ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Port of Churchill

Management

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the First Minister.

Madam Speaker, the Port of Churchill is a vital economic link with the world for Manitoba, and over the last couple of years the volume of grain has decreased in that port. We have had promises by new governments to ship a million tonnes of grain out of that port. Then we have had recommendations from Ports Canada to close the port down last July, and we have had a task force that was created with a number of recommendations that have not yet been implemented.

Today we have learned, Madam Speaker, that the present port manager of the Port of Churchill, his position has been deleted, and that position will be replaced by an individual who also will hold the responsibilities of managing ports on the St. Lawrence Seaway.

I would like to ask the Premier if he has objected to this decision of the federal government, and, Madam Speaker, how has he objected to that decision?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I was in cabinet all morning and I did not read that news report, but I want to make sure that the Leader of the Opposition knows that this government has been absolutely and totally committed to Churchill, to ensuring that the community, the port operations and everything else go well.

That is why we promoted and eventually got agreement from the federal government to have a national park go in there. That is why we have funded the study by Akjuit Aerospace, to ensure that the rocket range is resurrected and becomes a viable part of Churchill's operations. That is why we did the Arctic Bridge concept studies, so that we could show ways in which that port could be used for two-way haulage of goods, not just be dependent on grain.

But, you know, I find it interesting that the Leader of the Opposition talks about governments making promises in the past. I was very shocked during the election campaign to read that he had gone up there and promised them that, if he were elected as Premier, he would guarantee a million tonnes of grain would go through Churchill.

He knows full well that is totally outside of his control. He has absolutely no jurisdiction, no opportunity to make that kind of commitment, and he made that kind of dishonest commitment to the public, misleading people all over this province, Madam Speaker.

Point of Order

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, this is on a point of order. It seems to be on a daily basis that I have to rise to remind the Premier of our rules of order, in particular in regard to the statement "dishonest."

I will be prepared to lend my copy of Beauchesne's to the Premier, Madam Speaker, but I am hoping that, short of that, you will ask him to withdraw, once again, another unparliamentary and uncalled-for statement.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order, indeed, "dishonest" is an unparliamentary word, has been designated as such by many Speakers and on many occasions.

I would therefore ask the First Minister to withdraw "dishonest."

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will be happy to withdraw that comment.

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable First Minister.

* * *

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I know the Premier is sensitive about his promise on the $10-million limit to the Jets, but I asked him a very simple question on the Port of Churchill, one which did not require him to go right off the deep end.

Madam Speaker, Manitoba has competed for years, all Manitobans from all political parties have competed for years, with the interests of the St. Lawrence Seaway. Whether it was the Mulroney Conservative government or other successive governments, we have always competed against the vast number of political interests in eastern Canada that have chosen to ship our grain through the St. Lawrence Seaway to the detriment of a Manitoba port.

As the government indicated in the Speech from the Throne, all members, and I would suspect all members from all political parties, would be interested in what the response of the Premier will be to a decision by the federal government to combine the role of management of the Port of Churchill with an individual who is managing the St. Lawrence Seaway ports.

I would like to ask the Premier, what action will he take to stand up for Manitoba and stand up for the Port of Churchill against the federal government's decision?

* (1345)

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I repeat, this government has consistently stood firm for and supported the use of Churchill, the Port of Churchill, and has done significant things to try and enhance the viability of Churchill through things like Akjuit Aerospace, through the Arctic Bridge concept, through the establishment of a national park in Churchill and so on.

But, you know, the members opposite--the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) did it the other day. The member for Concordia, Leader of the Opposition, has done it over and over again, blindly supporting the Canadian Wheat Board and saying, well, you know, they can do no wrong, they are always right, they are the best thing for us.

They have been, time after time, the reason why grain has not gone through Churchill, and grain has gone through St. Lawrence, and there they go, blindly saying, just do everything to support the Canadian Wheat Board, being totally uncritical of it, when it is one of the problems; it is one of the issues.

