we and I know the other opposition party has been calling for for some time.
Conspicuous by its absence was any commitment to public hearings. There is a commitment that the group headed up by Mr. Desjardins will gather information from a broad cross-section of society.
Is there in fact to be read into that a guarantee of public hearings as part of this process?
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Foundation Act): Mr. Speaker, there are no restrictions or limitations with respect to that working group. If they think public hearings are appropriate, they will have public hearings. If they think some other forms of consultation are necessary, they will do that as well. We gave them some general guidelines to say we want the entire package reviewed, and that is their mandate.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, in fact, in various other reviews that have been commissioned by this government, public hearings have consistently been a part of the mandate, in fact, insisted upon as part of it.
My question for the minister, again: Given that back when he was the critic in 1986, he cited with approval the statement, and he was talking about the Lotteries Corporation, that the responsibility of government is to make sure that it is done fairly, nobody is ripped off and that the process is open to public scrutiny, will he now as the minister ensure, not just prefer, but ensure that this is indeed open to public scrutiny and that there is a guarantee of public hearings?
Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, the intent of the review committee is to look at all aspects of gaming and consult with whomever they think it is appropriate. If they wish to consult with the public in public meetings, if they wish to consult with the public through public meetings and written information, if they want only written information, they have all kinds of latitude with respect to this. I suspect that, given the quality of the people that will form this working group, they will have ample opportunity to consult with everyone in the province of Manitoba to ensure that their findings represent truly the mood of the people of Manitoba.
Audit
Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): You will pardon if we are a little dubious about the credibility, Mr. Speaker, of this minister on this issue, given that the last time this corporation was before a committee of this House was June 17, '93, with the '91-92 annual report, which was not even passed.
My final question for the Premier. He indicates that the Auditor has in fact done a full review. Given that on May 5 of 1994, in committee, Ms. Bellringer, who is the Provincial Auditor, indicated: the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation last year was an overview; we did not conduct a test audit on financial statements, will he now guarantee that that test audit is in fact done, given that he thought it had already been done?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): The Lotteries Corporation is audited by an independent auditing firm, Mr. Speaker. Their professional integrity, in fact, their very ability to remain in business as a professional, is based on the integrity of the audit work that they do.
The Provincial Auditor has further given it an overview audit to ensure that all of the relevant information she would like to have to ensure the integrity and the credibility of the work is available to her, and she has verified that, Mr. Speaker. That, it seems to me, is more than has been done in the past--in fact, more than was done when previous governments were in place.
* (1350)
Crow Benefit
Phaseout
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, over the past several years there have been many discussions about the Crow benefit and whether it should be paid to the railway or to the producers. We in the New Democratic Party have always supported paying the railways because it brought fairness to farmers, and Conservatives have always lobbied to have the payment made to producers, but no one in their wildest dreams believed that the federal government would eliminate the Crow benefit. The federal government has abandoned their responsibility to farmers.
I want to ask this Minister of Agriculture what steps he will be taking with the federal government, asking them why they have eliminated the Crow benefit. We are asking him what he will do to ensure that there is fairness to western Canadian producers, that they are not abandoned by the federal Liberal government as they have been.
Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, there is no question, absolutely no question, that prairie farmers face a very difficult adjustment period, but my department and this government will do all they can to ensure that we look at it in a positive way. We look at this post-WGTA era as what we can do in Manitoba that will bring prosperity to our farms and to our province.
Having said that--and I do appreciate that the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) did acknowledge by whose hand this action was taken. It was, of course, the federal government.
We had been led to believe, up until a few weeks before the final announcement, before the budget speech, that prairie farmers would have been given a reasonable phaseout period of five to seven years. Failing that, we had thought, along with farm leaders, that if it were to be a lump settlement, the figure should be much larger, in the order of several billions of dollars, Mr. Speaker.
The responsibility of the action that the honourable member for Swan River describes clearly lies in the hands of the federal government, the federal minister. My job is to try to ensure that the $300-million adjustment fund that was also contained in the budget, most of it, the majority of it, accrues to Manitoba farmers, because we are in fact suffering most of the hurt.
Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the minister that I am disappointed to hear that he is saying he is accepting this. This is not acceptable. This is an abandonment of western Canada. This is going to put farmers out of business, and this is going to create serious hardship for people in western Canada. I am asking the Minister of Agriculture whether he is prepared to lobby the federal government to ensure that there is money for a phaseout, more than the $1.6 billion that is in there right now, which is very small in comparison to the costs that farmers are going to have to pick up. This is going to put farmers out of business--
* (1355)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question.
Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, allow me to say that I have been privileged over these past six or seven years to have been part of a government that has experienced and has accepted the fiscal responsibilities of the day. It has not been a particularly easy challenge. It is my hope that later on this afternoon all Manitobans and I will be rewarded by hearing the kind of progress we have made in terms of the fiscal management of the province of Manitoba.
I am prepared to extend that same understanding to the federal Minister of Finance and the federal government in dealing with the difficult, serious problems that this nation faces, and do you know what? Most farmers understand that. What they seek is fairness, and they are not getting fairness from this Liberal government. The Alberta grain farmer faces a rate of 17 percent. The Manitoba farmer faces a rate increase of 300 percent. That is not fair, and that is what I will fight for on behalf of the Manitoba--[interjection]
Ms. Wowchuk: If the Minister of Agriculture says he is prepared to fight for fairness, I want to ask him: Since it is the producers that are going to be paying the increased cost of transportation, not the landowners, will he fight the federal government to ensure that the $1.6 billion is paid to the producers? Very simple to do through the Wheat Board. Put the money to the producers, not the landowners.
Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, I can perhaps impart some relatively new information on this subject. Minister Goodale was in Winnipeg today. I regrettably did not have the opportunity to hear him speak, but I am extremely disappointed. What he did was throw the ball back at the province by saying that if we want to do that, we would have to pass legislation in this Legislature and in all provincial legislatures.
I want to tell the federal government and Mr. Goodale, the one thing that prairie farmers have not got time for is political games. This is a federal program. He can do it exactly the way the member for Swan River has outlined, and it is his responsibility to do that.
New Careers
Funding Reduction Justification
Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): My question is for the Minister of Education.
Previous studies have shown that the New Careers program has had a 92 percent success rate in the percentage of graduates getting and keeping jobs.
What studies has this government used to justify cutting New Careers three years in a row?
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I think the member opposite is taking some speculation and trying to run with it as if it is fact. The question presupposes some announcement that may or may not be made in the budget that will be read very shortly. I think the member would be wise to hold his question until after that.
Mr. Hickes: The staff at New Careers have already received their lay-off notices effective April, so how can this minister justify cutting a program that has worked so well while keeping Workforce 2000 which, even this minister admits, has no accountability?
Mr. Manness: Again I would ask the member to pose the question after tomorrow, after he has had a chance to see the full totality of the training decisions that have been made with respect to the Education department.
We are well aware of the contributions that have been made by certain numbers of programs over the year. But what the member seems to be suggesting is that government should not evaluate, governments should not assess programs over a period in time, to see whether or not they are producing in the same fashion as they may have in the past.
We have prided ourselves as a government over the years of assessing our programs, trying to determine whether or not--and where they rank in priority terms, within the whole portfolio of training. We have done that again through the budgetary process. I would ask the member to wait until greater detail comes forward, at which time I am sure he will have more questions.
* (1400)
Mr. Hickes: When the minister says about assessing a program, I would like to ask the minister why he thinks it is more important to hand over tax dollars to wealthy firms, like Kentucky Fried Chicken, IBM, Holt Renfrew, rather than supporting a training program that has 92 percent success rate and that gets people trained and off social assistance.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I know the NDP party is against government supporting training for those particularly in the business area. I know the members opposite are totally opposed to the program that has worked so well in this province, which has been mirrored for the most part in the province of Ontario, which trains those who are presently in the employ to move to a new generation, to be ready for the new technology that exists.
Mr. Speaker, the member's question does not surprise me. It is in keeping again with the criticism that the members opposite have had. It is a disappointing question, I might add, given that tens of thousands of Manitobans have been trained in that program over the years.
So, Mr. Speaker, again, my final comment is that the member may want to again put his questions another day once he has seen the totality of the budgeting with respect to Education.
Metropolitan Kiwanis Courts
Renovations
Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): My question is for the Minister of Health.
Mr. Speaker, the ongoing saga of Kiwanis Courts, the Metropolitan Kiwanis Courts, continues to go on because we continue to get calls from people who are involved, concerned citizens in Kiwanis Courts and some of the family members who have individuals in the Kiwanis Courts.
