PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
Res. 22--Political Advertising and Government Guidelines
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that
WHEREAS the provincial government has spent hundreds of thousands of tax dollars on partisan advertising of provincial government programs in Manitoba newspapers and on radio and television stations around the province; and
WHEREAS at the same time as the provincial government has spent this money on advertising, they have underfunded the health care and education systems by $20 million; and
WHEREAS the same provincial government has been attempting to use employees of provincial government programs to appear in Conservative Party advertising; and
WHEREAS in 1993 the Provincial Auditor called similar ads "questionable" and stated that the provincial government should implement guidelines for government advertising.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Premier consider following the advice of the Provincial Auditor in this matter and "consider developing more explicit guidelines in this area, specifically defining the extent to which the political element is acceptable in ads paid with tax dollars;" and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Assembly request that the Premier refrain from further provincial government advertising campaigns while such guidelines are being developed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Maloway: Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to speak today on this resolution. I feel it is an important resolution, and I think it is important that the government understand that there is a deep concern over on this side of the House on this matter and in fact in the minds of a number of people in the province when they see taxpayers' money being shovelled into advertising campaigns by this government that are really nothing more than an extension of the political party's agenda of the Conservative Party. We have pointed out consistently over the last couple of years when this type of advertising has occurred.
I want to say at this point, Madam Speaker, that if the government were to advertise and its advertising were not so blatant and perhaps was done on a consistent basis over the four-year term of the government, perhaps it would not be so noticeable.
But it becomes fairly blatant and really noticeable when the acceleration in the government advertising occurs just before the period preceding an election, or when the government, as happened two years ago, was perilously low in the polls, had just lost the five by-elections and as part of its effort to get back in favour with the public proceeded on an unprecedented advertising campaign.
On that basis, while we did not expect that they would and could govern themselves in such a way as to stop the political advertising, we took the steps at the time to request of the Provincial Auditor that she intervene and attempt to request that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) at least develop some guidelines that could be used to determine the content of government advertising.
We gave the minister a year to work on guidelines. We asked on several occasions how the guidelines were progressing, and nothing was done. I guess it should not surprise anyone on this side of the House that nothing was done. But at the committee meeting the other day, the Public Accounts committee, I asked the Finance Minister about these guidelines that he promised a year ago, that the Provincial Auditor had requested he develop a year ago, and his response was that there are no guidelines in any other part of the country and because of that he really did not see much of a future in developing these guidelines. At the end of the day he does indicate that he is going to keep looking at it.
Now what that tells us, Madam Speaker, is this government has absolutely no intention of developing guidelines. It has no intention of controlling the government advertising amount and content. It proved during the last election that it will stop at nothing to win an election.
Now, there was a very good example of abuse of government advertising last year. Members will recall the government brought in a home renovation grant, a $10-million grant, and embarked on this huge advertising campaign to sell it to the public. At the end of the day I would suggest to you that the government probably spent more time, more money, advertising that $10-million program, in fact probably more than they gave out in grants, because at the end of the day there was a very low uptake on that particular program. The advertising was of a saturation nature at the beginning of the program.
Many of the advertising programs that the government does partake in are not there to inform the public. I have no objection with the government advertising program that gives valid information to the public, but the feel-good type advertising that this government has produced over the last four years is nothing more than an extension of their political party ads.
Now, Madam Speaker, another area of political advertising this government has been very involved in has been the lottery ads. I have a problem with the concept of even advertising lotteries. I understand that lotteries are here and they are here to stay. I do not think they should be expanded any more than they are at the present time, but why is it necessary to advertise gambling?
I mean, one only has to turn on the TV to see these mindless ads encouraging people to gamble. I mean, good God, people in this province do not need any more encouragement. They can buy lottery tickets everywhere you turn. When you turn on the TV, you see Don Cherry, and dogs on a teeter-totter, selling Sport Select tickets. This is something that the government, I feel, if it does not intend or if it does not want to cut back on the number of VLT machines it has currently, if it is not prepared to cut back on the gambling that the province is involved in at this point, surely there would be no harm done to ban advertising by the Lotteries Corporation.
* (1610)
I see it as totally nonproductive and certainly counterproductive if we are trying to, in some ways, discourage gambling or at least put the whole process in perspective. The idea that somehow we should advertise and build false hopes in people, that somehow even the poorest amongst us can put out a dollar and win a million dollars, or $14 million, I guess, was the last big lottery, is certainly not something that the government should be condoning. As a government, I think, any government is not well advised to be promoting that type of activity.
The Grow Bonds were another very good program that this government brought in, and we have commended them for their Grow Bond and their HydroBond program in the past. But, once again, why is it necessary for the government to expend extraordinary amounts of money, why is it necessary to approve extraordinary amounts of money for feel-good advertisements on Grow Bonds?
If we could bring this collection of ads to the House now and show them to the members, I think the members would have a good laugh looking at this advertising because, as the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) well knows, where is the content in these ads? Where is the information on the Grow Bonds? It is simply a taxpayer-paid ad for the Conservative Party going into an election, and notice now six months after the election, I am not aware of any government advertising on TV. Maybe the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) knows of some, but why is it that somehow a year ago, just six months before the election, there were ads, just wall-to-wall ads.
There were the lottery ads; there were the home improvement ads. They could not buy enough time. There were not enough hours in the day to run the ads. There was not enough money in the government coffers. They were pouring the money into the advertising campaign, and now just six months after the election, where are the ads? Where is that need for the government, at this point, to explain the Grow Bond program? Well, I guess everyone understands it now and it is not necessary.
Clearly the members should understand that we do not have objections to the government advertising information programs, but when they are tantamount to the canoe ad--everyone remembers the famous canoe ad in the 1990 election with the Premier (Mr. Filmon) floating down the river paddling, maybe he was in a big oversized bathtub for all we know, but we got the impression that he was in a stream somewhere with his canoe. To me that is very--[interjection] That is an election ad, that is right. So the member is agreeing with me that that was an election ad, certainly not very informative, I might tell you, but how is that canoe ad any different than those dozens of ads we have seen supporting the Grow Bonds, supporting the Home Renovation Program, supporting the Lotteries Corporation, nothing but feel-good advertising designed to promote and enhance the image of a failing government, because that is what it was doing at the time. It was failing and people knew it.
So much like O.J. Simpson has the money and resources to buy what he wants, this government is much the same way. We are down 10 points in the polls, we get thrashed in the by-elections, so what is the answer? You know, a million dollars will not do it so the answer is hire some advertising firms to get us out of this mess that the member for Pembina put us in, right, and they put together an advertising campaign that solved the problem for them. By the time they got into the election runup last year, I can tell you that that advertising campaign had clicked in and was getting results, and they know it. Anybody in that caucus who was briefed by their polling people after last August knows that their numbers were going up four points a month because of this advertising campaign. They smile. [interjection] The member says, that is not why they were going up four points a month. Well, that is exactly why they were going up four points a month. Their stock started to improve last August 1 when the airwaves were hit with this wall-to-wall, feel-good, quasi-political or blatantly political advertising that should have been billed to the Conservative Party. So this government outspent us before the writs were issued. They had spent their entire advertising budget before we had--
An Honourable Member: Got out of the gate.
Mr. Maloway: --got out of the gate. That is absolutely right. We could not get out of the gate.
The members like to talk about a level playing field. Well, you know, they are all in favour of a level playing field when it comes to them. Right? A level playing field for everyone else, but when it comes to them and their interests, that does not happen, and we saw what they did. The playing field became very unlevel. As a matter of fact, it was, as the member yesterday was talking about Don Cherry and his dog scenario. That is a funny ad, but the big blue dog was sitting way up as high as you could get on that teeter-totter when those writs were issued in January. It could not get any higher. It was impossible to spend any more money on advertising. You could not possibly have spent any more.
Now, I am sure they see that it worked for them once, and they have another four and a half years to go before the next election, so I guess we will have to sit here and wait and see what new goodies they come up with for the next go-round.
The point is, we do not expect them not to advertise, and we have said that, but blatant carpet-bombing advertising in advance, you know, six months before the election right up to the election, is not a level playing field. It is not a level playing field. It is misuse of public funds is what it is.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired.
