ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

War on Drugs

Report Release

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the acting Premier.

Madam Speaker, in 1990, the government promised to declare war on drugs. In December of 1990, the Minister of Justice, then the MLA for Fort Garry, was made chair of the so-called War on Drugs by the Conservative government. We have asked for copies of the report pursuant to the public hearings, and we would like to ask the government today, in this war on drugs that was declared some five years ago, did the government have any recommendations that they could make public on this war on drugs in their report, and were there any specific recommendations dealing with the drug flow to our institutions, particularly the Headingley Institution?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): During the opportunity that I and three colleagues from this side of the House had to look at the issue of the war on drugs across this province, there were recommendations which dealt with the departments across government.

We have, in the past, spoken about the kinds of initiatives which have been brought forward department by department in terms of Education and other departments to deal with the war on drugs. So I believe that departments have taken the issues very seriously and have acted upon them.

Mr. Doer: The minister did not answer the question of whether there were any specific recommendations dealing with correctional institutions and the Headingley Institution.

It has been five years since the minister was scheduled to release his report. In fact, the former Minister of Health Mr. Orchard said in 1991, the report would be released, and then again in 1992, in Hansard, the former Minister of Health said that they would release the report on the War on Drugs.

In light of the fact that many of the security staff and correctional staff at the Headingley Correctional Institution feel there are way too many drugs in that institution, they feel that the whole strategy on dealing with drugs must be improved, should have been improved over the last number of years while this minister was the Minister of Justice, the former chair of the committee on the War on Drugs, will the minister now make public the report on the War on Drugs that she chaired? The public has a right to know what is in that report, and will she answer the question of whether there were any recommendations that she made to the department of Corrections dealing with Headingley on drugs that are flowing through the institution?

Mrs. Vodrey: The War on Drugs report dealt very specifically with issues within the community, how we could assist young people from falling into a life of usage with drugs, how we could work in school areas to keep drugs out of the school areas. The focus was very much a community focus. However, do not let the member think that the issue of drugs within institutions is not an important one and has not been worked on.

In fact, I think the member knows it has been spoken about that we have fairly recently sent a handler and a dog away for training. That now is in usage within our institutions. I do not want to be very, very specific about the security measures; however, we are continuing to work with the issue of drugs within our institutions. There has also been a recent Supreme Court decision which will now allow us to do urine testing, random urine testing, within the institution. We will be passing those regulations, and we will be instituting that as another measure.

There were some measures which were simply not open to us in the past until, as in the case of random urine testing, we received guidance from the Supreme Court of Canada. We will be acting on those, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Doer: Of course, the minister, when she was the chair of the task force, said she would be acting on the war on drugs, Madam Speaker. The public yet five years later cannot even get a copy of the report that the minister just acknowledged has been produced for the government and not made public to the rest of Manitobans.

I would think that all of us should be somewhat sceptical of a minister who makes a lot of promises, utters a lot of words five years ago, six years ago. We see no action, no results. She has been Minister of Justice for the last number of years. Again, we see no results in terms of stopping drugs in our institution.

I would like to ask the acting Premier, will he order today the Minister of Health who has received the report on the War on Drugs, will he order today that that report be released? Manitobans participated in the public hearings and we want to know whether this minister has been dealing with this issue for the last five years and has done nothing, as many of her security staff feel is the case at the Headingley Institution.

Mrs. Vodrey: What members on this side of the House have issued a number of times is, from each of their departments, exactly what steps have been taken in the area of war on drugs to limit this very destructive effect within the community and within institutions that are supervised within the Department of Justice.

I have explained we did have some constraints that are put forward. We had difficulty with things such as random urine testing. However, we now have a decision from the Supreme Court of Canada. I explained that yesterday and today and members across the way still are saying, well, why did you not do it. We did not do it because we were not able to do it. We are now able to do it. It is our intention to pass the regulations.

The changes which we will also be making are in the area of interception of telephone calls, because we understand that a great deal of information may be passed in through telephone calls. But, Madam Speaker, as always, I want to be very careful about discussing openly the security procedures which we have in place, which we will have in place, because it is important for the security of the people who work in the institutions.

