Thursday, May 9, 1996

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Thursday, May 9, 1996

The House met at 10 a.m.

PRAYERS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS

PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

Res. 5--Save the Seine

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Riel (Mr. Newman), that

WHEREAS the Seine River has played an important role in the history of Manitoba; and

WHEREAS the Seine River has also been closely associated with the history of Manitoba's French-speaking community; and

WHEREAS the Seine River is also an important natural habitat for a diversity of Manitoba wildlife; and

WHEREAS the Seine River is now viewed by many as a recreational area for fishing, canoeing and walks along its many trails; and

WHEREAS this valuable natural resource has in the past suffered from neglect, from poor water management and increasing pollution; and

WHEREAS since 1990, the Save Our Seine committee has worked hard at protecting and developing this natural resource for all Manitobans to use.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship to consider designating the Seine River a Heritage site and thereby protect the Seine River as a valuable, historical and natural resource for all Manitobans.

Motion presented.

Mr. Gaudry: Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise and make comments on this resolution. The primary goal of Resolution 5 is to protect the Seine River from continued abuse, but another equally important purpose is to give the river the recognition it deserves from a historical perspective and also from an environmental point of view.

We must protect our Seine, not just so we may enjoy its beauty today but in the interests of future generations of Manitobans and in the interest of environmental protection. This resolution is also about recognizing and encouraging the work done by a dedicated group of volunteers who, as part of the organization known as our Save Our Seine River Environment Inc., rescued a river, and, in doing so, they bestowed upon Winnipeg the opportunity to enjoy natural wildlife, that is to enjoy a little piece of nature without even having to cross the Perimeter.

All of us owe this small group of volunteers a great debt of gratitude. They put a happy ending on what was at one time a very sad story. The purpose of this resolution is to ensure that the work this group has done cannot be undone in the future.

Winnipeg is a city of trees and rivers. Every summer, these trees and rivers turn Winnipeg into one of the most beautiful cities in North America. The importance of the rivers, however, goes even deeper. The rivers provide a lifeline to the past. They are what brought our ancestors to this spot, and they are at least part of the reason why Winnipeg grew from humble beginnings into a community of prosperity and prestige. Of our four rivers, the Red and the Assiniboine always get most of the attention. Behind these giant rivers the Seine toils in relative obscurity. It is a small and unassuming river that has only recently maintained a steady flow throughout the year. In low rainfall seasons, it often becomes dead or stagnant and has even been known to dry up in some spots. All of this does not paint a very romantic picture of the river. Still, there is something special about this river, something almost magical, but it has nothing to do with its physical attributes, which, as I have suggested, are modest at best. It has to do with the symbolism of hope and renewal associated with the movement to save this tiny piece of nature held hostage by the ravages of urban sprawl.

Today the Seine River is a jewel of nature trapped in a city of concrete and steel, but it was not always this way. In the not-so-distant past the river could easily have been described as a stinking, smelly embarrassment, a breeding ground for flies and an informal refuse dump. But all that changed a few years ago in the most wondrous and inspirational way. It is the story of this change that makes the river so special.

Madam Speaker, the story has transformed the river into much more than another example of nature's beauty and mystery. The river is now a symbol of rebirth and renewal, of rejuvenation and redemption. To understand what the river means to us and why we must support this resolution, we must first listen and learn from its tale. The Seine River reminds us of much of our history. Aboriginals, the voyageurs and freemen of the fur trade, the Métis, the French Canadians, to name but a few, all relied on the river. In this regard, the river has been described as a treasure trove of Manitoba history. Now, that may be a bit of an exaggeration, but the river certainly holds an important place in the human geography of our city.

The river's rich human history is recounted in a document by the Save our Seine organization. Here is a small quote from that report: To listen to the echoes of the Seine is to hear many people, many tongues. Listen closely and you will hear a Cree father teaching his son how to fish. Listen closely and you will hear the French songs of the voyageurs, les hivernants, as they defied the winter nights in their shacks along the Seine.

The Seine is the home of many beginnings, Madam Speaker. The first pioneer family of Canadian descent who settled in the west lived in a house on this river. And of course the father of our province, Louis Riel, was born near this unassuming little river. But there is also a dark history of abuse and neglect associated with this once-forgotten river. In the past, low water levels and lack of flow plagued the river. These problems were caused by pollution blockage and an excessive use of the river for irrigation purposes. Back then, garbage and refuse left by careless and thoughtless people threatened the natural wildlife which relied on the river's health. The river's ecosystem was under constant attack. Back then, travelling down the river was not much fun at all. The river was offensive to look at and smell, and it was all our fault. Who could be so uncaring that they would dump their trash into a river? The river was clogged with shopping carts, old lumber, automotive parts, boxes, bottles, I mean, you name it, and it was there. What a sad commentary on humanity. The citizens of Winnipeg had turned their backs on valuable natural and cultural resources.

But something changed in early 1990. This change I think had something to do with the CN moving their rail yards from The Forks. That action led to the development of The Forks walkway and The Forks Market, and with that came a gradual realization by the people of Winnipeg of the enormous potential and, indeed, beauty of our rivers. Madam Speaker, in the 1990s, property owners along the Seine decided to do something about the deplorable condition that their river was in. Maybe it was because they were encouraged by the development of The Forks, or maybe the reason was more basic, that they were sick of the smell or maybe that they were just plain embarrassed.

* (1010)

Whatever the reason, in 1990, something galvanized the property owners along the Seine into action. They decided to restore the river back to its natural beauty. They decided to save the Seine. The residents formed an organization which is now called Save Our Seine River Environment Inc., and it began to grow, and with its growth, through grants from the various levels of government, these volunteers began to improve the health of the river. The first Seine River cleanup took place almost six years ago, October 1990. At first, progress was slow because of the enormous amount of garbage and debris which littered by the river, but in the past five and a half years much has been done and by many people. Even the Lieutenant Governor of this province has chipped in to help. It must be stressed that the Save Our Seine volunteers--I see some of them are here in the gallery this morning, and I am pleased to see them there--have done more than simply clean the river. For instance, the group was instrumental in stopping raw sewage from emptying into the river, and more recently they have begun the costly process of breaking up the huge concrete blocks just south of Marion Street which slow the flow of the river.

The Save Our Seine committee was also responsible for establishing regular testing of the Seine River. They have planted trees and shrubs, installed birdhouses and nesting boxes for ducks, and there are many plans for the future including an interpretive nature corridor and canoe parks. Madam Speaker, because of their efforts, these volunteers have won numerous environmental awards, but more importantly, the river has almost been completely restored to its natural beauty.

It is a good thing that they did. There are many lives which depend on the river's health. Let us do a brief natural inventory. There are the white-tailed deer, fox, mink, muskrat, racoons, squirrels. The river is full of aquatic wildlife such as turtles and fish. As well, there are 101 species of birds which live in this rejuvenated environment. The river's most famous inhabitants, however, are its approximately 75 beavers. Like the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) mentioned a couple of years ago that every Manitoban had a beaver because we had a population of one million beavers in this province. Because of the actions of the Save Our Seine volunteers, the river is now viewed by many as a recreational area for fishing, canoeing , skiing and walks along its trails. The Seine River is a good example of the merits of maintaining urban wilderness. Walking along the river or canoeing on it, one could easily forget that they are in the middle of a modern industrial city. The beavers are still busy on this river, and every summer the fish come up the river to spawn, and turtles still find their place in the sun. The value of this natural beauty is impossible to measure, Madam Speaker.