Why do you not go and talk to the Canadian Wheat Board about its lack of support for Churchill, instead of coming in this House and complaining, Madam Speaker?

Mr. Doer: I asked the Premier to stand up on behalf of the Port of Churchill, and it is a legitimate question.

Does the Premier support the action of the federal government to dismiss the existing position of the port manager at the Port of Churchill and combine the management of the Port of Churchill with the manager who resides and manages a port on the St. Lawrence Seaway, which is a competitive port to the Churchill site?

Does he support that position? If he does not, will he stand up and phone the Prime Minister on behalf of Manitobans and the Port of Churchill, so we can have our own vision in Churchill, working together with all members of this Chamber to try to maximize this port on behalf of all of us, of all parties in this Chamber, Madam Speaker?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, unlike the Leader of the Opposition and his party, who blindly and uncritically support the role of the Canadian Wheat Board when it is one of the reasons why Churchill has not been used as extensively as it ought to for shipment of grain--we will not do that.

We will go out and do things that are positive for the Port of Churchill, like developing Akjuit Aerospace, like developing a national park there, like ensuring that there are opportunities for backhaul and two-way traffic through the Port of Churchill.

No, Madam Speaker, I do not believe that the decision that has been made by the federal government is the right decision, but I wish that the Leader of the Opposition would wake up and smell the coffee and do the right things by the Port of Churchill, instead of just criticizing all the time and not looking at all sides of the issue.

Port of Churchill

Government Strategy

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): My questions are for the Minister of Highways and Transportation.

The loss of the port manager of Churchill is a major blow to the community of Churchill and, in fact, northern Manitoba and Manitoba itself. Now, as the Premier indicated, the town has been making a lot of progress with respect to the development of the Akjuit Aerospace project, the Gateway North proposal, to tourism and other ventures in the community of Churchill.

I would like to ask the Minister of Highways and Transportation what action he and his government are prepared to take in protecting the port, in light of the fact that it will, in effect, become part of the St. Lawrence Seaway.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): I want to assure the member, as we continually have, that we support Churchill very strongly. In that context, department staff worked very aggressively on the task force for Churchill, which was an initiative to try to develop the economic future of Churchill around import, export, Akjuit, tourism and resupply to the Keewatin district.

We support very strongly the outcome of that committee called Gateway North, and as I said the other day, that proposal they have put forward for an economic opportunity involving the bayline, the port and all the activity through there was sent to the federal government to which we have not got a reply yet.

The action today is not good news from the standpoint of the impact it might have in terms of the enthusiasm that has been developed around the Gateway North project, and we intend to find out from the federal government what they plan to do with the port, because this is not the kind of signal we were looking for.

* (1350)

Mr. Robinson: Given that not a single grain of wheat has been shipped through Churchill at this point and only nine ships went there last year, what assurances does this minister have that Churchill will not be again shortchanged in this coming year?

Mr. Findlay: As the Premier (Mr. Filmon) has pointed out and I did the other day, the Canadian Wheat Board has a high level of responsibility to be sure that sales occur through that port.

In that context, I have talked to the Wheat Board earlier this week, and they have assured me they have sales on the book to go through Churchill this year, and they are pursuing additional sales, particularly to areas like countries in South America, where there seems to be some economic opportunity for using Churchill.

They have some sales on the book, and I understand they are continuing to work on acquiring more sales through Churchill.

Mr. Robinson: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his positive answers to my question.

I would like to ask the minister whether or not he will convene a meeting with the community officials in Churchill, along with other port supporters to discuss a strategy for ensuring that grain is not diverted to the St. Lawrence Seaway instead of through the Port of Churchill.

Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, I think interested individuals should be talking to the Canadian Wheat Board, because they are the people who make the grain sales that can be directed through Churchill. They are the individuals we must talk to.