* (1345)

Headingley Correctional Institution

Safety of Corrections Officers

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, who can forget the 1995 election campaign commercials with the Premier (Mr. Filmon) slamming the cell door? The Minister of Justice and senior Justice department staff have repeatedly stated that corrections officers are not at risk, and yet during a media tour of the Headingley prison scene, senior police officers warned media, and I quote, do not touch anything due to hepatitis, HIV, and everything else in there.

I want to ask the Minister of Justice to explain to the House and to Manitobans what protections she and her department are putting in place to provide for the health protection of corrections officers who work daily in the same environment as the media who were warned not to touch anything in that scene.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Certainly, at the scene during the tour there was some, and it was obvious when the press went through, blood mixed with the water, which was evident on the floor. There were also syringes which were filmed, which were evident and on the floor, some open, having been ripped from the casing. So the warning which was given was given to everyone in that scene to make sure that they did not have footwear on which might then have pierced their footwear and might have brought them into contact with something which was contaminated from any host of issues, including the tiling which came down from the ceiling and was then mixed with dirt and so on.

So, on that day, yes, there were warnings to everyone who went through to be very careful in that particular scene.

Mr. Reid: Then perhaps, Madam Speaker, the Minister of Justice can explain and tell Manitobans why her department failed to provide private washroom and shower facilities for corrections officers who are splashed with inmates' bodily fluids, forcing the officers to use the inmates' gymnasium shower area to clean up after being exposed to potentially serious health risks.

Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, the member might like to talk about in what time frame that occurred, and certainly the Workplace Safety and Health issues are being dealt with on a regular basis. Let me explain how they are dealt with. They are dealt with, first of all, in a committee level. They are dealt with then on a Workplace Safety and Health committee level, and then there is a further senior committee level in which these issues are brought forward.

As I said yesterday, at the moment, of the grievances outstanding surrounding Headingley jail, none of those grievances relates to issues of safety and security and the kinds of issues the member has brought forward. The issues instead tend to deal with matters such as disciplinary matters, sick benefits and so on.

I want to make it clear that this government is taking very seriously all of the issues that happened and that is why we are approaching our review of the matter in three very important ways.

Range Barrier System

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, I have a final supplementary to the same minister. Can the Minister of Justice explain why she and her senior department staff–and we have minutes from as recently as December 4, 1995, where the issues and concerns were raised by staff at Headingley–tell Manitobans that her new touchy, feely reforms have nothing to do with the Headingley riot cause when the intermediate wall inside the range barrier system was taken out exposing corrections officers to being outnumbered by as much as 20 to seven at the riot's start? How can the minister explain this?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, now some of the details that the member is bringing forward we have found in the past are not always accurate so that is why, as I was explaining in the–

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Point of Order

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, the minister was asked a question. The question was based on material that is documented in minutes based on facts. It is totally out of order for the minister to try and deflect from her own responsibility for these issues by trying to suggest that the information being brought is anything other than what it is, which is true and factual. She should answer the question instead of trying to detract from her own responsibility for this matter.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts.

* * *

* (1350)

Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, as I said, information that has come from the other side is not always accurate. That is why we have called and are approaching this review three ways, and I think it is very important to state again. First of all, there will be an internal review, and through that internal review–we are being assisted by federal corrections–we will be looking at all aspects of what occurs within the institution. We expect also, there is a police investigation going on, there may be criminal charges. Finally, yesterday, I announced a review being done by an independent person which will also look at all of these issues.

But, Madam Speaker, I think it is important to say that there are a number of issues which will be reviewed, but the accusation of the member of touchy, feely approach is simply wrong. He is simply incorrect, and I will take time at a further opportunity to explain.

Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism

Untendered Contracts

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, we now have the situation of another sweetheart contract, a deal to add to all the others. The person who managed the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) Tuxedo re-election campaign has an $18,000 untendered contract with EITC.

Madam Speaker, will the Deputy Premier now finally recognize, what all Manitobans know, that this is wrong and that it has to stop? Will he cancel the contract with Mr. Goldie and instruct all government departments to use proper tendering procedures for all major contracts?

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, as the member well knows, there was work needed to be done within the department as it followed on the Price Waterhouse study. The Civil Service Commission was requested to work with the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism and it was the Civil Service Commission that hired the individual the member refers to.