In conclusion, I urge you all to support the resolution that I am sponsoring today so that we may ensure that the work done by Save Our Seine Inc. will be continued in the future. The Seine must remain a symbol of rejuvenation and rebirth, of renewal and hope for a better future, a symbol that individuals can make a difference in the fight to keep our planet green, a symbol that changes are possible. This resolution should serve to symbolize commitment of members to always support initiatives of the type begun by Save Our Seine River Environment Inc. Passing the resolution will hopefully encourage others to follow the lead of the Save Our Seine volunteers. They showed us all that together, through volunteer service, we can all do our bit to make our communities better places to live.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr. David Newman (Riel): Madam Speaker, the honourable member for St. Boniface asked me to second this potentially very important and beneficial resolution. To his great credit he also invited me to propose an amendment to it to make it more meaningful and useful. This was the recognition of the fact that the honourable member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) and myself and all honourable members on this side of the House have been strong and enthusiastic supporters of many heritage recognition and environmental protection initiatives related to the Seine River. We also have a wealth of knowledge about the needs, aspirations and desires of the proponents of these initiatives.

Knowing that pride in our Manitoba heritage and concern about environmental protection is shared by all honourable members regardless of party affiliation, it was thought that this resolution, amended in the manner I have already shared with you, and certainly the honourable member for St. Boniface and myself have agreed, could be supported unanimously. This would demonstrate that sometimes partisanship can be set aside in the public interest, led by all of us sitting as MLAs during this private members' time.

So far in my one year's experience as an MLA, I have not seen a great deal accomplished in this time allotted to us for this purpose. In fact, I have been less than proud so far of the way we have used this valuable time of this most honourable of democratic institutions. Perhaps approving this resolution unanimously, as amended, will be a new beginning, a re-emergence of thoughtful, sincere, constructive and yes, even witty, hopefully not at someone else's expense, debate with a purpose, a goal of achieving a resolution we can all agree to is a worthwhile objective.

I tell all of you the pride I felt and expressed to labour relations practitioners in other jurisdictions about the unanimous resolution of this Legislature creating the Labour-Management Review Committee some 30 years ago, a joint committee of union and management which has endured for those many years through various governments. Its lofty goals may never have been achieved, but it continues to serve as a useful forum promoting labour-management co-operation. This Seine River resolution, as amended, will be no less important. It is a celebration and recognition of our multicultural heritage as a province. It seeks to promote further co-operation of Manitobans for the purpose of enhancing the Seine River ecosystem and securing its future as a known, and I emphasize known, valuable natural recreational and historical resource in a sustainable development fashion.

I do emphasize the word “known.” How many of you have cross-country skied or walked the Seine in winter or hiked its trails or canoed its waters in warmer seasons? I have had the good fortune to do all of those things, even one time falling through the ice up to my waist when it was 30 below. I have done all of these things.

For a moment, shut your eyes and visualize stepping into a canoe, off busy streets like St. Anne's Road, Archibald, or Provencher, and paddling into a green and peaceful environment around one of the many bends and startle ducks or geese, who in turn cause you to jump with surprise when they take off in flight. Pause to watch a white-tailed deer and her fawn, a beaver building a lodge, a blue heron perched and then taking off with majesty and grace, right in downtown Winnipeg, beside manufacturing plants like ICO and Westeel, beside apartment blocks, golf courses, and private residences.

* (1020)

This river and green space winding through the rural constituencies of LaVerendrye, the urban constituencies of Seine River, Riel, Niakwa, St. Vital, and St. Boniface, is an ecological treasure. One has a sense of intimacy with nature because the river is so narrow and the vegetation, the plant life, abound and overhang, almost like in an African jungle. The experience is entirely different than travelling the Red or Assiniboine, so much more removed from the banks with their abundant animal and plant life.

Add to this experience and setting the history, which has been described by the honourable member for St. Boniface so well, a history which is not well known, and you have a precious and unique treasure.

The heritage of this river includes the aboriginal populations of the past. It was a favoured place to fish and hunt. It is closely associated with a history of voyageurs and freemen of the fur trade, most notably Jean-Baptiste Lagimodiere, Canada's most celebrated voyageur, remembered for his six-month, 1,300-mile winter trek to Montreal during the winter of 1815.

The hundred-acre land grant right at the junction, the confluence of the Seine and Red rivers, was awarded by Lord Selkirk to Lagimodiere for his efforts. This first homestead of St. Boniface also became the home of the first Euro-Canadian woman to settle in western Canada in the person of his wife Marie-Anne Gaboury. They were the first Canadian couple to settle west of the Great Lakes and were responsible for the first children of Canadian descent born in the northwest, what is now Alberta and Saskatchewan as well.

With the arrival of Father Provencher in 1818, Marie-Anne Gaboury, in an afternoon baptism ceremony, became the godmother of some two hundred to three hundred children and adults living in or near the Red River settlement.

The first locomotive in western Canada, the Countess of Dufferin, was transported by barge from the United States and unloaded at this confluence of the Seine and Red rivers.

Louis Riel, the Father of Confederation, has a presence here. There is evidence that suggests that Manitoba's Father of Confederation was born October 22 or 23, 1844, at this very junction of the Seine and Red rivers, and his grandmother was that very same Marie-Anne Gaboury.

Quoting from one of the publications that have come from the Save Our Seine Environment Inc., it states: to understand the cradle in which Louis Riel was born, its times, its transitions, and its problems, is to arrive at a better understanding of the man. The troubles that had beset the early settlement, the role his grandparents had played, the tensions that were still very much present, all help in appreciating the rise of Louis Riel. His leadership of the Metis, the founding of the provisional government, and the joining of the new province of Manitoba into the Canadian Confederation was not some random incident, a haphazard accident that had somehow sprouted on the plains. The Seine reminds us of that noblest of Canadian traditions, the choice of conciliation, dialogue, and faith in the political process over conflict, confrontation, and unrest. Louis Riel chose, as others had before him, the difficult path of peace.

In recognition of this particular site, efforts have been made through Save Our Seine Environment Inc. and other supporters of the Seine to achieve national historic site recognition in a submission to the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, it was stated: In defiance of traditional practice, she, referring to Marie Anne Gaboury, accompanied her voyageur husband and became the first Euro-Canadian woman to settle in western Canada. A tolerant and generous woman, she adopted her husband's children from a previous marriage, à la façon du pays, and gained the respect and acceptance of local aboriginal women. She taught them catechism and they taught her Cree and Ojibway. Marie Anne became the doyenne of Canadians and Metis families in St. Boniface and grandmother of Louis Riel, founder of Manitoba.

The couple has been described as the ancestor to grandparents of one third of Metis Canadian families in western Canada. Many other peoples have been involved in this area of the Seine. The Des Meurons soldiers that settled on the banks of the Seine included Swiss, Germans, Austrians, Poles, Belgians, Hungarians and Alsatians. What a symbol of Canadian unity is the Seine. Not a constitution, not a railway line, but a living resource of common experience and emotion shared by many peoples over many years. As the honourable member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) said, it is a river of many tongues.

The Save Our Seine Environment Inc. also is described by the honourable member for St. Boniface. This organization has a lengthy history of contribution, bringing together different groups, individuals, disciplines, historians, scientists, youth. They are working towards the recognition of a Seine River interpretive trail between Provencher Boulevard and Marion Street. They are working at establishing a canoe route along the Seine that can be used all through the nonwinter seasons. Why an amendment?

The provincial Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship has no legislative power to make the heritage designation of the river as sought. This lies in federal jurisdiction. Also various other provincial departments are involved: Natural Resources, Environment, as well as, Culture, Heritage and Citizenship. The City of Winnipeg is involved through its community planning division. Rural municipalities are involved with respect to water levels. The federal government can designate heritage rivers and can designate historic sites pursuant to Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada.