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to respond to the member for Elmwood on this resolution. I totally reject all parts of his resolution and the comments that he has made here today. It is always interesting listening to that member try to make a case, and some of the speeches that he has made over the years have surrounded issues like this.
During the election campaign, the member and his party talked almost exclusively about health care, and I see that he still has to incorporate that into his resolution here indicating that that health care system is underfunded. The people did not accept that. We spend 34 percent of our budget on health care, and the member has not learned yet that people, whether it is health and education, are going to judge those systems on the merits of the system and not on how many dollars you spend.
* (1620)
The member tries to confuse the issue by talking about O.J. Simpson today, talking about the advertising of a Crown corporation and talking about some of the government programs. On the one hand, he says it is good to advertise government programs when it is for information, and he wants to be the one who arbitrates whether they are appropriate or not, the people of Manitoba are always asking about government programs and are wanting to know about government programs, and I will get into some of those a little later.
The member was a member, along with the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), of the Pawley government who spent over $2 million over a two-year period advertising the Jobs Fund, I might say a program roundly criticized by the three-time loser who leads that party. He was one of the biggest critics of that program.
Yesterday there was some debate about the Home Renovation Program. I am told that the member for Elmwood's (Mr. Maloway) constituency was one of the biggest drawers on that program, scores and scores of people. I suspect the member for Elmwood was out there promoting and advertising that program himself, and probably he should be happy.
I think that there were very few constituencies that accessed that program more than the member for Elmwood, and it is important that Manitobans wanted to know about that program. I mean, on the one hand he wants his constituents to access that program; then he wants to come to the House here and criticize the program.
For a small investment on the part of government, the Home Renovations Program saw a total of $43 million invested in the renovation of older homes. This provided jobs for many Manitobans and employed either directly or indirectly some 730 people. That was a very, very successful program, and it would not be successful if Manitobans did not know about it.
The member is confusing what he calls political advertising. He refers to the campaign of 1990 and some of the effective ads that were used then and tries to compare them to the type of advertising which presents information that Manitobans desire to have. I am not sure why he would be so critical of a program that members in his own constituency accessed to such a large extent.
I might say that in the area of tourism Manitoba has seen a dramatic increase in the number of tourists coming to Manitoba over the course of 1994. In fact, it was double the national average and represented $7 million in increased revenues to government. Again, these things do not happen without putting out some publicity, doing some advertising, and the member is against that sort of thing.
In fact, it is interesting, with all of the good news that is happening in Manitoba, there has not been one question over there on business expansion and tourism since this session started. A lot of these things happen because of the advertising, getting the message out, whether it is in tourism or whether it is in home renovations.
The member in his speech referenced Grow Bonds. He said it was a good program that they supported, but if you follow his arguments, he did not want government to tell anybody about it. He did not want communities to know about it.
There have been many, many successful Grow Bonds and issues. In fact, Rimer Alco from Morden, which was one of the first--and I think one of the members here recognized one of the administrators from Rimer Alco who received a national award. The Grow Bonds were very instrumental in having that corporation achieve the success it has and right across Manitoba. I know the new member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed), in the town of Killarney, the Country Woodshed who--[interjection] You have a long memory.
Point of Order
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I know that from time to time certain words have been declared unparliamentary. I would like your ruling on the question of whether in referring to a proper name "woodshed" as in Country Woodshed, the name of a business in Killarney, is appropriately used in this House as opposed to "woodshed," which is used in another context.
Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader was not really up on a point of order but on a point of clarification. Indeed, the context in which the honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship used the word is indeed parliamentary and not unparliamentary.
* * *
Mr. Gilleshammer: I thank you for that clarification, Madam Speaker. It just shows the length they will go to to keep a good program down.
There have been quite a number of Grow Bonds corporations started across the province, most of them, if not all of them, in rural Manitoba. There has been a total investment of over $21 million by Manitobans and the creation of 448 jobs in the 19 Grow Bond corporations that have been started. Again, these would not have the success that they have achieved without some form of government advertising and information dissemination across the province.
Manitobans have to be aware of these programs to take advantage of them, to make them work from within their own community. So we have seen, in areas of tourism, in the Home Renovation Program, which the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) promoted within his own constituency and the Grow Bonds, three of the main programs that government spent advertising dollars on within the last year, being very, very successful and helping Manitoba to grow, creating jobs--[interjection] Well, my good friend wants to know about the information on Lotteries.
I can recall, when members across the way, all they would talk about was secrecy, that you never tell anybody, you never advertise the programs that the Lotteries Foundation proceeds go to towards. The corporation and government came forward with a number of programs, the lottery beneficiaries awareness program, which allowed Manitobans to learn more about the programs. I recall the pamphlet that was put out at the UMM convention, exactly what the members were asking for, and then they simply roundly criticize it when it comes out.
The members want it both ways. They want to talk about secrecy and government programs that are a benefit to Manitobans, but they do not want anybody to advertise about it. These programs have been very, very successful. It has been part of the upswing in Manitoba business. The fact that we have a lower unemployment rate than almost every province in Canada is a result of things like the Grow Bonds program.
I might just mention the sales tax rebate. Over $24 million was leveraged in new homes being bought by Manitobans, a program that was widely accepted across the province and used by many, many Manitobans to create more jobs and assist, I think, almost 400 first-time home buyers through rebates. Again, when this program is advertised across the province, the members criticize it. I understand that they do not like the success that our government has had in coming forward with innovative programs which have assisted Manitobans from one end of this province to the other.
So I totally reject the statements made by the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). He knows very well that government has to have the ability to put out pamphlets and newspaper advertisements and materials to make Manitobans aware of programs that government is promoting. All these programs that we have talked about today, the tourism initiatives, the sales tax rebate, the Home Renovations and the Grow Bond program, have been very successful because there has been good policy developed around it. There is a wide acceptance of them across the province, and they have been very successful in putting Manitobans back to work and creating more jobs within the province of Manitoba.
* (1630)
The member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) who brought forward this resolution is well aware of the discussions that took place between 1981 and 1988 in terms of the way the government of that day, the Pawley government, conducted itself. In fact, when the Lyon government left office in 1981, there was a staff complement of 23 in the Communications Secretariat. By the end of 1988, there were 116 positions there, people totally dedicated not to productive work within a lot of those departments, but simply an obscene number of people doing advertising for that particular government.
(Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair)
Again, this government has considerably downsized the number of people who are involved within government to promote government programs. Again, the communications, the advertisements and the promotion of these programs has been very, very successful.
The member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) wants to link that success, of course, to electoral success. Well, the people of Manitoba had a chance in April to study the policies and the campaigns of all three parties and made some very wise choices and made their decisions. I know that the member for Elmwood is still smarting over that.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have no difficulty in saying very clearly that this resolution brought forward by the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) is not acceptable to us, and I am sure that other speakers here today will make that very clear to members opposite. Thank you very much.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I must admit that I am almost shocked and surprised at the speech that we have just heard from the minister, because what the minister is saying--and I assume he is speaking on behalf of some of his other colleagues because even though this is private members' hour, I am sure his speech does reflect his caucus's position--but what the minister is suggesting is that we say no to the Provincial Auditor.
If he would care to read the resolution--in fact, I will even give a copy here to the government House leader to read it directly--it is very clear that this is based on a simple request that we made to the Provincial Auditor that there be guidelines for advertising. In fact, I will be continuing this discussion with the government House leader later because I am sure he is very interested after reading this resolution.
I am surprised that anyone on that side would have any difficulty with a resolution that talks about--and this is a quote from the Provincial Auditor--developing more explicit guidelines in this area, which is the area of political advertising, and specifically define the extent to which the political element is acceptable and that it is paid with tax dollars.
What is wrong with that, Mr. Deputy Speaker?
I want to deal today with the context, why a member of this Legislature who has raised this issue at Public Accounts would actually have to bring this before the Legislature in private members' hour. Well, it is for two reasons basically. One is it is obviously a concern I think all of us should have. I mean advertising should be for informational purposes by the government, not for political purposes.
The second point is, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that this issue has been raised in Public Accounts. I have copies of the transcripts from Hansard. It was raised by our party. It was raised by the then other opposition party. It has been raised continuously. I have raised it in the Legislature. Many people have raised it in the Legislature. I just want to go a little bit further to point out to the minister why we have raised it.