Mr. Sale: That is a fine distinction if we can figure it out, Madam Speaker.

Will the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism take responsibility for the fact that the first act of his newest SOA was to give an untendered contract to the Premier's campaign manager, and will he tell the Civil Service Commission, EITC and anybody else that this is not proper, that they should tender all of these significant contracts?

Mr. Downey: First of all, Madam Speaker, it is not the most recent SOA.

Is he suggesting that there should be political involvement when it comes to the Civil Service Commission hiring people to do work on behalf of the government? Is that what he is suggesting?

EITC

Special Operating Agency

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Now that is a stretch, Madam Speaker.

Will the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism explain to the House why EITC became a special operating agency, which was not even recommended in his own Price Waterhouse study? They said get your department together, not create SOAs.

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, I would ask that the member do a little bit more research. He makes reference to EITC. I am not sure in what context he is referring to EITC, and maybe he could sort of clarify his question.

Home Care Program

Privatization

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, there is a huge human cost and a huge financial cost in the home care strike. We have the government putting people in hospitals and institutions. We have the government putting people into the Quest Inn. We have the government apparently bringing in workers, staying at hotels in the city of Winnipeg.

When will the minister recognize that the cost of his inflexibility, which might be as much as half a million dollars a day, is already in excess of this alleged $10 million the Premier said would be saved by privatization?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I do not think it is inflexible to offer to allow the Manitoba Government Employees' Union to have time to get bids of their own together to compete for the work. I do not think it is inflexible to offer a moratorium with respect to the tendering process. I do not think it is very flexible to call a strike vote and to call a strike before negotiations even begin, and the honourable member wants to support that. That is what is inflexible, and I think the people who rely on our Home Care program deserve better than that.

* (1355)

Labour Dispute

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, can the Minister of Health explain why the government, contrary to what the Minister of Labour is saying, is refusing to go back to the bargaining table, thereby prolonging the strike and risking the health of Manitobans?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, we have indicated publicly and directly to the individuals that, if they want to return to the table, we will be there, but we will not get involved in a publicity stunt for the media. If, in fact, they were as interested in the sick and the vulnerable of this province as they are in pulling off publicity stunts, perhaps this strike could be over.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister explain why he went on radio yesterday accusing people of not going back to the bargaining table and negotiating in public, and then today says that they are not prepared to go back to the bargaining table unless conditions by the government are met? How is that consistent, how is that fair and how will that end the strike?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, in respect of making accusations, I was simply stating the facts, and we are prepared to go back to the table if the union wishes to discuss this matter. We have put no preconditions, as the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) has indicated. We have been very flexible in this situation. If the union leaders want to start negotiating on behalf of their members and in the best interests of the sick and vulnerable of Manitoba, we will be there. What I really have to wonder about is why they will not enter into any essential services agreement, in fact, holding the sick and vulnerable of this province to ransom.

Headingley Correctional Institution

Debriefing of Corrections Officers

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, today we spoke with the heroic members of the Headingley riot squad. They informed us that in character with the problems that have plagued this facility, today, four days after the conclusion of the riot, and still no one from the minister's department or even Headingley management has debriefed them about the incident, nor have the guards who were on duty at the time of the riot been debriefed.

Could the minister tell us why, given that one of the reasons the riot occurred was because of the closed-door policy with regard to input from staff, the guards have not been debriefed or asked their opinions about how the riot started or steps that can be taken to prevent the next one?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, first of all, I reject the closed-door policy statement of communication, because there are a number of opportunities for communication which have been set up quite formally where people are expected to participate.

However, it is my understanding that senior members of Corrections are beginning the opportunity now to meet with individuals. I believe they are in fact–starting, it was this afternoon or this morning–meeting with members of the particular cell-block where the incident began.

* (1400)

Mr. Kowalski: Could the minister tell us why, given that one of the reasons the riot occurred was because of the closed-door policy with regard to input from staff, the guards have not been debriefed or asked their opinions about how the riot started, or why the only instruction they did receive was on what not to show the media when they toured the Headingley jail yesterday?

Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, as the member knows, the reviews that we are having done will look into what in fact were the precipitating events to the disturbance at Headingley. So the member has already come to his conclusions, but we are going to have in fact a full review and an opportunity to look at what the precipitating events were.

Now the member asked about three questions in what he put forward, and I am trying to keep them all straight. I believe that is the answer to one.

I believe I have answered when the debriefing will start. Certainly in the first few days we were simply dealing with a number of very urgent issues. When I was out myself on Saturday with the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pallister), we also had a chance to at least informally speak to as many individuals as possible, and we take that very seriously. I mean, there is just no question that people's feelings and views about what happened and how they are doing within the process is going to be very, very important to our total ability to continue working.

Inquiry–Terms of Reference

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Will the minister provide this House with some specifics, for instance, the terms of reference and the scope and mandate of the independent inquiry she announced yesterday?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I hope to be able to do that, certainly within the next few days. Our view is that we want to have this take place as quickly as possible. That was one of the reasons why we have chosen the route that we are going, so that it can take place at the same time as other reviews. We are at the moment working on all of that mandate, and also looking at the individual who will lead the review.

Legal Aid

Application Fee

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): My question is to the Minister of Justice. The Lyon government imposed a $35 user fee on applications for Legal Aid, which a study then found did not pay, and although the fee could be waived in hardship cases, applications dropped 48 percent in the first month and then, on an average of 112 applications a month thereafter, it was scrapped.

My question for the minister is, could she please explain, given information we have just received that the government is again about to impose, this time, a $25 user fee on all applications, even the one-quarter not accepted, except from those on welfare, but no exemption for hardship cases, why is she looking to see what did not work and bringing it back with a vengeance?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): As the member may or may not know, there has been a 3.8 percent reduction from the federal government, and this province covers, Madam Speaker, a very wide range of Legal Aid cases, broader range in family matters, for instance, than are covered in most provinces. It is our intention that we are able to continue to cover that broad range of cases without having to reduce the kinds of work that Legal Aid does. So, yes, there will be a $25 fee which will be imposed. However, those exempt will be, for example, people who are on welfare, people who are in hospital. There is a broad range of exemptions.

We expect that this will affect approximately 15 percent of the users of Legal Aid.

Mr. Mackintosh: Given our calculations, it could affect about 50 percent. Would the minister, who should be aware of the many fair proposals for increased revenues out there, answer Legal Aid's concern that was set out in a memo last week which said, this initiative will cause many administrative problems and everyone will find this requirement an unwelcome annoyance, but we are stuck with it.

Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, I have explained that there has been a reduction from the federal government's funding in the matter of Legal Aid. Manitoba provides a mixed system of Legal Aid. We provide the opportunity in some cases to have our staff lawyers deal with it, and in other cases, to issue certificates. So we believe that we have a very good model of Legal Aid in our province, the blended system of staff lawyers and certificates, a very broad range of coverage.

If the member thinks that it would be so important to follow along with some of the information that he has brought here, perhaps he would like to choose what parts we will no longer cover at all.

Mr. Mackintosh: My final supplementary, Madam Speaker, why is this fee on the poor, this little twisting of the knife, so important to this minister, when we are unaware of any application fees, for example, for corporate welfare or other business assistance?

Mrs. Vodrey: The member's question is, as often, not very clear. So let me just say that, because of the reduction, part of the reduction which we have received from the federal government, because of our desire to continue the broad range in funding, and I will reference particularly our broader range of funding in the family area, which is important, that we will continue to maintain that coverage.

However, let the member not forget that there is always the opportunity for an appeal. If people do not like the decision which they have had, they can appeal to the executive director of Legal Aid, and if they are still dissatisfied with that, they are also able to appeal to the board of Legal Aid.

So, Madam Speaker, there are a number of opportunities. As I said, we expect this will affect approximately 15 percent of the people.

Pharmacare

Income Statements

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, another way that this government is trying to get money from those who do not have it is by increasing the Pharmacare deductible. I am sure that there are many MLAs who are getting calls from Manitobans angry about the increases in Pharmacare deductibles and medication costs and confused by this government's application procedure. Many families will not only have to pay hundreds of dollars more for medications, but they will have to give the Pharmacare program confidential information from their income tax forms.