Therefore, I move the following amendment, seconded by the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar)--and I urge all honourable members to support it. It reads,

THAT Resolution 5 be amended by deleting all of the words after the word WHEREAS in the third line and replacing them with the following:

The Seine River is also an important natural habitat for diversity of Manitoba's wildlife; and

WHEREAS the Seine River is now viewed by many as a recreational area for fishing, canoeing, nature appreciation, skiing and walks along the trails; and

WHEREAS this valuable natural resource has in the past suffered from a lack of understanding and appreciation with the result that products foreign to this environment have accumulated and other practices have diminished the quality of the environment; and

WHEREAS water management practices would have to be reconsidered to enhance the Seine River; and

WHEREAS since 1990, Save Our Seine River Environment Inc. has worked hard to protect and enhance this resource for all Manitobans to enjoy;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the appropriate provincial government departments and the members of the Legislative Assembly to work in co-operation with the appropriate municipal governments and the federal government to do what is reasonably desirable to protect the Seine River for ourselves and for future generations of Manitobans as a valuable natural recreational and historical resource.

Motion presented.

Mr. Newman: My understanding is, Madam Speaker, that that amendment is supported by both the mover of the original motion and by all honourable members here. Thank you.

Madam Speaker: As indicated previously to the House that normally I would be taking any amendments under advisement, but am I to understand that there is a willingness of the House to deal with the amendment?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

* (1030)

Madam Speaker: Agreed. The amendment is accordingly in order.

It has been moved by the honourable member for Riel (Mr. Newman), seconded by the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar),

THAT Resolution No. 5 be amended by deleting all of the words after the word WHEREAS in the third line and replacing them with the following:

“the Seine--

Some Honourable Members: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense.

THAT Resolution No. 5 be amended by deleting all of the words after the word WHEREAS in the third line and replacing them with the following:

“the Seine River is also an important natural habitat for diversity of Manitoba's wildlife; and

WHEREAS the Seine River is now viewed by many as a recreational area for fishing, canoeing, nature appreciation, skiing and walks along the trails; and

WHEREAS this valuable natural resource has in the past suffered from a lack of understanding and appreciation with the result that products foreign to this environment have accumulated and other practices have diminished the quality of the environment; and

WHEREAS water management practices would have to be reconsidered to enhance the Seine River; and

WHEREAS since 1990, Save Our Seine River Environment Inc. has worked hard to protect and enhance this resource for all Manitobans to enjoy;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the appropriate provincial government departments and the members of the Legislative Assembly to work in co-operation with the appropriate municipal governments and the federal government to do what is reasonably desirable to protect the Seine River for ourselves and for future generations of Manitobans as a valuable natural recreational and historical resource.”

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure to rise today to speak to the motion and to Resolution No. 5 and the amendment put forward by the member for Riel (Mr. Newman). I want to congratulate the member from St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) and the member for Riel for bringing forward this resolution and the amendment to deal with the very important issue in our province, and that, of course, is to preserve a natural habitat within the city of Winnipeg.

As stated, the Seine River is viewed by many individuals in our communities for its use for both fishing, canoeing, skiing and so on, and it really is a very natural resource. What we are seeing, unfortunately, more often than not in our society, in our world, is that these resources are being lost to neglect and to overdevelopment. So it is important for us on this side of the House to stand with the members opposite to support this resolution. It is rare, unfortunately, that we in this Chamber and in this private members' hour do pass resolutions such as this, or other ones, with unanimous consent, and that is unfortunate.

I just want to remind the members opposite that I brought forward a resolution, maybe three or four years ago, on cleaning up the Red River, which was very important to all of us in this province, I am sure, and particularly important to myself as a member representing Selkirk. At that time, the government and the members of the Liberal Party decided not to allow that resolution to come to a vote and in fact spoke the resolution out. So that was, I thought, an error on behalf of the members opposite. [interjection] The member for Inkster asks which resolution. It was a resolution I brought forward calling for the cleanup of the Red River, and I believe it was your former leader who stood up in the House here, and he would not allow that resolution to come to a vote. Perhaps that is why I could explain his political destiny, as it were. He was clearly not recognizing an important resolution, and he would not allow it to come to a vote.

Madam Speaker, we support the resolution. I am interested in some of the comments within the amendment. It speaks about the water management practices having to be reconsidered to enhance the Seine River. I am interested in what practices will have to be reconsidered, and I am also interested when we can expect those changes because we do believe that there is a need out there to have a lot of these practices reviewed. This particular time of the year, all of us have seen the huge impact that Mother Nature and, in particular, our rivers can have on our environment. We have seen over the past number of weeks the flooding throughout this province. So while we view and we recognize that we must protect our environment, we also recognize that we have very little control at times to contain some of the powers of Mother Nature.

Madam Speaker, we do support working on this side of the House in a co-operative way to solve the problems facing Manitobans. We want to recognize, in particular, the actions that were mentioned by both the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) and the member for Riel (Mr. Newman), and those are the actions of our Lieutenant Governor, the Honourable Yvon Dumont, who is taking on this project. Since taking on the cleanup of the Seine as one of his projects, and I understand, and I have had discussions with him on this, that he has worked along with members from the Save Our Seine. I want to recognize them here today. He has taken this on, and because of that he has used his stature in the province to bring media attention to this and to enhance the work done by all those involved.

Madam Speaker, I also must mention that it is was, I believe, the prior, prior, prior government under the leadership of Premier Pawley that started to work on the Save Our Seine. I think that is important that we recognize that as well.

Madam Speaker, we support the resolution, we on this side of the House, and it gives us great pleasure. I just want to speak on behalf of all my colleagues here today that we do support this resolution. We hope that future generations will look back at the discussion here today and the resolution brought forward by the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), and that we took some action to protect something as vital to ourselves, as vital to our society here as a river, and that future generations will, I am sure, recognize this as an important resolution for our community.

Madam Speaker, I know that there are other members interested in speaking to this, so I just want to once again add our congratulations to the members and to the Save Our Seine committee and demonstrate our support for this resolution so that future generations can enjoy this natural gift. Thank you.

Mrs. Shirley Render (St. Vital): I would just like to thank all of the honourable members who have spoken so far. As the member for Riel (Mr. Newman) said, it is good to be working together for a change.

For me it is a real pleasure to be speaking on the Save Our Seine group. This is a group of very dedicated and enthusiastic volunteers whose No. 1 priority is to ensure that there is a proper flow and water quality of the Seine River. A number of years ago they identified that there was a problem with the Seine so they banded together, and virtually from the moment that I was elected, I have had the pleasure of working with this particular group. One of the reasons why I have enjoyed working with this group is that they have not just turned everything over to government. They have continued to be a very forceful group, a very dedicated group. They have continued to do the bulk of the work, to be the prime force behind the continuation of the strength of the Save Our Seine group.

As I say, Madam Speaker, it has been a pleasure to work with this group of volunteers because they just did not form themselves and then step back and say, you do it all. They have been in there right from the start, 100 percent.

As I said, Madam Speaker, I have been working with this group virtually from the moment I have been elected. I was elected in September 1990, and less than a month later I had arranged for a meeting with the Minister of Natural Resources the Honourable Harry Enns at that time, and that was the first meeting with various ministers of government here. It was at that meeting that we realized that, yes, there was a very definite place for the hands-on work of the Save Our Seine group, but there was also a very definite need to start to develop a master plan.

At that first meeting, we were able to bring about a grant to fund the work of a University of Manitoba Natural Resources Institute student, and his name was Morley Smith, to develop a management plan for improving the water quality and quantity of the Seine. Each year following, we have been able to access some government money, either under the special conservation fund, through the Department of Environment, to make sure that what we were doing was always going to be done in a scientific and proper kind of way.

Along with working with government, the Save Our Seine group, as I said, never sat back and twiddled their thumbs. They were always out there actively promoting what the Seine was all about. More importantly, they were out there doing things, and they initiated, in 1990, an annual cleanup which has taken place every single year. I can remember that first year, it was a very small core of volunteers that was out.