I said I have already talked to them and relayed our strong expectation that they will live up to the Liberal government's commitment of a million tonnes through the Port of Churchill, which they made in the election of 1993. They did not do it last year. We would certainly expect they would live up to that promise this year in 1995.

Manitoba School for the Deaf

Relocation

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.

The formation of the first Advisory Council for School Leadership at the Manitoba School for the Deaf could have been a significant achievement for this government, but the council at its most recent meeting this week indicated, and I quote: that the process that has taken place within the government to relocate the Manitoba School for the Deaf has left people shocked by the surprise announcement of the relocation, angry at being left out of decisions that affect our children's future and frustrated with the ongoing process of trying to obtain more information about this decision, only to be met with unanswered questions and lack of response to telephone calls.

I want to ask the Minister of Education to explain why she has treated this first parents' advisory council in such a manner in the months since the Premier (Mr. Filmon) got his election photo opportunity announcing the uprooting of this educational community.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the member has made a statement that I think is unjust and ill-founded, and she knows it.

I have had innumerable meetings with parents and others involved with the School for the Deaf. I have had only one phone call that I have not been able to make a return on. I have made a return, left messages on an answering machine, had that call return done--in short, the telephone tag routine--with one person.

Every other person who has contacted me from the School for the Deaf has either had a personal meeting or an extended telephone conversation. The last phone call to that one individual was from me to her answering machine, and I am waiting now to see if we can connect, but it has not been from lack of trying.

The member asked me these types of questions in Estimates. I answered them. I think her allegation is unfounded, untrue and unfair.

* (1355)

Ms. Friesen: Well, the minister will have the parents to respond to, not just me.

Will the minister make a commitment to meet with this, her first new advisory council, who have no trustees to turn to and whose principal is a direct employee of the department? Will she meet with them as they have requested, before June 28?

Mrs. McIntosh: The member knows, because I also gave her this information in Estimates, that I am quite willing and pleased to meet with any representatives from the School for the Deaf, have met one, two, three--four meetings already with people from the School for the Deaf, plus with the interpreters meeting a week ago today, plus many telephone conversations, plus constant dialogue with those parents of deaf students who live in my constituency.

So for the member to leave the implication she is trying to leave on the record by saying will I now agree to do something that I have indicated I am quite willing to do--any request that comes to me, my schedule permitting--obviously, if I am tied up in Estimates, I cannot get out to meet with everybody I would like to, but I have always indicated that I will meet at the earliest opportunity.

The request that she is referring to, if she is referring to a formal request that has come in writing, I do not recall seeing a formal request in writing. The parents know, because I have indicated, any time when I am free, I would be more than willing to meet with them because we have so much we want to do together.

Ms. Friesen: My supplementary is to the Premier, to ask the Premier to tell us when he will reply to the April 26 letter of the parents of the school asking that plans to move the School for the Deaf be temporarily suspended until there is consultation with the parents and community members, which, contrary to what the minister has said, has not yet taken place.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I will take that matter under advisement and discuss it with the Minister of Education and Training.

Renovation Analysis

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, the real loss in this situation at the School for the Deaf has been the loss of trust in government. The deaf community fears it has been marginalized again, and there is an unavoidable sense that the government got its election press release, the Pan Am Games got a prestige setting in Tuxedo and that the government's commitment to listen to and work with parents mattered very little in the end.

Will the minister tell the House why she has refused to share with parents any information on the study which evaluated the present School for the Deaf and its prospective renovations?

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I wonder if I might ask the member for Wolseley to rephrase the question or, indeed, put a new question. In my opinion, that question was a repeat of a previous question.

Ms. Friesen: The question is indeed different, and it deals with the refusal of a freedom-of-information request from the parents of the school, from the Advisory Council, for the minister to share with parents any information on the study which evaluated the present School for the Deaf and its prospective renovations.

They have received a refusal from the minister's department for freedom of information, and I am asking the minister why.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I am unaware of any request under Freedom of Information in my department. Those requests will come, I understand, to department officials in various departments, and they will make responses. That request has not come to me. The member leaves an implication on the record that is incorrect.