I want to ask the Minister of Health why people are being forced to give the authority for Pharmacare to use their income tax form. When this was not necessary before, why is it necessary now?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, in order to have an income-based program, the program requires information in order to fix the amount of the deductible level. This is something that has been underway in Saskatchewan for some time and the honourable member is aware of that. It is based on the concept that I believe the honourable member referred to in her inaugural speech when she quoted someone she referred to as a great man. She might look back at her inaugural speech and she might be reminded of the principle behind our Pharmacare program.

Ms. Cerilli: A supplementary question for the minister: Has the government examined the implications of this policy on privacy and confidentiality and can he explain those implications, especially given the fact that this government has an agenda to privatize health care?

Mr. McCrae: Any medical issues or any other kinds of issues that are supposed to be confidential are kept that way and there are safeguards in place. Indeed, as we move forward into the information age even further, we are working with our partners in health, including partners like the Consumers' Association and the Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties to ensure that people's rights to privacy are safeguarded.

Ms. Cerilli: A final question for the minister: Why, when people contact the office for Pharmacare, are the staff unable to tell them which line on their income tax form they are supposed to use, and are they intended to supply their entire income tax form?

Mr. McCrae: It is, as I recall, a relatively simple application form. If–

An Honourable Member It does not even mention gross or net.

Mr. McCrae: It mentions a specific line, I believe, on the tax return, and if it does not, that is another matter.

If the honourable member would like to bring to my attention the shortfall in information that needs to be put forward by the people at the other end of the phone, let her be specific and we will be happy to investigate.

* (1410)

Endangered Spaces Program

World Wildlife Fund Rating

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Environment.

Today, the World Wildlife Fund gave Manitoba a D-minus rating, despite the fact that this government has spent a quarter of a million dollars on the Premier's Sustainable Development Unit for endangered spaces protection.

My question is for the minister. How can this government account for this expenditure on the Sustainable Development Unit, which has resulted in a D-minus rating from the WWF and has produced no act and no white paper?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, I have not studied the report that the member refers to, but I think he should be aware that this province has gone further than almost any other jurisdiction in the country. Perhaps the basis upon which they made their judgment is either staled or flawed. I am not sure.

Management Plans–Provincial Parks

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, a D-minus rating is at the low end of the scale–

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Dewar: Madam Speaker, given that this government has met less than half of their 1990 election commitment on endangered spaces and given that it has a year to consult with First Nations, my question for the minister is, where are the management plans for the four northern provincial parks?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): On behalf of the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Driedger), for whom that responsibility falls directly, I will take the main part of that question–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Cummings: Just a minute. I will take the main part of the question as notice.

Madam Speaker, I am confident that the actions we have taken will meet or exceed the requirements that might be placed on us by the public or by any other organization such as the world wildlife association. I want to emphasize one particular aspect of this program, and it is a laudable program which we willingly signed on to, and we will achieve the goals, but it is a little difficult to be able to respond appropriately to the goals that were laid out when the goalposts seem to be somewhat flexible and moving.

I want to assure you and assure the public that this province will have no trouble meeting the obligations.

Sustainable Development Act

White Paper Tabling Request

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): My final question is to the Minister of Environment.

Will the minister table in the House today his white paper on The Sustainable Development Act?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Would I table it today? No. But we have undertaken to make sure that there is a significant and ongoing public consultation on that process. In fact, I think it would be a good opportunity to put on the record that we have spent a significant amount of time on public information in regard to that issue. In fact, there has been a great amount of feedback from the public, and we will be using that information to go out and make sure that all of the affected parties have an opportunity for input.

This government will continue to be consultative.

Nonpotable Substances

Appeal of Court Decision

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): My questions are to the Minister of Justice. Lysol disinfectant and hair spray are the two most widely abused, nonpotable products in Manitoba. Under new regulations to The Liquor Control Act in 1992, a number of merchants have been charged with selling both Lysol and hair spray, yet in an October 1995 court decision the accused was acquitted when the judge ruled that hair spray was not a designated nonpotable intoxicating substance.

Can the minister tell the House if there has been an appeal of this decision?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I will have to take the question as notice, a very specific court case, to find out whether or not there has been an appeal. The member may have to provide some additional information, that he obviously has, to me in order to do that.