Every single year, Madam Speaker, they have had an annual cleanup, and every single year there have been more and more people going out for the annual cleanup. In fact, the very first year there was just one site, now there are a number of sites with a core of volunteers going into each of the sites. As I say, this is a group of volunteers that works hard to publicize what the Seine is all about, publicizes what it is trying to do to ensure the preservation of the water quality and flow of the Seine.

* (1040)

As I said, their initial function was really--I guess you could call it restoration, preservation and enhancement of the Seine. Along with that, there is another story with the Seine, besides the recreational aspects, besides the natural habitat that the member for Riel (Mr. Newman) has spoken about. After all, this is a little river that winds its way through the heart of the city and somehow or other has been left untouched. Regretfully there were boulders and cement boulders in the Seine, but the group has gotten rid of those. There is another aspect to the Seine besides the recreational and the natural habitat, and that is the historic factor. Being an historian, this is something that has always intrigued me, because we all know that there is a certain romance to history and this is a river that really has been forgotten and the history of the Seine has been forgotten.

So I would just like to put on the record, with thanks to J.P. Brunet who has been one of the prime movers of making sure that we have not forgotten the historical aspect of the Seine, and just let met tell you a wee bit of the background. Let me tell you about some of the central characters of the Seine River. Names like Jean-Baptiste Lagimodiere and Marie-Anne Gaboury. These colleagues are the central players of the Seine River. To begin to understand the history of the Seine is to understand the life and the times of Lagimodiere, along with that is to also understand the decline of the fur trade, the rise of agriculture, the settlement of the Des Meurons veterans and the first peaceful attempts at colonization, the Catholic missions, the beginnings of St. Boniface, and, of course, the birthplace of Louis Riel. All of these events are directly related to this one voyageur and his wife and their children and grandchildren as their lives unfolded by the banks of the Seine.

Madam Speaker, this is all spelled out very clearly in a document called Seine River Trail, Suggestions for Historical Interpretation. Let me just reiterate, the Seine is the home of many beginnings, the first white woman to have settled in the West, the first pioneer family of Canadian descent in the West, the first children of Canadian descent born in the northwest, Alberta and Saskatchewan, the origins of French-Canadian settlement in the West, the origins of the French Metis in the West, the first homestead and the first permanent beginnings of St. Boniface, the first Catholic mission in the West, the first settled military presence in the West that assured the first attempts of colonization. As the member for Riel (Mr. Newman) pointed out, also the first echo of Manitoba's multicultural mosaic, the difficult transition from the fur trade to colonization and the first echos of a province being born, all of these were happening on the Seine, and, as I said earlier, the birthplace of Louis Riel; in fact, the first locomotive, the engine that changed a nation. These are but some of the echoes of beginnings that can be heard along the Seine. So you can see there are a multitude of opportunities for historical interpretation along the Seine.

In fact, Madam Speaker, where they were talking about canoeing along the Seine, walking along the Seine and the river, skiing along the Seine in the wintertime or the historical signpost that we can mark, the Seine, as I say, is a little piece of history that flows through St. Vital. Actually, I guess I should not be that constricting, it flows through St. Boniface, flows through many of our ridings, touches upon many of our lives, and it really is a very unique piece of our lives. I say unique in the sense that it is a natural oasis in the heart of an expanding urban development. I think that we here in the Chamber, and I would like to think that we in St. Vital in particular, cherish both the natural and the historic heritage that is called the Seine River.

So, Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be supporting this resolution, the amended resolution. I am very pleased that all of us are going to be working together with various levels of government and will be continuing to work together with the Save Our Seine group.

Once more I just want to reiterate, this is a group of very dedicated and enthusiastic volunteers who have committed thousands and thousands of hours, whether it is the hands-on kind of thing for the annual cleanup, whether it is supervision of the Green Team, and they have now supervised the Green Team operations for a couple of summers and I am positive that they have their application in already for Green Team 1996. This is a group of people who have been working hard for a good six years to preserve the natural habitat, to improve and increase the water flow and the water quality of the Seine and now are working on the historical nature of the Seine to make sure that this is a river, and the people who made history are not forgotten.

It is a pleasure to support the amended resolution, and again, it is a pleasure to support Save Our Seine Incorporated. Thank you.

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): I appreciate the opportunity to stand and make a few comments in terms of the resolution and the amendment that has been proposed this morning in the House.

As an avid canoeist and outdoors person who has tried my hand at survival on rivers in northern Manitoba and throughout rural Manitoba, I can understand why this House today has shown the kind of co-operation that we have in sometimes setting aside our partisanship and working together on a goal that is very much important to people in the city of Winnipeg, in particular the citizens that live in the southeast part of the city, the St. Vital and Riel and St. Boniface areas. Madam Speaker, I understand fully the importance of having a clean, protected waterway just a stone's throw from where we live.

Too often, I think, we get caught up in a definition of development that restricts us only to the very traditional form of development where you build humongous factories and you dump the effluent into rivers, where you take all the garbage that you have in your household or in your place of business and dump it into some river somewhere. I do not consider that development.

I think what we are proposing today fits into the model or the definition of development that I think will be prevalent in the latter part of this decade and into the new century. I think it represents a shift in the way people see development and see the way humans live and exist within our environment, and I think today we are making a very positive statement towards development. I think we are also understanding that part of development is the quality of life that we leave ourselves and base our decisions upon.

I want to compliment the mover and the seconder of the amendment and the resolution. In particular, I want to congratulate the member for Riel (Mr. Newman) for his historical perspective that he brought to this debate. As a student of history at university, I understand the importance of the people who at that time had developed this part of the world, their contribution to our society, and I want to remind all honourable members of the importance that waterways have played in the opening of the West. I know throughout rural Manitoba where I live many decisions were based, many decisions on locating communities were based on the availability of clean and protected water, and I think what we are doing is adding our voices to history and the continuance of Canadian history by understanding the importance of waterways and the importance of protecting the water that we have.

I do want to leave some time for other members to make statements today before our hour runs up. The last point that I want to make has to do with the fact that we here in this House have no magic wands, Madam Speaker. It is very important what we are doing in making a statement with this resolution, but we have to remember that just because we have made the statement in the House does not mean that the amount of garbage that is in the Seine River right now will somehow mysteriously vanish, will somehow leap out of the river and not be there in the way of the recreational and other uses that we have in the Seine River. It is going to take a lot of work to make sure that the Seine River is protected. It is going to take commitment further than today from elected officials at all levels. It is going to take very much a commitment to protect this river, and I want to make sure that everybody understands that this is one step in the protection of the Seine River.

Having said that, I think that the folks involved with the Save Our Seine group have done an excellent job in raising the profile of the state of the Seine River and its use and its importance to us as a society. I would congratulate the Save Our Seine people and encourage them to continue with their very fine objective in regard to this matter.

* (1050)

Madam Speaker, with that I would just conclude the remarks that I am making, and hopefully I have left time for others to put a few statements on the record as well. Thank you very much.

Mr. Ben Sveinson (La Verendrye): Madam Speaker, we have heard of the culture, the heritage, the history of the Seine River, and I am not going to go into it too much simply because everybody else has, but I would like to add a little history and a little heritage to the stories that we have heard.

It was back in about 1934, approximately, that my wife's family moved from Czechoslovakia to this country, and they settled on River Lot 23 at St. Anne right next to the Seine River. In fact, today, Madam Speaker, my wife Millie and I still own 22 acres that border on the Seine River. Some 26, 27 years ago, Millie and I moved from Winnipeg back to the homestead or the yard, if you will, of the farm that my in-laws owned, and over the years we have raised two boys and a girl, Wayne, Jeff and Bonnie, all of whom have enjoyed the Seine River. Now, during the first couple of years that we moved out there I noticed--because this was a time of I guess you would not say drought but close, where the Seine River in fact went down, there was very little water in it--you could see all these different things in it. I used my tractor and a chain to hook onto things like old cars and large branches or trees that had been thrown in. You could go into it--and many other things. There were rubber boots. There were all kinds of things. It just seemed that the Seine River was a bit of a garbage disposal unit.