The member also knows that I have had many lengthy discussions with the parents of the children who attend the School for the Deaf about the relocation which has been under study and under discussion, publicly and informally, for four or five years, Madam Speaker.

The member knows absolutely that there are many of those parents in the School for the Deaf--I would say if I counted them up, probably the majority--who are very eager for this new location. Those parents have given that information to me in the many conversations we have had on this topic.

The member is leaving an impression on the record that she has either exaggerated or twisted in such a way to give a false impression to this House.

Alternate Locations

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my supplementary is to the Minister of Government Services.

I want to ask the minister to table any evaluations conducted by his department for alternative locations for the School for the Deaf.

Hon. Brian Pallister (Minister of Government Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question. I will take that question as notice and get back to the member.

* (1400)

Pan Am Games Committee

Office Location

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I thank the minister for that, and I wonder if he would, at the same time, table the investigation and the evaluations of alternative locations for the headquarters of the Pan Am Games authority.

Hon. Brian Pallister (Minister of Government Services): Madam Speaker, I will.

Forest Fires

Firefighting Resources

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.

I would first like to inform this minister that the facts on equipment shortages in the forest fire situation were ascertained yesterday morning from three of his own officials in three different northern offices. They stated that they were having to pull some fire crews back precisely because of a lack of equipment. One official even commented on equipment shortages to a CBC National News reporter.

I would like to ask the minister, given that in 1989, at times, half of the blazes were still left unattended because of a lack of water bombers and helicopters, whether he is now able to share with us his plans for bringing in more equipment to fight the fires in the North.

Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, I repeat again that we have very qualified people out there who are doing a tremendous job in terms of jumping at fires and keeping them under control.

I do not for one second accept the fact that there is not enough equipment out there, enough manpower out there, because it changes day to day, and my professional people move it around as it is required, and they are doing a tremendous job out there under very adverse conditions, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Struthers: Will the minister pursue bringing in enough equipment to supply fire crews that are waiting to be called in, given that this would provide relief and assistance to fire crews who have been working around the clock doing a yeoman's job?

Mr. Driedger: Madam Speaker, one thing I will say is that it is not my intention, as Minister of Natural Resources, to start running the fire operations.

We have people who have done it for many, many years. They know exactly what they are doing, and they are doing a tremendous job, I repeat again, and I will not interfere.

Evacuation Process

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Given that Highway 391 is now closed, can the minister tell the House what contingency plans are in place? For example, is VIA Rail on standby for residents and evacuees should the forest fire situation change near Lynn Lake?

Hon. Brian Pallister (Minister of Government Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question.

I will use the opportunity to bring the House up to speed on the situation. In regard to Leaf Rapids, which yesterday was evacuated, approximately one-half the population is now being taken care of and have their temporary home in Thompson with the remainder in The Pas, as well as Lynn Lake. There are teams of people who are working effectively, I think, very effectively together, to try to deal with this situation. It is a horrible situation.

We have right now over 3,000 Manitobans who have been forced from their homes in this province, and I know that everyone in this House sends their sympathies out to those people who have been evacuated from their homes and are very appreciative of the work that is being done by firefighters in the threatened areas and elsewhere in this province. Right now, today, volunteers are working to make the evacuees welcome. Volunteers are working to assist in the communities that are threatened.

The officials in my department, in Natural Resources, as well as officials of other departments and officials in the host communities, as well as the threatened communities, are all doing their very best to work together to effectively address this problem in a spirit of good teamwork.

A very successful spirit is present in Manitoba, and today I would invite the member opposite to join in that teamwork.

Gaming Commission

Research Information

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

Yesterday, when we had introduced a matter of urgent public importance, the government House leader put some words on the record for which we would like some clarification.