I find it very interesting that the minister would suggest that somehow these ads were just totally innocent. They were only there to inform people about certain public programs, and they just, of course, coincidentally happened to expand dramatically the number of ads, the amount of ads, just coincidentally around what might have been called the first pre-election window last year. It was just coincidence, I am sure, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that the ads--and I think this is important because there are a number of ads that create a lot of concern--one of them was the so-called ads on rural development, because what I find interesting was the slogan they used was the same slogan they used in their caucus mail-outs.
It was the same slogan they used in the provincial election, you know, this Manitoba Strong, and then I guess they must have taken it from some of these beer ads. I am sure they got their inspiration from the XXX, but this Manitoba Strong, if you look at the content, it is identical. It is absolutely identical, the government ads, the Conservative caucus mail-outs--and, by the way, they sent tons. They sent tons of leaflets out with this Manitoba Strong, copies of various items of propaganda and, by the way, not just to their own constituencies. They sent it into coincidentally constituencies such as Flin Flon, Transcona, I believe, Crescentwood. I do not know why they would have sent it out. This is just informational to inform their constituents. But the fact is they ran ads with that specific tag on it.
Now what other things have we raised in the Legislature? Well, one I found rather amusing--and this, again, I guess was just informational, again, was the money that was spent, the $44,000 that was spent by the Rural Development minister on these newspapers that were sent out across rural Manitoba. I remember we did--in fact, both opposition parties actually checked the pictures and there were 17 pictures of guess which caucus--the Conservative caucus. In fact, in one of the issues there were seven pictures of the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach).
I am sure this was only to do with government programs, and it was just coincidental that the department was putting out a newspaper that had seven pictures of the minister and 17 pictures of the PC caucus. No pictures of any other members of the Leg., and that was just coincidence. It was strictly for information, perhaps, I guess, to make sure that people recognized what the Minister of Rural Development looked like when he travels rural Manitoba.
That is not the only ad they rented. Can anyone forget the Lotteries ads? Now this is the government--just remember this. This came out just recently. This is the government that received figures on the community-by-community breakdown of Lotteries funds, VLT funds, in November at cabinet. It had been requested by the Free Press in May of 1994. November, they got the information. We had the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) get up and say in committee, well, we could not get it out; we could not break it down via the community basis that was requested.
It took them seven months, till after the election, before they released that information in June of this year. This is on the one side. On the other side, there was nothing stopping them putting out $2 million of advertising just coincidentally leading up to the election, talking about some of the, quote, benefits of Lotteries expenditures. They had Hollywood-style productions. They had these ads. They were run on a saturation basis and just coincidentally did happen to deal with an issue that was of concern to a lot of Manitobans, the great expansion in terms of gambling.
Now, this is the government that could not get the community-by-community breakdown for VLT revenues released? It took them seven months, but they could run a $2-million advertising campaign? [interjection] The minister says they were good ads. They had better be with the price that was paid by the Lotteries Foundation. They had better be, because I have seen Hollywood pictures produced for lower budgets than some of those ads.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, you run through the cumulative impact. There was reference made to the Home Renovation Program. We said right from the beginning that there were going to be difficulties with that program. There are a heck of a lot of people out there that would like to renovate their homes that do not have $5,000 to put down to attain that $1,000. Some of us suggested that it was a Tory program designed for Tory constituencies. [interjection]
The member points out, perhaps even the program was designed for the ads, because what I find interesting is, the percentage that was spent on advertising for this program, the percentage that was spent on the REDI program, in terms of advertising. Let us recall that these programs did not say, you want information on the REDI program, contact us.
The REDI ads, they went around--and I will tell you, they probably created more jobs in the advertising industry with that program than they did in rural Manitoba. You look at the amount that was spent on advertising the successes of the REDI program. I tell you, you know, there were some, not many in northern Manitoba, but the fact is, go to anybody in private business and give them an advertising budget where they are going to be running 40 percent and 50 percent cost of advertising to deal with the results of those programs.
* (1640)
If anybody on that side can with a straight face say that there were not political motivations for those ads, I would like to hear them say so, because I can tell you, they would be very, very naive if they believe that. Everybody in this House knew that this was part of the Conservative re-election agenda. They were running polls. They knew that they were weak in the area of jobs, so they had to do something.
So what did they do? It was quite brilliant actually. They took the same programs, and they recycled the ads. They recycled those ads. I mean, the small potato ad, you know, it got to the point where there was this big debate in the House between the Liberals and Conservatives over small and big potatoes. I mean, this was going to be part of the election campaign. You know what, Mr. Deputy Speaker? It worked.
I mean, it is not surprising that they did not advertise other elements of what the government was doing. I mentioned about VLTs. They did not advertise how much money was taken out of rural communities. They did not do that. The Jets, they did not advertise that one very well in the election. There was not a single ad saying: Your government has made a real smart investment in the Winnipeg Jets. You are going to buy into the Keith Tkachuk contract here. Have we got a deal for you.
None of that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You know, this government that was so concerned about informing Manitobans, what did they do about those critical issues? Absolutely nothing.
How about health? You know, it was interesting because they did try some PR under Don Orchard's rule as Minister of Health. They hired an assistant deputy minister, went around the province, gave seminars on health reform, and then, of course, something happened called the by-election. Then we got the current Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) who has--I mean, I give him credit. He has managed to mumble his way through two years of health care reform, never once giving a straight answer in this House.
It is interesting. Dauphin Hospital, you know, they did not advertise what health care reform Tory style was to the people of Dauphin. It was interesting that they got assurances throughout the election campaign, do not worry; it is not a problem. So what happens? Within a few months after the election, Dauphin gets it, Flin Flon, the same thing.
What I like too is the way our hospital system works in Thompson. We had the Conservative candidate, ran on health care reform. He actually did. So what happened? They received the lowest vote in 25 years. Thanks to our wonderful system, the Tory candidate has now been appointed to--guess which board in Thompson--the hospital board. There is democracy for you, Tory style. He is now sitting on the hospital board. He is a fine individual, but, I am sorry, when you get 1,300 votes, the lowest number of votes in 25 years--in fact, the Tories in Thompson got fewer votes than the NDP candidate did in Arthur-Virden--I mean, Mr. Deputy Speaker, there is something wrong there.
But, you know, the government, under this Minister of Health, did not go out and say, here is what health care reform means to your community hospital. They did not say, here is what health care reform means to urban hospitals; here is what it really means to you in terms of services. In fact, they ran--and at least they paid for it in Conservative dollars in the election--those famous ads of the Premier saying, do not worry about it; just think of all those great experiences you have had in the past with health care.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, those were brilliant ads. They were brilliant ads. They were totally misleading, but they were brilliant. In fact, I think there is a common theme here. You know what? I will say that the Conservatives are good at one thing, advertising. They are better than the New Democrats. They are better when they are in government on abusing government ads for political purposes. In the election, they have more ads than we do. They have a lot more money than we do, and they will say anything to get elected. If anybody doubts that, take any of them, they will say anything to get elected. Run their ads through.
What I would be interested to do--and I remember Filmon in the canoe in 1990. Does anybody remember that ad? It was Gary Filmon, friend of the environment, you know, warm, fuzzy sweater. That one, that canoe had developed quite a few holes pretty early on in the mandate. I will say, if you remember the ads--by the way, I want to get videos made of these ads to remind people periodically, especially those people who, in the final week, decided maybe they would give this government one more turn, give them a chance, vote for them because, you know, they won the election. I do not discount that. I have never questioned that, but look at those ads. Remember, like I said--they said do not worry about your health care. I asked the people in Dauphin, Flin Flon, Thompson, people here in the city of Winnipeg, what is the reality?--those ads or the reality of a government that is now back in with a majority doing whatever the heck it wants in that area?
You know, I went through other areas with their ads. They were talking about how fiscally responsible they were. The Winnipeg Jets, you know. Remember what they promised in the election? It was $10 million. They did not advertise that because, I tell you, rural and northern Manitoba, in many areas of the city, a lot of people would not agree even to $10 million. So what did they do? As soon as they got elected, they forgot all that gloss, the PR that they put in place, and all of a sudden the ante was raised to $35 million. We have seen secret money put forward in the infrastructure program. We have seen the deal collapse.