We understand that the government staff and Kiwanis Courts have met and outlined some of the processes of what would occur in regard to the Kiwanis Courts issue.
The concerned citizens at that last meeting had asked for details of the construction and remodelling plans and timetable. Now, those details were not available at the meeting, but I would ask the minister, can he tell us when those details of the remodelling and the timetable will be available for the concerned citizens and the families and the individuals who are still in the Kiwanis Courts?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, thanks to the good work done by the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), the concerned citizens in the neighbourhood, the board of the Kiwanis Courts, the government, and thanks also to the work of Mr. McIntosh, who assisted all of us in bringing parties together. That is the one thing that I can say about my honourable colleague for Sturgeon Creek--it is extremely positive--that he has been able to bring all of these various and divergent interests together to bring about what we believe will be a satisfactory solution to all of the issues that were raised.
Mr. Speaker, while it may be true that actual drawings and details are not yet available, at the earliest opportunity, we will continue to take the concerned citizens of St. James into our confidence and work with them, as well as the board of Metropolitan Kiwanis Courts.
Ms. Gray: With a supplementary to the Minister of Health, will the minister indicate if he will get back to the concerned citizens and at least let them know when the timetable will be available and what it would be? Mr. Speaker, the concerned citizens and the families involved have had some assistance from all three parties, and they prefer to see this as a nonpartisan issue. So we are simply asking for the information for them.
Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, again, as recently as a week ago, the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek met with the concerned citizens. At that meeting, everybody was brought up to date on the most recent developments, and it is that kind of approach, I believe, that will satisfactorily resolve all of the issues.
As I say to the honourable member, just as soon as further information is available, I will be working with the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) and the concerned citizens of the neighbourhood to make sure that everyone is brought up to date.
I was pleased that the concerned citizens gave an indication of endorsement of the work that has been done to this point, and we expect to continue in that vein.
Education System Reform
Curriculum Changes
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education's so-called action plan on education has meant that junior high schools across the province are suddenly faced with impossible choices in timetabling and staffing. Industrial arts, music, choral music, home economics and French must either be compressed or eliminated under the minister's plan. The minister has been aware of this for at least a month, and he is aware of the confusion and anger that have resulted for families and schools.
I want to ask the minister today to freeze this curriculum plan until after the election so that stability can be returned to Manitoba's education system.
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote something that I happened to come across the other day. It says: The problem is not money, the solution is not more cash; the problem is focused standards in the capacity of the system to evolve and change and show adaptability in that change.
An Honourable Member: Who said that?
Mr. Manness: That was one Premier Bob Rae.
Mr. Speaker, I have been listening over the course of many months to the NDP approach on education reform. The silence is deafening. I have not heard one reaction from the NDP party with respect to how it is that they would initiate reform.
When the member comes up and asks me a question specific to implementation and how it is that we are going to try to change around some of the course offerings within our public school system, I say to the members opposite, then obviously they want the status quo totally supported and I would leave that statement at their door.
There is not chaos. Obviously schools are going to have to make decisions because the government is asking them to focus in a much greater fashion on the literary skills that are needed in our students as we move into the next century.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, that is an utterly irresponsible answer, because every school in this province is being asked to reduce by half industrial arts, music and basic French. They do not have a curriculum to reduce by half those courses. That is an utterly irresponsible answer from the Minister of Education.
I want to ask the minister to explain why neither he, his deputy minister nor his staff were aware of the impact that the damage that these curriculum changes would do on schools right now. It is a relatively simple question. Why is there such a gap between what goes on in the department, or at least what passes for planning in the department and what is happening on the ground in our schools?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, the members obviously reject everything that Bob Rae says, the way they call me down, but maybe I will try something that Allen Bacon said. Allen Bacon, of course, is the Canadian Teachers' Federation president. He said that Canadian schools need to focus on core subjects and move away from the vast array of program choices now on offer in high schools.
Mr. Speaker, there seem to be two poles of vision with respect to how it is we should try and reform the system.
Our action plan is clearly stated. We know where we want to take the public education system.