He questioned the credibility of the work done by Dr. Philippe Syrenne, who was commissioned by the Winnipeg Free Press to undertake an extensive study of the social and economic impact of gambling. The minister referred to Dr. Syrenne as a so-called professor of economics and suggested that the Winnipeg Free Press was politically motivated in publishing a report on Dr. Syrenne's study.

Madam Speaker, my question to the minister is, if the minister has any knowledge of any improprieties in the research done by Dr. Syrenne, will he advise the gambling commission of these concerns, given that they already have consulted extensively with Dr. Syrenne and are using his report as a source of information?

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): I think, Madam Speaker, that I am entitled to my opinion on these things.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, my question to the Premier: Is this in fact the government's opinion, that the research work that the gambling committee is now looking at is fundamentally flawed because it was politically motivated?

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The member is seeking an opinion. I would ask the member to rephrase his question.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, is it government policy that the report that was commissioned and done and which the gambling committee is using as resource information is fundamentally flawed because it was strictly politically motivated, not only from this particular professor but also by the Winnipeg Free Press?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I want to assure the member for Inkster that the Desjardins commission will access all of the information that is presented to them with respect to gaming in this province. Much of it will be simply opinion. Others of it will be research--some better, some worse, some valid, some perhaps not so valid, but they will access all the information that is given to them.

That is the purpose of them holding public hearings. That is the purpose of their going out and soliciting any and all views with respect to gaming.

Some of these are just simply views. Some people come to it with a bias. Some people come to it with a predisposed idea of what the conclusions ought to be. Nevertheless, the Desjardins commission will listen to it, will absorb the information and will make their judgments based on all of that information.

* (1410)

Gambling

Information Release

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, will the Premier explain why he is prepared to allow the lottery policy review committee or the gambling committee to release information such as the Clients of the AFM Gambling Program and Callers to the Provincial Problem Gambling Help Line: A Statistical Profile, and the unedited Volberg report, yet not allow elected representatives to have access?

Why does he fear making these reports public himself? What fear does he have?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I am tempted to say we have nothing to fear but fear itself, Madam Speaker, but it has been said before.

An Honourable Member: By a much better man than you.

Mr. Filmon: If I did not like the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) so much, I would take offence at that remark. I am considering endorsing her when she runs for leadership, Madam Speaker.

Point of Order

Mr. Lamoureux: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I have put forward a very legitimate question. I would expect a Premier to answer the question.

If he wants to have dialogue with the member for Wellington, they can feel free after the question to go to the loge and talk.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, I, indeed, did recognize the honourable First Minister to respond to the final supplementary question of the member for Inkster.

* * *

Mr. Filmon: Well, Madam Speaker, I was actually contemplating endorsing the member for Inkster for leadership of his party, as well, but he better be careful because I may withdraw that support.

Madam Speaker, the issue about the release of reports has to do with whether or not the commission is one that is truly independent, that is truly objective in its point of view, and is not going out there for political reasons.

We believe that the commission is. We believe Mr. Desjardins will present us with information and recommendations upon which the government can act, and it will do so without political interference by us or by anybody else in this province.

We believe that in order to do that, they need access to all sorts of information, information that might be ordinarily barred from publication by The Freedom of Information Act, but in the interests of getting the information that they need in order to arrive at their judgment, we believe it should all be provided to them.

That is what is being done, and they will deal with how they treat the information and what they do with the information, but they are not there as a vehicle to simply support the research of the Liberal Party or any other party in this Legislature.

Health Care System

Children's Psychiatric Services

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, we will be meeting later to find out who we will endorse for leadership.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am absolutely positive now that it is the heat, and I would remind all honourable members that it is your time and the clock is running.

The honourable member for Crescentwood, to pose a question.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, a young woman in my constituency has had a very serious mental health problem, and the net result of that was attendance at the Emergency department of Children's Hospital on June 2.

The attending psychiatrist said, and this is a quote from the family: If we had an empty bed, we would admit your daughter immediately, but we do not. So take this medication, and we have made an appointment for a psychiatric assessment in two weeks. That is the earliest we can do.