We are seeing this bizarre spectacle of us, the taxpayers of Manitoba now paying for one of the biggest contracts that has been signed in a long time. We are competing with the Chicago Black Hawks, you know, the third highest in the NHL, and we as taxpayers are paying for that. Now, this government is so concerned, this party so concerned about information. They did not advertise that in the election. Vote for us and you will own part of Keith Tkachuk's contract. Boy, that would have gone down real well in a lot of constituencies they were fighting and they won them.
The bottom line is, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we admit Conservatives are better at one thing, and that is running misleading advertising, either as a government or as a political party, but, you know, they should not have the right to continue to do that in government. The Provincial Auditor states very clearly that a lot of their ads were very borderline and questionable--the Provincial Auditor.
So I ask this question: Is it unreasonable to ask what this resolution does? Very clearly it says one thing, let us have guidelines. Well, the Conservatives can still run misleading election ads, but let us make sure that at least when it comes to the taxpayers' money that is being put forth for these ads that there are guidelines so that it does live up to giving out information and not the kind of political agenda that we saw from this government, coincidentally, six months before the provincial election.
I submit to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is so reasonable that even some of the government members, particularly the new members who were not part of the government that brought in these ads--they do not have any ownership of this. I am sure if they ask their constituents, they would agree with this. How much more reasonable can you get? Guidelines. That is all we are asking for. So I urge members opposite to keep an open mind on this. I say to the new members in particular, now is your chance to say, enough of what happened in the past, let us have some integrity in government and have the guidelines that the Provincial Auditor has requested for advertising.
Mr. Mike Radcliffe (River Heights): Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today on this issue as well. I feel bound in duty to bring some information to this House today. I listened to the honourable member bring forth this resolution, and I am astounded. He is coming from a party that in 1988 had 116 communicators on the public payroll--116. The prior Conservative government had 23. Here is a group of people that have made a business out of advertising. They have the nerve, they have the temerity to come before this House today and suggest that there should be guidelines.
I want to share with the honourable members of this House today that on the day before Mr. Walding ended this regime of the NDP rule in Manitoba, do you know what their budget was for spending to polish their image? $13.2 million.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Not enough.
Mr. Radcliffe: That is right. The honourable member for Inkster says not enough. That is what the honourable NDP government did. They just tried to throw more money at their problems, and they were told by the people of Manitoba that it does not work. You do not just throw more money at problems. That is right.
* (1650)
There was a comment, there was a judgment made on the strategy of the NDP government on their advertising and on their communication. This is the judgment that was levelled against that party: the Manitoba government is spending too much on public relations people to sell its program; the ribbons and bows you put on it are more important than the actual package. Who said that, Mr. Deputy Speaker? Do you know who said that? You are right, Mr. Minister of Health, it was Gary Doer.
This is the very leader who now purports to come before the people of Manitoba and try to say that there should be guidelines. He was not saying it then.
I think another essential item that should be disclosed to this House today, the Manitoba Home Renovation Program that we heard about in the previous discussion in this House today. We were led to believe that this was a nothing program, that it was going nowhere and that the people of the province of Manitoba were not picking up on this program.
Mr. Lamoureux: He said it was a Tory program.
Mr. Radcliffe: That it was a Tory program, says the member for Inkster. Well, let me tell you, the real information, the real facts are, in the district of Elmwood, do you know how many grants were made on the Home Renovation Program? One hundred and eighty-nine grants. That was the third highest in our province.
There is an old adage, Mr. Deputy Speaker--
Point of Order
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson on a point of order.
Mr. Ashton: Yes, on a point of order. Under Beauchesne's provisions it is customary that members quoting from documents are therefore required to table those documents.
The member directly quoted from a document that he has that is a constituency-by-constituency breakdown of the program, and I would ask that he table it as is our rules under Beauchesne's.
Mr. Radcliffe: On the same point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe that the quotation that my honourable friend is citing only applies to a letter and does not apply to anything else.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for River Heights is correct. Under Rule 29.1: Where in a debate a member quotes from a private letter, any other member may require the member who has quoted from the letter to table the letter, but not from any other document.
Point of Order
Mr. Ashton: On a point of order and I am raising it in terms of Beauchesne's Citation 495, and the provision does apply strictly to ministers in terms of documents, Mr. Deputy Speaker, both including letters and other documents. While it does not strictly apply to private members, it has been practice in this House that when members quote a specific document that they also table that particular document. I would ask if, not as a question of direct ruling, that as a matter of courtesy if the member would do us the courtesy and provide that information from the document that he is reading from.
Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe the record will show that no reference was made to any particular document. The information, like everything else in this honourable government, there was open information provided. The information that was germane was provided and put on the floor, but there was no reference or cites made to any particular document.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Under Citation 495(6): "A private Member has neither the right nor the obligation to table an official, or any other, document."
The honourable member does not have a point of order.
* * *
Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I thank you for the guidance that you have offered to us today. I would like to cite for the edification of the honourable members present an old adage which goes like this: That if a single tree in the forest falls and nobody was there to hear it, was there any sound? It is imperative not only that this government present the best programs and the best governance to the people of Manitoba but that we also tell them about this governance. There is no point in having marvelous programs unless the people of Manitoba know about it. For example, the Home Renovation Program, to which I made previous reference, obviously the people of Elmwood were informed, and they certainly liked it. They found out about the Home Renovation Program. [interjection] That is right.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to inform this House that in 1983 the NDP created a Communications Branch to the honourable then Maureen Hemphill's Education department, and they spent $315,000 in one department. The Education critic of that day, the now honourable First Minister, was cited as saying, it is apparently nothing more than a propaganda machine for this minister and her department. There is a difference between the public's right to know and setting up a self-serving propaganda machine.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would suggest that this is some of the relevant background that gave rise to the motion that is before us today. I think, when the honourable member comes before this House and says that ads are questionable, that government employees are used, that there is $20 million of underfunding and there is partisan advertising, that when you put those sort of allegations in the context of the profligate spending that we see, that came from the prior administration, it has absolutely no credibility.
This government, as the honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mr. Gilleshammer) has said, the sales tax rebate, the tourism programs that we put before this--[interjection] The what?
An Honourable Member: Toryism.
Mr. Radcliffe: Toryism. Yes. The tourism, the Business Start program and the Grow Bonds, these are some incredibly earth-shattering programs which have turned the economics of this province around, have attracted the imagination of the people of this province, and they voted--
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The first hour of private members' hour has expired. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for River Heights will have five minutes remaining.
We will now deal with Resolution 23.
* (1700)
House Business
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): On House business, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have a general agreement amongst members that for tomorrow in private members' hour we will deal with only one private members' hour at five o'clock due to the late start because of the Governor General's visit tomorrow.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it agreed that tomorrow there will be only one private members' hour which will commence at five o'clock? Agreed? [agreed]
Res. 23--Pre-European Canadian History
Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), that
WHEREAS the teaching of Canadian history in Manitoba schools is vital not only in instilling in our children a sense of Canadian culture and identity but in developing an understanding of why our country is as it is today and how it arrived in its present form; and
WHEREAS the First Nations and Inuit peoples living in Canada today played a vital role in the development of our nation; and
WHEREAS the history of those First Nations and Inuit peoples extends back untold centuries prior to the arrival of the European settlers in Canada; and
WHEREAS the cultural, political, economic and social diversity among Canada's First Nations and Inuit peoples is not currently reflected in the curriculum of our elementary and secondary schools, the focus of which is on First Nations and Inuit peoples as a barrier to settlement and colonization or at best as an ally to either the French or the English settlers, leaving them bereft of identity apart from the colonizers; and
WHEREAS First Nations and Inuit peoples are often portrayed by history textbooks and in the educational system in general in stereotypical and misleading ways, fostering racism and ignorance among children which lasts into and beyond adulthood.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the provincial government to consider initiating a new Canadian history curriculum which includes a pre-European history component highlighting the diversity and complexity of First Nations and Inuit peoples' cultures across Canada; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Assembly urge the provincial government to consider developing a curriculum component dealing with the effects of European colonization on First Nations and Inuit peoples which is a sad yet very important chapter in the growth of Canada, and one of which many Canadians remain unaware.
Motion presented.
Mr. Hickes: Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to speak today on this resolution. I believe that this legislation is essential in order to bring justice to the aboriginal peoples of this province.