At any rate, what I am saying here is that the area along my property, I did clean up at that time. My children have enjoyed the Seine River very, very much, and not just my children, but many other children from the town came out and spent a lot of time with our children, doing things like, for example, they would tie a long rope onto a tree and would swing across the Seine River. When they got a little tired of that, they would fall into it and go for a swim and come out and have some more fun. They did things like fishing in the Seine River, and they have pulled out, would you believe, 18- to 23-pound jacks out of that river, and this is as of last year and in past years.

We have seen beaver in the river, fox that follow it; the mink stick close to the river--many, many enjoyments and animal life that in fact my children have had the enjoyment of seeing and being around. We see canoers canoeing down the Seine River past our place now, something that, when we first moved out there, there were not too many of these things happening simply because the Seine River had become that kind of a thing that people could not really do it. But we also see now snowmobilers, skiers. My kids, during the time that they were growing up, would clear a piece of the Seine River and go skating. So there was much, much enjoyment.

The Seine River comes through an area that is just east of Ste. Anne that is called Lake Rivière, and many people will remember Lake Rivière, although it is closed now and they are building homes in kind of a park area there now. It was a very nice spot for people to go and enjoy the beach that was there.

The Seine River now is a very nice river, and the settlements of Ste. Anne, Dufresne, Lorette all have Save Our Seine groups as we see in the gallery today. I thank them, and I thank all those volunteers who have taken and given of their time to make a river beautiful once again.

I would like to speak for another 20 minutes or half an hour on this, Madam Speaker, but I want to give others the opportunity.

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, I certainly want this motion to come to a vote before time has expired, but I simply wanted to add a couple of words to what has already been said. Based on my past as a rural member and a rural representative, I have been exceptionally pleased to see how the protection of the Seine has evolved where the local residents have taken a keen interest and have actually taken a hand in managing, improving and preserving the asset that they have right in their backyards. It has always been my view that this type of interaction, along with some support from public authorities, is the best way to maintain a watershed and an asset of this nature.

As the years go by, and we learn more and more about how to involve the different support groups in the community and interrelate that with policies of government and the directions that we want to take, the greater chance we have for success in maintaining and preserving the Seine and doing even better in the future with other watersheds, because there has always, in my view, been a bit of a difference, a gap that needs to be closed between how we have been able to set up watershed management organizations in the rural areas, but we, probably by omission more than anything else, have not taken an active enough role in doing the same thing with some of the streams, whether they are major or minor within our urban areas.

I would like to support this motion. I would like to also recognize the unanimity there is in the House today.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is the amendment to Resolution 5, moved by the honourable member for Riel (Mr. Newman), seconded by the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar). Is it the will of the House to adopt the amendment?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Is it the will of the House to adopt Resolution No.5, as moved by the honourable member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), seconded by the honourable member for Riel (Mr. Newman), as amended?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

What is the will of House? There is one minute remaining. Eleven o'clock?

Some Honourable Members: Eleven o'clock.

Madam Speaker: Pursuant to Rule 21, the House will now consider Private Members' Business.

* (1100)

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS--PUBLIC BILLS

Bill 200--The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act

Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), Bill 200 (The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'assurance-maladie), standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr. Toews). Stand?

An Honourable Member: Stand.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? [agreed]

Bill 201--The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act

Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson), Bill 201, The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act (Loi sur le jour de solidarité à l'égard des autochtones), standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau). Stand?

An Honourable Member: Stand.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? [agreed]

Hon. Darren Praznik (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I believe that there is agreement to have this particular bill remain standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), but we certainly have no objection to having any member of this House who wants to speak on it during this time do so, as long as there is agreement that it will remain standing in the name of the member for St. Norbert.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): I rise today in support of Bill 201, the Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act, brought forward by my honourable friend and colleague the member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson), and I thank the honourable member for Rupertsland as well as the honourable member for the Pas (Mr. Lathlin) for their fast work, beginning with their efforts within the National Indian Brotherhood years ago to attempt to establish a national day of recognition honouring First Nations people, Metis and Inuit peoples.

Therefore, this bill is only the tip of the iceberg. It represents years of effort and is consistent with the view held by aboriginal people that when we do something we should be aware of the implications of our actions as far as seven generations into the future.

Therefore, I hope all members of this House will support Bill 201, The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act, so that we can be assured that those yet unborn, seven generations into the future, can say that today we acted with wisdom in establishing The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act.

As well, Madam Speaker, an Aboriginal Solidarity Day would be a fitting addition to the Aboriginal Veterans' Day, celebrated on November 8. On November 8, we honour a specific sector of the aboriginal population, veterans who played a key but, for many Canadians, a little-known role in fighting for Canada's freedom in both world wars and the Korean War.

The fact that June 21 was selected as the appropriate day for acknowledging the history, culture and contributions of aboriginal people is no accident. June 21 is the summer solstice, the longest day of the year. In many ancient cultures, it was a day of celebration. In the northern hemisphere, it signalled the advent of summer, the season of growth. Therefore, it symbolizes for us the growth, the power, the impact that aboriginal culture has on modern day Canada.

So it is not just a day honouring past contributions, it is also a day pointing to future greatness. This day would signal the fact that finally Canada has begun the long process of enabling aboriginal people to step into the sun. For when all is said and done, all nonaboriginal Canadians in their heart of hearts know that they owe a tremendous debt to the original people of this land.

The first European settlers to this land, the land my honourable colleague refers to by its ancient name as Turtle Island, would not have survived had it not been for the compassion and generosity of the aboriginal people. I do not wish to chronicle the long saga of and tears visited on the original inhabitants of Turtle Island since the first contact with Europeans. Suffice it to say, Madam Speaker, that when the racist National Party of South Africa formed government in 1948, they sent their representatives here to Canada to learn first-hand how reserves operated and functioned.

The bandustan system, the apartheid system, was modelled on the Canadian reservation system. It is one of the lesser known and dark facts that Canada's reserves served as a blueprint for the apartheid system in South Africa, and the overt, state-sanctioned racism of apartheid South Africa was mirrored by the subtle racism faced by aboriginal people in Canada.

Apartheid is gone. State racism is gone, but subtle racism lingers everywhere. In combatting subtle racism, Madam Speaker, racism not always obvious, it is important to deal with powerful symbols that strengthen and celebrate the contributions and culture of the people affected by racism.

That is why Aboriginal Solidarity Day is so important to all of us. Certainly, woven into the Canadian fabric, one of the most original and colourful threads is that of Canada's aboriginal people. Creating such a day is not merely tokenism. Aboriginal people are on the move. Patience has worn thin. Young, capable leaders, together with elders, are charting new and powerful directions. Aboriginal society is growing. Aboriginal culture is flourishing.

Aboriginal people want and deserve the same political, economic and material realities enjoyed by other Canadians. In modern-day Canada, there is no longer room for pockets of poverty, unemployment, poor health, high suicide rates, substandard housing, low life expectancy.

In a first-world country, all citizens should work together to remove conditions that create third-world realities for many aboriginal people. As well, Madam Speaker, the creation of an Aboriginal Solidarity Day costs the taxpayers absolutely nothing. It is a much needed gesture of respect. As Phil Fontaine has pointed out numerous times, what aboriginal people want from their fellow Canadians are two things, fairness and respect.

As younger aboriginal people show respect to their elders, so we should show respect to our elder culture, the aboriginal. The aboriginal people of Turtle Island, of North America, have given up most of their land to nonaboriginal people. I use given up in the euphemistic sense because we all know that most of the land was simply taken.