Five days later, Madam Speaker, she was admitted to a medical bed for malnutrition and dehydration.

I would like to ask the Minister of Health, in light of the minister's unequivocal assurances to the honourable member for Kildonan's (Mr. Chomiak) question of May 25, can he explain what happened to this young woman and her family following June 7?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am not sure I understand everything the honourable member has told me. I do not think he has brought this to my attention before now. If this happened on June 2, and he has known about it, why has he not told me before now?

Each and every time honourable members bring these matters to my attention, and they do arise from time to time, Madam Speaker, when they do arise we address them immediately, and I am wondering why the honourable member waited 19 days to bring it to my attention.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, I have written to the minister today on this matter. I received--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for Crescentwood, on a supplementary question, no preamble is required or no postamble.

The honourable member, to pose his question now.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister now describe the specific steps that he will take to address what is clearly a bed shortage for acutely psychiatrically ill young people in this city?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, working with the mental health community, those people who advocate for mental health patients and clients, families of people affected by mental illness, we have put together a plan which has enjoyed pretty well unanimous support.

When there have been in the past times of pressure on some of the emergency rooms, we have addressed those issues, when they have come forward, by using the swing-bed approach. In other words, there is an ability for us to deal with pressures that are persistent or chronic, and if something needs to be done about it, we do that.

I would be very happy to review the specific case the honourable member has raised, but, I repeat, it is now 19 days, according to the honourable member's date that he gave me, since this has occurred, and we have been through nearly 50 hours of review of the Estimates of the Department of Health. There was ample opportunity for the honourable member to raise this in another, and may I say more effective way.

Mr. Sale: My question for the minister is, will the minister delay the planned closure of this eight-bed ward until he has carried out an adequate assessment of the need for the beds for these young adolescents?

Mr. McCrae: I will not take 19 days to get to the bottom of it, Madam Speaker.

Health Care System

Children's Psychiatric Services

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): On May 25 of this year, the Minister of Health assured the House that adolescents in need of psychiatric care will get the services they need and will not have to wait in line.

Can the Minister of Health explain why an adolescent is being detained at the Youth Centre where he has been since May 31, a situation that was just recently brought to my attention, because there are no psychiatric beds available?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Again, Madam Speaker, if the honourable member wants to bring specifics to my attention, I will make specific inquiries in the particular case he is talking about.

We have a variety of mental health services available for Manitobans today, Madam Speaker, that we did not have before. We are working together with people representing families and representing mental health clients and patients to build a continuum of mental health services that meets the needs.

We do not place all the reliance on the acute-care sector of mental health care delivery, although we know that we need to have some of that capacity, but we also have to have various other methods of delivery of service, things like crisis stabilization centres, things like youth treatment programs, which have all been put into place in recent months and years, Madam Speaker, something that was never done before.

We are breaking all kinds of new ground here in Manitoba, and we are a model for the rest of this country.

Mr. Martindale: Why has the Minister of Health not provided psychiatric beds, since this adolescent was taken to the Health Sciences Centre, was not admitted, an hour later was taken to the Youth Centre where the staff feel it is an inappropriate place to be keeping him?

Why is there a waiting list for adolescent psychiatric beds?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I answered the honourable member's question last time, and, as I say, if he brings to me specific details, we will make a specific inquiry into the matter.

Mr. Martindale: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister why he has not fulfilled his commitment to provide the psychiatric beds that are needed. This is not just an individual situation. There are a number of people who are waiting, and there are no facilities available.

Does he think it is humane to keep an adolescent in a holding cell five feet by seven feet with no furniture and the lights on 24 hours a day? How can he countenance this policy?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I am not countenancing anything. What I would like to ensure is that the appropriate services are available when they are needed. Just like the honourable member would like to have, that is what I would like to have, too.