By creating an educational system that recognizes the contributions and sacrifices of the First Nations and Inuit people of our province and in Canada, we will be able to begin the process of reconciliation with the aboriginal peoples in our province. In this manner, the resolution would not only address a variety of the demands of the native peoples in our province but also convey a better understanding of the aboriginal peoples and their needs and aspirations to other nonaboriginal communities that make up our society. The development of such an appreciation would create not only a more harmonious but also a truly just society.
Resolution 23, the pre-European Canadian History resolution, calls for two changes in the current provincial education system. Firstly, the legislation proposes that the provincial government initiate a new Canadian history curriculum. This new curriculum will include a pre-European history component highlighting the diversity and complexity of the First Nations' and Inuit peoples' cultures across Canada.
The second change the legislation calls for is that provincial government develop a curriculum component which deals with the effects of European colonization on First Nations and Inuit peoples. These effects have unfortunately been a sad but fundamental aspect of Canadian history. The changes that are called for in this resolution are not extreme by any means. These measures are simply another manner in which to strengthen our educational system.
By teaching young people about the aboriginal peoples of this land, we are giving them a greater understanding of their own homeland. Such an understanding is essential in understanding our current situation. To date, this has been the problem. Students in our school system have been taught that the history of Canada began in 1497 with the arrival of John Cabot. Prior to his arrival, the land that would later be known as "Canada" was simply inhabited by hunters who wandered the land in search of food in a day-to-day existence. It was rarely, if at all, mentioned that these people had a rich culture and a way of life.
As a result, many within Canadian society do not have a thorough understanding of the native communities in this country. This lack of understanding continues to lead to tensions between aboriginal and nonaboriginal societies. Tensions that arose at Oka in 1991, and the recent outbreak of hostilities in Ipperwash, Ontario, and Gustafsen Lake, British Columbia, are only the tip of the iceberg.
If we are to ensure that incidents of this kind are avoided in the future, then it is necessary to deal with the issues at the heart of the matter in a just and equitable manner. This can only be done, however, by understanding the demands of both aboriginal and nonaboriginal communities. Unfortunately, the establishment has failed to appreciate the hopes and aspirations of the native community, instead dominant society has historically pushed the aboriginal communities into the fringes in the hopes that this segment of society along with the concerns will simply disappear.
The native peoples of our nation, however, will not just disappear. They are an important aspect of our society and sooner or later leaders within the nonaboriginal community will have to deal with First Nations and Inuit peoples.
By alerting our provincial education system to include a pre-European aboriginal component, we will be beginning the process of reconciliation by initiating the development of a bridge of understanding between the aboriginal and nonaboriginal communities. By instilling this appreciation in our young people, the future of the entire community will be more harmonious and just.
In today's educational system, Canada prior to the arrival of the Europeans is a subject that tends to be neglected. Rarely do students learn of the cultures and ways of life that existed for thousands of years prior to the landing of the first European ships on the coast of eastern Canada.
Students fail to recognize the fact that there existed a rich and diverse mixture of cultures in what is now Canada. For example, in the far North tribes such as the Dogrib and Inuit lived off caribou and moose, whereas in the east, tribes such as the Mohawk and Huron, in addition to hunting, also tried their hand at agriculture.
In the central plains regions, the Assiniboine and Sioux hunted the bison to survive, while on the Pacific coast, tribes such as the Haida tended to comprise much of their diets with food from the ocean.
All of these tribes and the various other ones did come into contact with one another. Occasionally, tensions arose and conflicts followed but, in many cases, trade became the order of the day. In fact, it is the aboriginal peoples who were the first traders on the continent. It has been shown that the trade between some of the tribes was quite significant, and elaborate systems of trade were developed. For instance, some systems of trade were able to move traded goods thousands of kilometres away from their place of origin. For example, archaeologists have discovered shells which originated in the Gulf of Mexico in sites in Manitoba.
Another aspect of Canadian history that has also tended to be neglected has been the sacrifices that the First Nations people have made either voluntarily or at the hands of an oppressive government. The aboriginal peoples of Canada welcomed the Europeans to this land. In fact, many native people saved the lives of many newcomers who fell sick when they came to this strange new land. In this manner, both groups coexisted. They traded and co-operated with each other in order to survive. Some aboriginal peoples even consented to share the land with the newcomers. This they did through the treaties that they signed.
* (1710)
Unfortunately, the sharing that they had in mind was in no way similar to what the Europeans had in their minds. Unfortunately, this was to become the sorry state of aboriginal and nonaboriginal relations. The Europeans, and later the Government of Canada, viewed the native peoples as an obstruction to the development of the nation. As a result their policies were intended on weakening if not destroying the aboriginal way of life. This was done in a variety of ways. Native people were captured as slaves for the Europeans. They were contaminated by the Europeans' alcohol, religion and law, and they were exposed to European diseases. In fact, entire villages were wiped out by foreign diseases.
These were only a few ways in which the aboriginal culture was attacked by the colonizers. As the First Nations people began to slowly lose their way of life, it became all too clear that foreigners with their smallpox and brandy, guns and blankets, law and religion had come to stay. Unfortunately, much of this aspect of the development of Canada tends to be ignored in today's educational system. As a result few Canadians have a full grasp of the enormous contributions and sacrifices that aboriginal peoples have made to our nation.
The introduction of an aboriginal perspective regarding the history of the First Nations in Canada will therefore benefit mainstream society. The native peoples of Canada have a great deal to teach the mainstream society. One specific example is the aboriginal world view regarding nature. The aboriginal people were environmentally friendly long before such a term existed. The native peoples have lived sustainably with their environment for thousands of years. They seem to understand the land and all the resources around them. Only with the benefit of such an understanding could one expect to live in regions such as the Arctic. This is exactly what the many native tribes did.
As one researcher stated, despite being one of the most inhospitable regions on earth, the Canadian High Arctic was home to people for thousands of years before the arrival of the Europeans in the 17th Century. To survive, native peoples adapted to a constantly changing environment and produced thriving cultures in an unlikely setting. Long and frigid winters accompanied by a scarcity of animal foods and raw materials demanded technological ingenuity and a strategy for survival unique to the Arctic. In this context the native peoples had to truly appreciate the environment in which they lived regardless of the region. By being able to do so, they were able to survive while ensuring that the land would continue to be able to satisfy the needs of the people into the future. This is a lesson that has a great deal of bearing on our society today. The catchwords of sustainable development are continually being espoused. However, very little appears to be changing. Perhaps, if mainstream society is able to expose itself to a traditional aboriginal world view in which the Earth is respected, then perhaps sustainable development may become a way of life rather than simple political rhetoric.
Understanding between the aboriginal and nonaboriginal people is especially important in Manitoba. It is appropriate that our province's name is Manitoba, which in Cree and Ojibway languages means place where the spirit lives. It is our province of Manitoba that has one of the most significant aboriginal communities in Canada. In addition, it is this aboriginal population which is expected to increase drastically in the upcoming years. In this respect, aboriginal youth are crucial to the development of this province. It will be this upcoming population of aboriginal youth who will have an important leadership role into the next century.
In order to be prepared for this role, it is necessary for aboriginal youth to understand their history. Without appreciating their historical development, these members of society will be lacking a grounding. They will, in a sense, be ruthless. Furthermore, it would be difficult for them to discover where they will be going without first understanding where they have come from.
There are also other social reasons for implementing a new Canadian history curriculum. If the youth in our province are exposed to the realities of the aboriginal people, they may develop a greater understanding of the plight of the First Nations and Inuit peoples. With such an understanding, it may be easier to battle racism and discrimination within our society. Until recently, few people questioned the practice of giving one perspective in examining the history of our nation. Such a practice, however, is an obstruction and limits the ability for aboriginal people to gain a sense of empowerment.
In addition, such an approach does not challenge the dominant thought. Thus the thought fails to develop. It becomes stagnant, with little chance of development. Thus education may promote understanding and respect among the various groups that make up this province. By providing a history of Canada prior to the arrival of the Europeans, aboriginal youth will be given something to feel proud of. They will no longer simply be considered the aggressors or the allies to the European colonizers but rather individuals and communities in their own right. Through such a sense of pride, aboriginal people will be encouraged to continue to contribute to our community development. Only by possessing a sense of pride can individuals become productive citizens within a modern society.