That gift or takeover, whatever you wish to call it, has become the basis of wealth for the nonaboriginal people, but apart from what we owe aboriginal people on just material terms alone, it pales in significance to what they have given us or are willing to share with us in the spiritual and cultural round.

Most Canadians, I believe, are still unaware of the tremendous positive potential inherent in the beliefs, the values, and spirituality of the original inhabitants of this land. Let me explain what I mean. I am very fortunate that I can go to an elder whenever I need advice or wisdom, whenever I want to anchor myself to something deeper, something more stable, a bigger reality. My elder says this, and I use her own words: Being indian has very little to do with skin colour. It has to do with what you believe, how you relate to others, how you relate to the earth and all that is on it.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, when we are celebrating Aboriginal Solidarity Day, we are in the deepest sense celebrating not just the material achievements of aboriginal peoples of the past, nor just the increasingly major achievements that the growing aboriginal population will undoubtedly achieve in the future, but also we are celebrating the world vision, the spiritual reality, that emerges from our aboriginal people.

I will talk about only two of many elements comprising this world vision, the sense of family and the sense of mother earth. First of all, many aboriginal people still live in an extended family, not just a nuclear family. Therefore there is a wide supportive network for any given individual. Roles are clearly defined. Everyone has value. Elders are not just shoved aside, as they are in the dominant white society. Elders are valued. They speak experience. They speak wisdom. They resolve conflicts. They guard the stories and the values and the traditions of the people.

In many aboriginal traditions, adolescents are expected to go through an initiation rite into an adult rite, a vision quest, and this vision quest gives direction and guidance to that person's life. This makes sense. It is much more sane than, you know, this older tradition is much more sane than the one we seem to have for our own adolescence, which seems to be merely a period of pimples and rebellion.

Secondly, aboriginal people have lived on this continent for at least 20,000 years without polluting this continent or destroying it. We have much to learn from their “touch the earth lightly” philosophy. It is high time nonaboriginals shared the vision with aboriginal people regarding the sanctity of Mother Earth. We have much to learn from aboriginal people when it comes to stewardship of the natural world. Some buzzwords current in the modern world are sustainable development, recycling, clean environment and so on. Aboriginal people have not just talked respect for Mother Nature; they have actually practised it and are still practising it. It is the ancient wisdom of the aboriginal people, the wisdom of working with Mother Earth and not against her, that could be our salvation in the increasingly industrialized global village.

* (1110)

The aboriginal people have lived on Turtle Island, this continent, for at least 20,000 years without harming the land, the trees, the air, the water, the animals, the birds or the fish. The colonizers have been here less than 500 years, and all aspects of Mother Nature have been placed under severe stress, all in the name of progress. But we can still step back from the brink. That is why the values held by aboriginal people, why their spirituality is of such critical importance for all of us. It is not just a question of a polite, respectful thing to do, but it is a question of our very survival. It is perhaps ironic that the people who were once pushed to the margins of our society, a people who even today have not yet been given their full place in the sun, have precisely those tools, those values, that spirituality that could ensure for all our people our mutual survival, our mutual growth and harmony.

Therefore, I urge all honourable members to support Bill 201, The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act. The creation of this special day is long overdue. I thank my colleague the honourable member for Rupertsland for introducing this important bill, and I look forward to all-party support for this bill. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: As previously agreed, this bill will remain standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).

Res. 6--Immigration Policy Changes

Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Madam Speaker,

WHEREAS Canadians from all cultures have been able to live together in harmony and mutual respect; and

WHEREAS immigration has a net economic and social benefit for our society by providing labour and investment, purchasing goods and services, attending our universities and stimulating job creation; and

WHEREAS family reunification is a vital component of immigration policy, because family supports allow new Canadians to settle more quickly into the community and because in many cultures there is a strong reliance and emphasis on the extended family; and

WHEREAS immigration to Manitoba has steadily declined over the last four years and now reflects only 1.8 percent of Canada's immigration instead of the 4 percent of Canada's total immigration to which Manitoba is entitled; and

WHEREAS in the 1993 federal election the Liberal Party promised to maintain a fair immigration policy, including immigration levels set at 1 percent of Canada's population annually; and

WHEREAS the Liberal Party has also promised “a system that balances a strong enforcement and fairness and humanitarian and family values”; and

WHEREAS changes to Canada's immigration policy have been announced which will see the numbers of independent immigrants increased while family reunification is curtailed through changes in categories of immigrants, making immigration levels well below the 1 percent of population target; and

WHEREAS family reunification is also threatened by strict new requirements on language; and

WHEREAS this culturally insensitive policy will leave many new Canadians with no option to sponsor their close relatives and reunite their families;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the federal government to consider keeping its promises on immigration, especially as they apply to family reunification; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Assembly urge the federal and provincial governments to consider making reunification a top priority in their ongoing negotiations on immigration objectives in Manitoba; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Assembly urge the federal government to enter into an immigration agreement with the provincial government which is comparable to agreements in other provinces; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Assembly direct the Clerk of the Assembly to send a copy of this resolution to the federal Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and to all Manitoba members of Parliament.

Motion presented.

Mr. Santos: Madam Speaker, I believe that these immigration changes in the federal legislation are definitely monetarily based, definable discouragement for poor people to become immigrants to Canada and to this province. It appears that there is another hidden and systemic attack on the poor, decisively destructive of the principle of equality of opportunity for all. Equality of opportunity is perhaps the centrepiece in the crowning jewel of the law that we inherited from the United Kingdom into this country, Canada.

The principle of equality of opportunity is a fair and equal chance among people of unequal talents and abilities to better themselves in circumstances without artificial restraints. In this situation, constraints are tied to having or not having money in order to be able to immigrate to Canada and to this province of Manitoba, thus giving the wealthy class more opportunity and the poorer class little or no opportunity to come to this country.

To base Canada's immigration policy selection on economic and material grounds, which are unequal in the population rather than on the inherent human qualities and potentials as human beings inherent in themselves as creatures of God, is an artificial definition of what is a desirable immigrant, because it is based on absence of presence of wealth, not on our collective sense of justice as fairness which is displayed in our adherence to the rule of law in our protection of basic human rights, in our protection against discrimination and constitutionally prohibitive ground.

I mentioned the crown jewels because the crown, although it is antiquated and politically impotent, still has the functional usefulness in this society because it is a rallying ground for the unity of the people, not only within Canada but also among the Commonwealth of Nations. Discrimination on the basis of not having or having money is of course not a constitutionally prohibited ground; it is not one of the grounds that is prohibited by the equality clause in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Yet it is generally known that poor prospective immigrants to Canada can come only from the poor, nonwhite developing countries, such as the Philippines, the Caribbeans and Africa, whereas the relatively well-off, the relatively wealthy immigrants, come from the white industrialized rich countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia and Europe.

So given the undeniable fact of the place of origin of poor, nonwhite immigrants as contrasted with the place of origin of relatively well-off predominantly white prospective immigrants, it becomes crystal clear, if anybody would like to analyze the situation, that the federal Government of Canada which currently is under the ruling Liberal Party, Canada is reverting to some shameful historical past of discriminatory policy that had happened in this country.

If you remember back in 1923, we had an immigration policy excluding Chinese descent people from coming to this country, and it was official policy supported by the majority of the people at the time. Not only is this a racist policy, it was also a sexist policy. Why did I say it is sexist? Because they exclude only those Chinese people of Chinese descent only on the side of the mother. If their origin is on their mother's side, they are excluded; if their origin is on their father's side, they can come in. So it is not only racist; it was also sexist, but it was official.

An Honourable Member: What year was that?