If the honourable member would play the real role of an advocate and bring to my attention in a timely fashion information that I can find useful to help assist in solving problems which do exist from time to time--I would be very pleased if he and his colleague from Crescentwood would move a little more quickly in assisting people who run into difficulties with the health system.

* (1420)

Crow Benefit Elimination

Adjustment Fund

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, when the federal government announced the end to the Crow benefit, they also announced a $300-million Crow adjustment fund which we understood was to be used to help farmers who are going to bear the largest burden of this change of transportation, would be used to help them offset their costs. However, we now learn that a good portion will not be going to the farmers.

I want to ask the minister if he has received information and if he can share with us how the $300-million pool will be divided up.

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to report to the House and to the member that, following a discussion I had with federal Minister Goodale last Thursday, it was his indication that this $300-million adjustment fund would be used in significant portions, some $100 million, for offsetting the specific costs that Manitoba and eastern Saskatchewan farmers face as a result of the loss of the pooling formula with regard to the St. Lawrence Seaway, that a further $40 million to $45 million would be spent in Alberta for the alfalfa dehy industry and that the remaining portion of some $140 million to $150 million would be provided to the provinces for infrastructure support. In his mind, that was principally support for road construction.

Madam Speaker, I hasten to remind the honourable member, this is relatively public knowledge, but it is the federal government's decision to make. He has yet to fine-tune the actual amounts.

My position to the minister was simply that we wanted full compensation for the St. Lawrence Seaway pooling formula loss for certain in this first year, and that amount alone was some $110 million to $120 million.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.

Point of Order

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I wish to bring the attention of the House to the fact that I received the concern from the woman in question on Tuesday of this week. I raised it today because her fear was--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the honourable member for Crescentwood's point of order, the honourable member for Crescentwood does not have a point of order.

House Business

Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, on a matter of House business, there is general agreement to add to the list for sequence of Estimates under Room 254 the following: Community Support Programs; Employee Benefits and Other Payments; the Canada-Manitoba Enabling Vote; Allowance for Losses and Expenditures Incurred by Crown Corporations and Other Provincial Entities; Allowance for Salary Accruals; Internal Reform, Workforce Adjustment and General Salary Increases; Urban Economic Development Initiatives; Canada-Manitoba Infrastructure Program--Capital; Emergency Expenditures.

Those are to be added to the list for Room 254, as well, Madam Speaker, as moving Government Services from Room 255 to Room 254 to follow the aforementioned categories.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable government House leader have leave? [agreed]

Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, would you call for second reading Bill 14, followed by Bill 24.

NONPOLITICAL STATEMENT

Aboriginal Solidarity Day

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, do I have leave for a nonpolitical statement?

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for Dauphin have leave to revert back to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]

Mr. Struthers: Madam Speaker, I rise in this House today to mark the occasion of Aboriginal Solidarity Day, which is today, the 21st of June.

Since 1982, June 21 has served as a national day of solidarity for all aboriginal people. It is my wish that all Manitobans, both aboriginal and nonaboriginal, join with me in celebrating the proud history and the unique contributions and sacrifices of our aboriginal brothers and sisters.

As a rookie school teacher on the Norway House reserve I know some of the pressures of life as a minority. At Norway House I was greeted openly and warmly and learned much about aboriginal life. I learned what it takes to survive without many of the basic amenities that most Manitobans have become accustomed to. I learned the value of co-operation, and I learned the benefits of working together toward a common community goal.

Madam Speaker, celebrations marking Aboriginal Solidarity Day began this morning with sunrise ceremonies and will occur throughout this day to remind us not only of aboriginal successes but to highlight the injustices suffered by the original inhabitants of our province.

Let all of us today in this House determine our resolve to real justice and equality though such tools as the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and the dismantling of the Department of Indian Affairs.

Finally, I ask that all members join with me and my colleagues on this side of the House in offering our wishes for a productive, successful and memorable Aboriginal Solidarity Day today. Meegwetch. Thank you.