Mr. Hickes: Can the minister advise whether the Crown will appeal the recent sentence of only 45 days in jail for smuggling 56 cans of hair spray onto a dry reserve?

Mrs. Vodrey: Of course, if we are in the appeal window, then I simply am not able to comment on the case at all.

Liquor Control Act

Nonpotable Substances

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Can the minister tell the House if she is prepared to end the confusion and specifically list both Lysol and hair spray as designated, nonpotable intoxicating substances under the regulations?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): The Manitoba Liquor Control Commission takes its role in controlling substances and seeing that people adhere to the legislation very seriously. I will raise that issue with them and get back to the member.

Louisiana-Pacific

Federal-Provincial Review

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment. In a short period of time this minister will decide whether or not to allow Louisiana-Pacific to cut on Crown land. The Province of Saskatchewan has declared its willingness to co-operate with the federal-provincial review of the transboundary effects of the two OSB mills' licences straddling our provinces.

My question to the minister is this: Will he commit his government to a federal-provincial review of the Louisiana-Pacific plan or will he choose to support the CEC report that ignores federal concerns on transboundary effects?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, I am not sure if I agree with the preamble of the member in terms of the rejection of federal interests. This province and our process has spent a considerable amount of time, and I am talking months, virtually into years, working with the federal authorities to make sure that we have addressed the concerns that might be raised. The member raises the issue of cross-boundary concerns, and I think that there needs to be a lot more work done before that claim can be . . . .

Environmental Licensing

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): In that case, Madam Speaker, when will the minister make up his mind and either grant or deny Louisiana-Pacific their licence?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, there is an implication in that that the Minister of Environment might be able to manipulate the process. Surely the member is not implying that this will be a political decision. We have spent literally months in front of the Clean Environment Commission. We have a director who will receive the information and make a decision from that, and I, frankly, think that it is an affront to the process that has been in place and the Clean Environment Commission that he would make that implication.

Used Car Inspection Program

Resale of Written Off Cars

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): My questions are for the Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation. Nearly 36 months ago, the then-Minister of Highways and Transportation announced the used car inspection program. Since the program was implemented last July, we hear of consumers being gouged, lack of consistency in the inspections, garages being certified and then suspended and then reinstated with apologies and so on and so on. Police and industry officials suggest that one out of every five used vehicles has been written off elsewhere and is not being properly tested.

My question to the acting minister is, what happened to the promise that this program would stop written-off cars from being sold without buyers being informed?

Hon. James Downey ( Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, not accepting any of the preamble, I will take that question as notice for the Minister of Highways (Mr. Findlay).

Elimination

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Why does this government not simply scrap the discredited inspection program and deal seriously with vehicles that are written off?

Hon. James Downey (Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, is the member indicating that he does not support vehicle inspection, that he wants the highways to be unsafe for the people who are travelling on them? Is that what he is recommending? I do not think that is what the public of Manitoba want.

Mr. Jennissen: Madam Speaker, given that the best safety devices are facts, why will the minister not have his 18-month-old task force come to some conclusions and finally act on these issues?

Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, this government's record is very clear and very positive as it relates to the protection and safety of the public, unlike members opposite.

* (1420)

Correctional Facilities

Overcrowding

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

Madam Speaker, the riot that occurred at Headingley jail is a very serious issue. Now, with the transfer of the inmates to various other institutions within the province of Manitoba, it raises some serious concerns with the corrections officers who have to provide for public security and also for members of the public, concern that we may have a repeat situation with respect to the Headingley riot.

I want to ask the Minister of Justice, what actions she and her department are taking to ensure that where there are very serious overcrowding conditions like we presently have at the Remand Centre here in Winnipeg and in Brandon, what actions her department is taking to ensure that we will not have a repeat of the Headingley riot situation?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): We are certainly making every effort to accommodate inmates in a secure pattern; however, the Province of Saskatchewan has been very co-operative with us and this morning I believe we have firmed up arrangements now so we will be looking at placing individuals in institutions around the province. Again, I think it is only fair to be very careful about any comments that I make which may in fact cause additional problems inside.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.