The NDP obviously does not want to do anything but to criticize, and I say to the members opposite, stand for something, tell the public where they stand on these important issues.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, the minister puts me in mind of the best teacher I ever had. She was a geography teacher. Her name was Miss Wycliffe. She said, answer the question, what was the question, look at the question.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member, with your supplementary question.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, could the minister explain why, before the blueprint, before the action plan, before the householder, before the video, before the television advertising which this government has paid for, could it at least have simply sat down with teachers, with parents, with principals and said, what is going to be the impact of these curriculum changes now?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I am remiss. I did not bring the chronology of all those meetings, of sit-downs, as the member asked me to do, that I have had with the Teachers' Society, indeed with the trustees and all of the partners within the education enterprise.
Mr. Speaker, we have taken the document out, as the member knows, as the members opposite know. It has had wide distribution. It has had wide opportunity for reaction and, most importantly, it has had wide acceptance.
So we stand by the document. We fully understand that there is going to be some pressure associated with the timetabling this fall. We are trying to give guidance to those schools that sense they need it, but a large number of principals tell us they are going to be able to cope with the plan that is being laid down.
Again, I ask the members whether they support reform or whether they reject it.
I gather, from the tone of their questions, they totally reject it.
* (1410)
Child Care System
Government Strategy
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Family Services will be aware of the prairie preschool study, a study which followed children to adulthood and which showed that as the result of good quality child care they had higher levels of education, higher levels of income, higher rates of employment, higher rates of intact marriages, lower rates of incarceration, utilization of welfare and lower rates of teen pregnancy.
Since child care is shown to be effective and cost-effective, since for every dollar that is invested in child care there is a saving of $7, will the Minister of Family Services work to restore the child care system in Manitoba, since the result of their policy has been children withdrawn from centres, wage rollbacks for early childhood educators? Will the minister--
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The member has put his question. We are trying to move along here.
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question, because it does give me the opportunity to explain to Manitobans once again the increases and the impact that those increases have had on our child care system in the province of Manitoba.
Mr. Speaker, he wants us to go back to the $27 million that was in place under the former NDP government and reduce child care by $20 million. We have increased our funding to child care in the province of Manitoba since we have been government by $20 million. That is not a reduction. That is an increase.
We have increased the number of subsidized spaces. We have doubled the number of subsidized spaces since the NDP were in government. That is not a cutback. That is an increase in child care. We have increased the number of licensed spaces in the province of Manitoba. We are up to 19,000 licensed spaces in our province today. That is an increase, not a decrease.
We have made a commitment as a government to child care, unlike what our neighbours in Saskatchewan are doing when they spend $14 million for the same population on child care that we spend $47 million on. Is that the NDP policy, Mr. Speaker?
Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services what is she and what is her government going to do to remedy the current problems that fill up the spaces so the child care centres are not laying off staff and rolling back wages for early childhood educators, and some centres are considering closing because of their policies.
What is this minister going to do?
Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I guess I have to repeat for my honourable friend, because he does not seem to understand, that there is $20 million more in child care today than there was when the NDP government was in power. There are twice as many subsidized spaces in our child care system today than were there under the NDP administration. There are more licensed spaces in the system today than were there when the NDP government was in power. So there has not been a reduction. There has been an increase to services for children in child care in Manitoba.
We will continue to maintain our commitment, unlike the Liberal red book promise that was broken in this budget. There was not a mention of child care and child care support. I am extremely disappointed in a Liberal government that makes a promise and backs out on it within a year of making that commitment.
Federal Funding
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Could the Minister of Family Services tell the House if she has had any communication from the federal Minister of Human Resources, Mr. Axworthy, and whether there still is a promise of 150,000 child care spaces in Canada, whether there is any money available for Manitoba, and if there is, whether her government is going to match that money and create more child care spaces in Manitoba?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, indeed, I have met with the Manitoba Child Care Association and we have discussed those issues. I wrote to Mr. Axworthy on January 18 and asked for a commitment from him on what Manitobans could expect from the federal red book commitment to child care in Manitoba, and I have not heard back from Mr. Axworthy. That has been a month and a half ago now, and there has been no commitment from Mr. Axworthy on whether the federal government would live up to their commitment. But the budget was silent on the issue of any more funding for child care.
As a matter of fact, there will be major reductions to Manitoba in transfer payments for child care, for services to the mentally disabled and for services to women. They will not be providing the same support as they have in the past, and it will be very difficult for any province to determine what their next steps will be.
Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.