Resolution 23, the Pre-European History resolution, is a very crucial piece of legislation. It is the first of many steps that are required in fostering a clear dialogue between aboriginal and nonaboriginal persons alike. Only through such changes can native peoples begin to feel they are indeed respected and cherished in our modern nation. This resolution, firstly, recognizes the rich and diverse cultures of aboriginal peoples and, secondly, acknowledges the monumental sacrifices made by Canada's First Nations and Inuit peoples. This resolution is crucial in order to bring honour and justice to the aboriginal peoples in Manitoba and also in the rest of Canada.
I hope that all members of this House will join with me in displaying their support for this resolution.
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to thank the member for Point Douglas as well for his comments. The member for Point Douglas is one whose dialogue with me on other matters has always been well motivated. I am pleased to listen to his remarks today because I believe, in this instance, as in others, he also is well motivated here and not playing any political games but rather speaking from the heart on a very important matter with which I agree.
The member indicates a problem that has been in the past in existence. It is a real problem. He indicates that until recently people did not question the perspectives taught. He is correct. I would, for his comfort, indicate that recently people on this side did indeed begin to question the very matters he has raised for the very reasons he has raised them, and wish to indicate to him that we have already begun to do exactly what he is requesting here. We have gone so far as to have materials printed and distributed. We have curricula currently being revised. We have met with people who have also talked to us about aboriginal perspectives.
In fact, just yesterday, I met with the Social Planning Council on their committee dealing with racial prejudice and biases, and, again, one of the things that we were talking about was this very thing to the point that we have accepted an offer from that particular committee to take a look at our aboriginal perspectives as they are developed to see if it does not meet anything, in their opinion, that we still need to meet.
* (1720)
Just to indicate to the member that he is absolutely on the right track and to give the assurance that we have already begun to do what he has asking for the very reasons he has asked it, I will just read you an excerpt from the Foundation for Excellence, which is the book that we put out, I think, in September, or it was being developed last year, and I had the privilege of sending it out in September. It describes the goals for integrating the aboriginal perspectives into the curricula. It says, as one of our stated goals, I am quoting now, aboriginal perspectives will be integrated into curricula to enable students to learn the history of Manitoba and Canada before European settlement and to give the perspective of aboriginal people, as well, since that time.
Each subject area will address the perspectives and accomplishments of aboriginal people. The goal in integrating aboriginal perspectives into curricula is to ensure that all students have opportunities to understand and respect themselves, their cultural heritage and the cultural heritage of others. Aboriginal perspectives apply to learning experiences for all students. However, there may be unique and particular experiences that apply specifically to aboriginal students. Aboriginal students are both learners and participants in aboriginal cultures and may not necessarily be an expert in their culture.
I am going to just break from the quote here for a moment to speak to an issue the member is probably very deeply familiar with, and that is to those children who, for whatever reason, have lost their heritage or culture, so they need to be reacquainted with it or to understand the part that it still plays in their lives.
Their knowledge about their culture may be the same as that of other students in the class--that is a quote--but if they do have extensive knowledge about their culture, it can benefit the entire class. All students learn in a variety of ways, and this should be taken into consideration. The intent is to ensure that high expectations and supportive learning experiences and environment apply to all students and not just to nonaboriginal students.
The aboriginal perspective will be integrated in Manitoba, kindergarten to Senior 4, which is the old Grade 12, kindergarten to Grade 12, in all elements such as the foundation skills, resource-based learning, differentiated instruction, curriculum integration, aboriginal perspectives, gender fairness, appropriate age portrayals, human diversity, antiracist-antibias education, and the one to which the member was referring at the conclusion of his remarks, sustainable development. Here the comment about sustainability and the long experience in living in a sustainable way with nature, particularly in the far North, are most appropriate.
That is the statement of intent, but, to go back and sort of enlarge upon it a little bit, we did make the decision that we would teach the pre-European part of the people who live in our part of the world. North America did not begin with the arrival of the Europeans, and we recognize that. That is why we have said that we will be learning the history of Manitoba and Canada before European settlement and also to give the perspective of aboriginal people since the arrival of the Europeans.
There are two very important components there.
Again, quoting from our Foundation for Excellence, the development of curricula will be guided by the following goals. We have goals of aboriginal perspectives for aboriginal students which would be to develop a positive self-identity through learning their own histories, cultures and contemporary lifestyles and to participate in a learning environment that will equip them with the knowledge and skills needed to participate more fully in the unique civic and cultural realities in which they will live.
The goals of aboriginal perspectives for nonaboriginal students, because we set goals for them as well--they have the two groups who will see the aboriginal perspectives, integration through the system, in differing ways. One will be those students of aboriginal ancestry and the others will be those students of nonaboriginal ancestry. Our goals for those students who are nonaboriginal in terms of aboriginal perspectives are (1) to develop an understanding and respect for the histories, cultures and contemporary lifestyles of aboriginal people, and (2) to develop informed opinions on matters relating to aboriginal people in the populace.
We are also working, as a matter of interest--Manitoba Education is working through the western consortium to develop curriculum material with respect to aboriginal people for other provinces. The member made a very interesting and true statement when he indicated the very large proportion of our population that are aboriginal. Because we do have such a large per capita population of aboriginal people in our province on a percentage basis, I think it is imperative that we ensure that their learning experience and their knowledge of who they are and their backgrounds, culture and their ability to interact with others, the cross-cultural awareness training that will be essential if we are to live as a cohesive society able to work together and live together and be productive as individuals and as a province. It is very important that we do not forget these items.
We will see in our aboriginal perspectives specific items where you deal specifically in discussions about aboriginal peoples, their ways, their culture, and we will also see the integration through all subject areas.
There are two approaches that could have been taken. One approach would be what I would call the token approach which I do not like particularly although it is better than nothing which would be to say, all right, boys and girls, Friday afternoon at three o'clock you are going to sit down and you are going to learn about race relations, antibias education, aboriginal perspectives and that is it. But when you go back then to your other classes you do not have to worry about it anymore. It is better than nothing, but it is much better I think to have your class on those things, those items, those perspectives and then go back and find that when you are studying geography, for example, and you are talking about a particular river that you do more than just talk about the particular river in terms of the voyageur went down it. You go back, you talk about the river in terms of perhaps information you may have through archaeological digs, the kind of people who have been around the river and that type of thing which would include in many instances our aboriginal people. You can learn a lot about people that have been lost through historical records by archaeological digs and so on.
So we see that permeating literature, the stories that are read, the literature that is read, the music that is taught, the artwork that is done, the history, the geography, the human relations, all of those subject areas should have this component in. And it is not enough to have a class that says, this is this is this is this about our aboriginal peoples and go back into a class where we are going to have math taught by a teacher who has not been properly sensitized to this issue and in two or three unthinking comments completely undoes the class.
It is extremely important, and I talked yesterday as well to some people at the Faculty of Education that our teachers be learned in these things, that they learn the subtleties of language that can lift up or put down. There are many, many ways in which the simple use of a phrase can tear a person to pieces or undo 16 weeks of positive cross-cultural awareness understanding.
And so those things have to come right from the Faculty of Education if we are going to really have it permeate the system. The teachers coming out have to be fully aware of what we are doing and why we are doing it and not inadvertently destroy the integration we are trying to put in here.
So it has, I think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, what I am saying is that I appreciate what the member said. I think his comments are good. We have started to do the very things he is asking. The document that came out in September, I would be more than pleased, in fact, could probably benefit from his own background and experiences particularly in the North. I would be more than pleased to sit down with him, go through our plans, and if he has got any input on the Inuit or northern aboriginal people's perspectives, I would be most grateful to receive it and seriously consider it.
* (1730)
Mr. Deputy Speaker, is this meaning something here? My little light is blinking. Is that telling me something?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: You have one minute left.
Mrs. McIntosh: Okay. Thank you. I have never looked down to see it blinking at me like that, like a winking eye.
We are very concerned about this topic. It is a very important topic. There has been a tremendous amount of single-minded viewpoint expressed in our system in the past. Curricula does need to be updated to reflect a better and more accurate understanding for all students, aboriginal and nonaboriginal, as to our land which we do now share, but the aboriginal perspective must not be set aside as insignificant or of passing interest. It is a very vital and real component of our society and our province and will have and should have a lasting and positive impact on all that we do.