* (1120)

Mr. Santos: 1923. In some basic sense, fairness means playing by the rules, rules that are reasonably stable so that everyone knows what the rules are and everyone knows how to make decisions to protect their interests under the existing rules. So the people can gear their actions, they make their decisions according to the rules, and that is fair and just for all, because one can prepare and understand the rules and their implications on one's affairs and they can make decisions accordingly. So any stable set of rules of immigration would be good for this country, but if the rules are constantly changing, frequently changing, not only in minor detail but also in basic fundamentals, then fairness is destroyed. People can no longer count on the same rule before, when they make their decisions to immigrate here, because now they want a sign fee to sponsor their relatives and they could not because of lack of money.

Let me show you an example of the difficulty of changing rules. In taxation, every year the taxation rule changes. You can make decisions this year and yet next year find out that they are no longer good for you, and that is not fair for the citizen at all. Every year Canadians can no longer enjoy the fruits of their economic and commercial decisions. They are caught off balance when taxation rules are announced, with an altered set of rules that militate against their respective interests. Similarly if immigration rules and immigration regulations are radically changing most of the time, even established families in Canada who wish to help their relatives and their kinfolk to reunite with themselves could no longer do so. For escalating costs of immigration fees and charges which poor families could not anticipate and did not anticipate, family reunification is no longer accessible except for the well-to-do, the wealthy, the economic elite in this country. This is no longer accessible by the hard-working middle class and the hard-working poor of this country. For example, the $500 immigration application fee and the $975 immigration landing fee, how can you save that amount of money if you have a job and you are laid off, you even lost your mortgage? You cannot even feed your family here. How can you ever, ever sponsor a relative when the rate of exchange, let us say, is one to 20--one dollar for the foreign currency of 20 units of currency in the foreign country.

Surely, this will close the door and leave many poorer Canadians already settled here, already citizens of this province and this country, no longer able to sponsor close relatives, even husbands and wives and spouses, and be reunited with their family because of this policy. Therefore, the party in government in Ottawa, in the federal government, is injuring, not only injuring, they are oppressing the newly established Canadian citizens who are unable to raise enough money to sponsor their close relatives to come into Canada. They have forgotten that at one time their ancestors were immigrants. They have forgotten, Madam Speaker, where they came from. Let me conclude by saying that the now-established ruling elite in Canada, whose descendants were at one time immigrants themselves, have forgotten where they came from. They have forgotten that once they were either children or grandchildren of immigrants to Canada who, in the immortal words of Emma Lazarus, came here tired and poor, huddled masses yearning to be free, refuse of teeming shore, homeless, tempest-tossed, yet welcome by the lamp beside the golden door.

In the olden days of Israel, as the Lord God commanded Moses, you shall neither mistreat nor oppress the strangers among you, for you were a stranger in the land of Egypt. Therefore, love the stranger, for you were a stranger in Egypt. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): I am pleased to be able to have an opportunity to speak on this resolution, and I think within the house today there would be probably substantive agreement on the resolution. With a few minor changes which, I think, are acceptable to honourable members, we could probably pass this resolution today, and I commend the member from Broadway for bringing it forward. Some of the parts of his contribution I do not endorse, but I think the basic parts of the resolution would get some of our support.

Madam Speaker, immigration is very important to Manitoba, and we have specific economic sectors, such as the garment industry, which require an influx of skilled workers, and these needs are not being met under the current policy and legislation. In addition to that, certain changes that have taken place at the federal level with the introduction of the right-of-landing fee create a rather insurmountable financial barrier for many immigrants, and we do have concerns that federal policy on immigration seems to be set with the thought of solving some problems in southern Ontario. As I have said before, it is important that the federal government set national policy based on all of Canada and not simply because there are some difficulties in certain areas of the country.

So some of the recent policies are creating a rather substantial barrier. Manitoba in particular has had tremendous benefits from immigration in past decades. Particularly Manitoba has welcomed the family reunification class and the ability for family members in Manitoba to bring assisted relatives to our province, and the regulations that have been put in place have been quite a detriment to the numbers of immigrants Manitoba is receiving.

In the early '90s Manitoba was a recipient of nearly 6,000 immigrants and, in the last number of years, even though the economy of this province is improving, the unemployment rate is declining, our numbers are declining because of some barriers that the federal government has put in in terms of the cost of applying for immigration, the right-of-landing fee, the cost for medical exams and a number of other things.

Manitoba is currently negotiating an immigration agreement with Ottawa. Unfortunately there are a number of barriers that have prevented us from concluding that agreement. Certainly the changes in the ministers at the federal level has caused a delay. Subsequent changes in the agreement that had virtually been struck a few weeks ago have created some problems in our accepting that particular agreement.

Madam Speaker, I would like to move some amendments. The WHEREASes that have presented in the original resolution are acceptable, and I would like to add four additional WHEREASes.

The first being

WHEREAS immigration has been the cornerstone of the growth and prosperity of Manitoba; and

WHEREAS Manitoba must have a reasonable level of immigration to maintain growth; and

WHEREAS current federal immigration policy, including right-of-landing fees, can be a detriment to immigration growth in Manitoba; and

WHEREAS Manitoba is currently negotiating an immigration agreement with the federal government which will give us more flexibility in meeting our immigration demands.

And by deleting the second and third “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED” clauses and adding an additional clause to follow the last “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED” as follows:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba support the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship in their efforts to negotiate an immigration agreement with the federal government.

* (1130)

Madam Speaker: Order, please. As previously indicated to this House that I generally take amendments to resolutions under advisement, is it my understanding that there is unanimous support of the House to deal with this amendment?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. The amendment is in order.

It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mr. Gilleshammer), seconded by the honourable member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), that Resolution 6 be amended as follows with the insertion of four additional WHEREAS clauses and that the second and third BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED clauses be deleted and a final BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED clause be added.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to be able to put some words on the record with respect to immigration. Immigration is in fact a very important aspect of Manitoba. How we grow as a society will ultimately be determined through all sorts of different factors. Some factors are more important than others, no doubt, and immigration has to rank as one of the most important factors in terms of the future of the province of Manitoba.

You know, immigration, in particular, has been an issue for me over the last eight years. I deal a lot with immigrants in terms of trying to assist in the best way I can to facilitate family sponsors and so forth to be able to be reunited with their families. Any opportunity that I am provided to be able to put a few words on the record with respect to immigration matters, I am always pleased to do that.

I understand that there is a will from the Chamber to have the amended resolution go through, with the idea of having, actually, a vote on the resolution, once I am done, or if there are other members that want to be able to speak. So having said that, Madam Speaker, I wanted to address a couple of the issues, in particular, that the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) has put on the record.

You know, I do take great exception to individuals or political parties that will try to flare up a debate for political reasons using the word “racism.” I take it very, very seriously in terms of when individuals use it. I know that the member for Broadway is very careful when he speaks inside the Chamber, but I am concerned in terms of the use of the words “head tax” and trying to imply that the federal government is imposing a head tax, when we know full well that it is not a head tax, Madam Speaker.

The member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) makes reference to the fee as preventing spouses from being able to come to Canada when, in fact, Madam Speaker, it has never in the last couple of years been brought to my attention where a spouse has been prevented from coming to Canada as a result of a fee. So, to a certain degree, there is a certain amount of rhetoric that is used in this whole debate, and a lot of that rhetoric is driven from the New Democratic Party in an attempt to try to come across as more sincere and more genuine towards the immigrants.

You know, I am a bit disappointed in that approach in the sense that the NDP were in a government situation in the province of Manitoba. The NDP did have an opportunity to appeal in a more sincere fashion to our immigrant population, such as credentials and recognition of their credentials. In fact, the member for Broadway himself was an MLA when the NDP were in government, Madam Speaker, when the issues facing immigrants today in terms of racism, in terms of credentials and recognition of those credentials--the government of the day did absolutely nothing to resolve those problems.