(Madam Speaker in the Chair)
Madam Speaker, I will conclude my remarks on that and again issue a very sincere invitation to the member at his convenience to meet with me at some point and go through any ideas he might have. They would be given very serious consideration.
Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise and speak to this resolution, simply to indicate the concerns and also the areas that we are approving of in this resolution.
This government recognizes that an important part of its children's education is learning the history of the aboriginal people both in Canada generally and within Manitoba specifically. In the document, Renewing Education: New Directions, a Foundation for Excellence released to the field in August of 1995, our government took the necessary steps towards ensuring that the education system in Manitoba was strengthened, and ensured that the history of the aboriginal people played a vital part in this renewal.
Madam Speaker, as such the government has taken steps to ensure that Manitoba school children learn about Canadian history, geography and culture at an earlier age level than is currently being stipulated. This education would include knowledge of pre-European Canadian history and the important role the aboriginal community has played in Canada's development. As part of the New Directions guidelines, content will be covered earlier in the curricula so that topics related to the Canadian studies that are currently covered in Senior Levels 3 or 4 will be addressed before the end of Senior Level 2.
Students within the Senior Levels 3 and 4 will be offered new courses that may include opportunities for further in-depth exploration about Canada and the Canadian issues. These issues will include studies about our First Nations people as well as the many other nationalities that make up our country and our province.
Madam Speaker, if the New Directions document simply eliminated Canadian history without ensuring coverage of Canadian content prior to the end of Senior 2, there would indeed be cause for concern. Now, fortunately, this is not the case, and, in fact, quite the opposite is true. Expectations for student learning of Canadian history will actually be increased as the compulsory kindergarten to Senior 2 outcomes and standards are developed. Knowledge of Canada's history will not be an option for Manitoba students. It will be a compulsory and vital part of their education from kindergarten to Senior level 2.
Further, with content of material being covered earlier, Manitoba students will have an even greater opportunity to learn about the history, geography and culture of our great country and province. Along with this opportunity comes increased and earlier exposure to the important role aboriginals played in pre-European Canada. Therefore it is clear that the government of Manitoba has taken a very proactive approach to ensuring that the young people of Manitoba are taught the important role the aboriginal people have played in our history and what a vital role they will play in its future success.
However, while this government has recognized how important it is to have history courses include a pre-European component, we also realize that this is not the only means of ensuring that Manitobans understand the aboriginal historical perspective. Madam Speaker, therefore, I am pleased to say that this government has undertaken a number of initiatives to facilitate and nurture the understanding of the aboriginal heritage.
One such initiative is the support the government provides the Canadian Native Arts Foundation. This foundation recognizes and endows the artistic endeavours of the aboriginal people. As such, the government of this province is providing the opportunity for members of the aboriginal community to develop and express their many artistic talents. This creates an opportunity for those who may never have been exposed to the art of aboriginal people and the history that is expressed through that art to observe and appreciate its cultural value. This type of initiative is an important noninstitutionalized way of bringing the aboriginal heritage and culture to the mass population who may not otherwise have had such exposure.
Madam Speaker, through these means, a true appreciation and knowledge of the aboriginal heritage can be garnered and cultivated.
Further, this government has committed, as part of its educational renewal initiative, to the inclusion of aboriginal content and perspectives in all newly developed curricula at every grade level. This initiative underscores the fact that, as part of our government's overall goal of improved education in Manitoba, there is a systematic effort to further improve the dissemination of knowledge regarding the history of this country's aboriginal people. Further, our government is not just interested in increasing the amount of pre-European Canadian aboriginal history taught in the schools, but it is also determined that it be taught accurately and correctly. As such, we have committed to establishing an aboriginal perspectives resource team, comprised of targeted aboriginal educators.
Madam Speaker, the recruitment process for these teams' members will ensure that it is composed of a diversity within the aboriginal community and reflects a variety of cultural viewpoints and experiences. It will be the responsibility of the resource team to develop the aboriginal content for the curriculum and ensure that it is a true portrayal of the history of the aboriginal people. This reflects the will of this government to work in partnership with the aboriginal community as it relates to education and their heritage.
Madam Speaker, once the resource team has completed developing the aboriginal content for the curriculum, a Program Development branch consultant will then act as team leader to co-ordinate the process for integration into the particular curriculum. Thus not only will the new education directions ensure that aboriginal history has a more prominent position in the education system, native educators themselves will play a significant role in ensuring that what is taught is an accurate and true reflection of the history of their people.
Also, as a further measure, an aboriginal steering committee shall be established to ensure that the curriculum clearly reflects the aboriginal content. Therefore, it is without question that this government is committed to an accurate teaching of pre-European aboriginal history to young Manitobans.
* (1740)
Further, to ensure that aboriginal views can be heard on a wide range of educational programming, every curriculum committee established by the Program Development branch will have a resource team representative as a sitting member.
To further ensure that the aboriginal perspective is noted throughout the education system, the New Directions initiative requires that the department team leader and the curriculum frameworks writing consultant have the responsibility for ensuring that all new curricula courses include aboriginal content and perspectives before they are released.
As well, Madam Speaker, editorial staff will especially edit to ensure the inclusion of this departmental requirement. Therefore, this government's education renewal package provides for an aboriginal perspective throughout the process of curriculum development in a responsible and consultative manner. This is reflective of the importance this government places upon the education of its young people and on the importance aboriginal history plays in that education. Yet, this government has recognized that, while it is an important step, changing the curriculum alone is insufficient to ensuring that the aboriginal perspective is properly communicated in all our classrooms.
It has been acknowledged that an important part of the renewal process is the people who deliver this message to our young people--the teachers. As such, I am pleased to say that this government has taken steps to reform teacher education in this province. It is clear that the ethnic composition in our classrooms has been changing significantly over the past decade, and I am sure that we can all attest to that. With this change comes the demand for our teachers to be responsive to the many needs that are inherent in such diversity.
This government has recognized that the personal and educational needs of people are largely determined by the circumstances of their individual upbringing, and as such, Madam Speaker, we have stated in the New Directions document that teachers must be able to respond to student diversity, including that of our aboriginal students. Therefore, the teacher education reform will place an emphasis on the development of these skills.
It is also clear that this government has positioned itself as a leader in education initiative. It is also clear that a major part of that initiative is a desire to heighten the awareness of the aboriginal culture and perspective in the K to Senior 4 levels. Our government has paid special attention to ensuring that the aboriginal perspective received its due consideration in K to Senior 4 education reform.
Madam Speaker, it has been similarly responsive to the aboriginal culture and perspective in Manitoba's post-secondary institutions through its educational renewal initiatives.
It is important to note that aboriginal communities themselves are playing an increasing role in the development of post-secondary education programs. I am particularly pleased by this development because it is the partnership between the aboriginal community and the education system that will ultimately define the success of the initiatives put in place to increase aboriginal content and perspective in our schools.
Further, Madam Speaker, indications of the strong voice aboriginal communities have are seen through the college preparation for Natives Program Advisory Committee and the Urban Native Integration and Adaptation Program Advisory Council. Other examples of aboriginal participation include: Yellowquill College in Portage la Prairie, Gods Lake Narrows community-based university program, and the Northern Metis Education Program in Lynn Lake.
Through these formal mechanisms, aboriginal communities ensure that the historical aboriginal perspective, including the pre-European historical era is fostered in Manitoba. It is also important to note that the University Education Review Commission devoted a significant portion of their review to the aboriginal people of Manitoba.
Their report focused on the importance of aboriginal participation and education. As post-secondary renewal unfolds, the educational perspective will be an important thrust. Therefore, this government has made great strides towards ensuring that pre-European Canadian history and the aboriginal history in general is an important part of the education curriculum in Manitoba.
This is in fact a due acknowledgement of the important role the aboriginal community has played in the development of this country and the crucial role they will play in its future.
I thank you very much.
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I am glad to have the opportunity to support my colleague, the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), in his resolution on the incorporation of pre-European history into the Canadian history curriculum in Manitoba.
It is an important issue. It is one which speaks to the development of all our children as citizens, people who understand the entire past of Manitoba and who have a sense of the way in which it could be shaped in the future.
It speaks also, I think, to the community of Manitoba to a people who have done, over 12,000 years, great things together, and who have the possibility in the future of being united in a new kind of future for a very different kind of province. I do not think any Manitoban can be unaware of the changes in the Manitoba population, in the great growth in aboriginal people who suffered enormously as a result of disease and starvation and famine at the end of the 19th and early 20th Century.
That population has now begun to rebound and the great youth and energy of that population is something which must be important to all Manitobans. So I think from the perspective of both the education of all our children and of the nature of Manitoba as a community, that this resolution is very important.
I accept in good spirits the minister's intent. The minister I think has also spoken of the importance to her of the integration of aboriginal history and aboriginal perspectives into Manitoba's education. I think she is quite sincere in that and has incorporated into her programs for the development of new curriculum approaches in Manitoba. I will not say they are actually new curriculum yet, because we have not seen them, but certainly new approaches to Manitoba's curriculum. She has incorporated the possibility of aboriginal perspectives and an aboriginal resource team.
I think, Madam Speaker, we also have to look at what we have lost in Manitoba under this government. I think, first of all, the minister I think assumes in her development of curriculum and in her proposals for the development of resource-based curriculum that somehow the knowledge exists out there, that it is just waiting to be picked up off the library shelf and put into the curriculum and developed by the various specialists. In some areas that is true, but in many areas and particularly in the area that this resolution speaks to, the area of pre-European contact, it is not true.
* (1750)
Indeed, there have been some, and the government of Manitoba over the years has played a very important part in the developing of aboriginal resources, and I will speak perhaps to the kinds of materials which were developed by a previous government, by the Pawley government. You will find, for example, in the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship some of the most important booklets and information on precontact European history that were developed in that period.
I am pleased to see that this government has maintained many of them in print. I am thinking of substantial books such as The Oldtimers: first peoples of the Land of the North Wind. I am speaking of the booklet series that deal with the trading routes of Manitoba, with The Pas and Mossy Portage, of the ancient circles of the Dakota entrenchments. There is a wide variety of pamphlets from historic resources which were initiated under the Heritage Council of Manitoba in the Pawley years. I am glad to see that the government has continued those because they are a valuable source for teachers and for students.
In fact, for the pre-contact history of Manitoba, they are in fact almost the only source, because we are talking here, Madam Speaker, about 12,000 years of history. It is something, it is an area of research which needs to be developed not just by historians but by archaeologists. Archaeology is an area where this government has in fact reduced its support. We used to have a very successful public archaeology program at The Forks where students across Manitoba were brought to The Forks and they could sign up for a dig; in fact, there were long, long waiting lists sometimes carrying over to another season. Students across Manitoba, first of all, were introduced to the discipline of anthropology and to archaeology so that they know how information and knowledge was in fact created. They were also enabled to make discoveries for themselves, one of the most important elements of education as a whole.
But where has that program gone? Well, it does not exist anymore because the provincial government withdrew its support. And yet there we were digging a site of 8,000 years of occupants. It was being dug in a very central population where students from the age of from Grade 3 upwards were enabled to take part in the discovery and expansion of knowledge. But this government which now speaks so highly of pre-European contact and education for all students was the one which chose to eliminate that program.
Let us look at museums. We used to have a program in the museums where there a discovery box went out from the museum to enable students to touch and to feel the elements of archaeological discovery, and through that discovery box taught about archaeology as well. So students who could not come to The Forks, students who could not come to the Museum of Man and Nature had that opportunity.
Well, as a result of the cutbacks of the federal government in particular, but also to some extent of the provincial government, those kinds of outreach programs of our museums have been greatly reduced.
Let us look at another museum, Kenosewun on River Road in, I believe, the constituency of the member for Selkirk. That was a federal-provincial program which created an excellent museum. It was based upon a dig which explored the most northern reaches of agriculture in all of North America. At about A.D. 1000, there were aboriginal farmers on the banks of the river at Lockport. Through a joint program of the provincial government and the federal government, under the Agreement for Recreation and Conservation, that was excavated and dug, and a museum was developed which explained, in a very small locale and through a variety of exhibits, including an archaeological exhibit, including a specially developed film that was developed and presented to all peoples, the history of that region.
But that museum is not open on a very long basis. The support for it has been withdrawn, and both the federal and provincial governments have withdrawn their support for that Agreement for Recreation and Conservation which developed the Kenosewun Museum.
So although the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck) spoke about the government's support for the Native Arts Federation, I think that might be the only area where we might find support for aboriginal issues in this government. Let us not forget that this is the government which has done nothing about the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. Let us not forget that this is the government which did nothing about the Abinochi Aboriginal Language Program, and let us not forget that this is the government which abandoned the Indian and Metis Friendship Centres.
So for the government now to speak in matters of great sensitivity, and I accept the minister's intent on that basis, I think we must also examine the experience that we have had with this government in aboriginal issues and with the losses that have occurred to aboriginal peoples and indeed to the whole community in this period. It does, I think, give me great cause for concern when the government talks about the opportunities for students in history to understand the issues of aboriginal peoples because, of course, we know, as a result of the activities of this government, there will be no Grade 11 history. There will be no compulsory history. Students will in fact be able to graduate from Manitoba schools with American history but not Canadian history.
As the curriculum stands, and indeed as I understand the minister's plans, there will be elements of history and social studies at the Grade 3 level, at the Grade 6 level and at the Grade 9 level, as there are now. That is where the government intends to put some precontact material or pre-European history material. Well, I certainly support them if they do do that, but let us not forget that what we have lost is the Grade 11 level. We have lost the 17-year-olds. We are now going to be teaching this material to 10-year-olds, to five-year-olds and to the Grade 9 level, and that is a loss. Let us be quite clear about it. Let us also remember that this is the government which has reduced the Native Education branch, the one which developed curriculums, which developed new materials, which dealt with the parents. It has reduced them from 17 people to three.
The minister and I, during Estimates, had a very frustrating discussion about this. The minister seemed to maintain that these people had been dispersed to the regions where they were continuing to develop curriculum. But you talk to anybody in any region of Manitoba and what they tell you is that these regional people have turned into regulators and inspectors, that they are not developing curriculum, that they are not developing materials. Indeed I ask the minister to tell me where indeed were the materials she expected they were developing. Of course, they are not producing anywhere near the amount that Winnipeg No. 1 or Frontier School Division is. So, again, I accept the minister's intent. I accept her great concern for the development of pre-European history in our schools, but where is the place for it, where are the materials, where is the development and the focus within the department that there used to be?
I would contrast this, Madam Speaker, to the work that is going on in Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. I think this is a government which believes in a competitive approach to education. I ask the government to look at what is going on in those provinces, at the Meewasin Authority, for example, in Saskatchewan, at the world heritage site in Alberta and at the world heritage sites in British Columbia. None of those have taken place in Manitoba. We had a proposal under the Pawley government for a world heritage site, looking at the aboriginal presence and the aboriginal communities of the area in the Churchill region, but nothing has happened on that.
So, again, Madam Speaker, I want to conclude by saying I support this resolution. I hope that it will pass. I hope that the government will understand that simply writing a line in a policy document does not mean that something will happen. I believe also that this government has a great deal of ground to make up in its relationship with the aboriginal community and indeed in its perspective upon aboriginal issues in Manitoba.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Just very briefly, the concept which the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) has pointed out in the resolution is something which we do support. It would be nice to see more aboriginal content, if you will, the founding nation being involved in the Canadian history. The member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) has pointed out some of the inadequacies of the current curriculum, much of which we would concur in. With those few words, we would be quite content to see it pass.
Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): Thank you very much for the opportunity to put some information on the record in regard to this resolution. I was very, very pleased when the Foundations of Excellence with the New Directions proposed that Canadian history be included in the curriculum throughout the entire school system rather than just concentrating in a particular year. I think that the honourable member across with his resolution, it is a very good resolution and it has a lot of bearing to it.
I would say that our government has already started on that course in terms of addressing some of the concerns that were placed in that resolution. We are now going to see that the teachings or the aboriginal way of life in terms of what it was pre-European will be--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Morris (Mr. Pitura) will have 14 minutes remaining.
The hour being 6 p.m., this House is adjourned; however, when the House is adjourned today, it will stand adjourned as previously agreed until 2:30 p.m. tomorrow (Thursday).