Madam Speaker, they even went further where they tried to manipulate and politicize different groups that were out there. The Conservatives were quite critical at the time of some of the work that they were doing in order to try to prevent some of the political manipulation that has been done under the New Democratic Party while it was in government.

Since it has been in opposition, Madam Speaker, I have had opportunity to participate in numerous different workshops dealing with immigration matters. I like to believe I keep myself fully aware of the different immigration discussions that are going on in terms of the province and the federal government, and what is important for the province of Manitoba is to achieve that bilateral immigration agreement.

I do know that there was little if any headway whatsoever under the Brian Mulroney government in Ottawa, and since Mr. Chretien and the current government have been there, there has been a sincere attempt to achieve a bilateral immigration agreement. In fact, Madam Speaker, for the first time, provinces have and will be using the provincial nominee class. Manitoba is one of the biggest benefactors from the provincial nominee class.

This is a federal initiative that was brought in from which Manitoba is benefiting. Yes, Madam Speaker, there are areas in which the federal government has to be more open-minded in terms of that you cannot apply the same immigration policies--or expect that the same immigration policies are going to be fair to all regions of the country. The landing fee of $975 will have a negative impact. There is no doubt about that. It will have a negative impact on immigration across the country, and when it was announced, the provincial Liberal Party opposed it then and nothing has changed.

But there are other issues in which we feel that we have to contribute as provincial legislators. The biggest single most important issue is the bilateral agreement, and I think that on the surface we should actually applaud the federal government in areas such as the provincial nominee classification, something in which the New Democratic Party while they were in government, even outside of government, did not lobby for. It was only since the Chretien government that this provincial government has lobbied for, and it is something which the federal government has acted upon. Let us take advantage of the general good will that has been expressed both from the current minister here in the Province of Manitoba and the federal government in terms of trying to achieve that bilateral agreement, and we as a provincial party will do what we can to facilitate and see that bilateral agreement achieved, because we believe ultimately that is what is important to the province of Manitoba.

What we would also like to see is the whole issue of the landing fee addressed. We ultimately believe that, if you were to get rid of the fee and get rid of the processing fee, it is obviously going to allow for more people to able to apply to come to Canada. The more people that apply to come to Canada, the better it is that we are going to have in terms of selection and ability to be able to bring more people to the province of Manitoba ultimately. But Manitoba is very unique. The most successful immigration policy that we have had in the province of Manitoba has been under family reunification. It is because of family reunification in most part that we have been able to at least sustain some level of immigration to the province of Manitoba, and this is an area in which we believe that the bilateral agreement should have some sort of a concentrated effort on.

* (1140)

Equally, we disagree with the government and the New Democrats who say and fundamentally argue that what we are entitled to is a certain percentage of the number of immigrants coming to Canada. I would disagree with that. I believe that Manitoba should be looking internally and saying, what is the optimum number of immigrants that we can sustain in any given year? That number is the number which we should be advocating for, not necesssarily a percentage of the overall number of immigrants that come to Canada.

What we need to do is, we have got to become more aggressive in the type of immigrant that we want. Family reunification has to be a No. 1 priority. Areas in which our economy can benefit, such as the garment industry, and other, in particular manufacturing, aspects, of our economy where there is a higher demand and we are not able to meet that demand--wherever we can benefit economically, I think, has to be explored. That would be our second priority, and then you could list off from--of course, there is a refugee obligation that the province should be prepared to accept, as all provinces should be accepting.

The province of Manitoba has benefited tremendously. I would ultimately argue we have the most to gain if we can open our doors even wider. But part of the problem, and when members talk about, well, the $975 landing fee being a roadblock, I will tell you, as the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) likes to refer to it as the head tax, that racist approach dealing with this particular policy, which the member for Thompson and New Democrats can continue in their bid to try to manipulate the voting process in the province of Manitoba. But I will tell you what is more of a roadblock, quite frankly, and that is if you have to go through the lines and try to get through the applications and the interviews abroad. If you want to be able to open up the process, allow for more immigration counsellors in the embassies, allow for more interviews, try to speed up some of the backlog that is out there.

If the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) was really wanting to address this issue, what he should be doing, Madam Speaker, is start to lobby where there are the backlogs to try to alleviate that backlog to allow the numbers to increase. As Manitobans, what we should be doing is becoming more proactive in terms of trying to put out the positives of the province of Manitoba.

In today's technology, Madam Speaker, what does it cost to get a RAM disk, if you like, for a computer, talking about the benefits of our multicultural society and making it available overseas, putting it on a three and a half inch disk or putting it on a five and a half inch disk, that if the will was there and the drive was there from the province of Manitoba, there is no reason why we could not be attracting more immigrants to the province of Manitoba.

Ontario and B.C. have been very successful at doing that, Madam Speaker. Manitoba has, in my opinion and in the provincial Liberal Party's opinion, the greatest potential in terms of being able to attract, because we are indeed a very multicultural society in many, many different ways.

We are much more tolerant, I would argue, Madam Speaker, than other provinces that are out there. I feel, in many cases, much closer, in many ways, to the Filipino community than I do to my own ethnic community. The tolerance is there. People want you to participate, people want you to get involved, and we should be sharing those multicultural values and heritage.

What we should be promoting is the need to retain the heritages of homelands and expanding that across the province of Manitoba, Madam Speaker. Whether it is having the barbecued pork or the perogies from the Ukrainian tradition or heritage, we as a society benefit tremendously by having this, and what we should be doing, I would ultimately argue, is look at ways in which we can ensure that Manitoba is going to be able to get our number of immigrants up. The only way we are going to do that is to become much more aggressive on getting those immigrants that are coming to Canada coming to the province of Manitoba. The best way that we can do that is look at where we have been successful at getting immigrants from abroad to come to the province of Manitoba.

An Honourable Member: Where have you been successful?

Mr. Lamoureux: Well, Madam Speaker, where we have been most successful is in countries like the Phillippines, countries like India, countries like the West Indies. These are areas in which maybe what we should do is have more of a promotion and so forth, maybe start lobbying to get more immigrants from that area, start promoting this, so that, in fact, those immigrants who are coming to Canada are going to make Manitoba our first choice. That is what we need to do in order to get more immigrants coming to the province of Manitoba.

In dealing with the landing fee, as I said, the party has taken a position. The provincial Liberal Party has taken a position on that. For the New Democrats, they want to try to make this a huge issue, and there is nothing wrong with that, Madam Speaker. Make it a huge issue. It is a huge issue, but do not try and say that it is racist.

There are many other issues that are out there that have much more racial overtones. I know the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) wants to stand up and call it a head tax and say that it is a racist policy. The member for Thompson does not know what he is about to speak, and that is predicting it, and, Madam Speaker, I would suggest to you that if this Chamber wanted to become more aggressive and get more immigrants to the province of Manitoba, then let us take a united front and do just that, and let us stop some of the rhetoric and get more immigrants to the province of Manitoba because as a society we will benefit tremendously.

The more immigrants that we get to the province of Manitoba, my best guess is that we could probably consume, in any given year, depending on the classification, somewhere around ten thousand to twelve thousand immigrants in any given year.

Having said that, Madam Speaker, I see that my time has run out. I appreciate the opportunity, and I would welcome any other opportunity to continue debate on this very important issue.

Introduction of Guests

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Prior to recognizing the honourable member for Thompson, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to both the Speaker's Gallery and the public gallery, where we have with us this morning the Minister of Internal Trade for China, accompanied by 17 delegates from China, under the direction of Mr. Chen. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this morning.

* * *

Mr. Steve Ashton (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, as much I have just been criticized by the member for Inkster for what he thinks I am about to say, what I am actually going to do is ask if there might be willingness not to see the clock at twelve o'clock so we can put this matter to a vote, the same spirit we had earlier with the Seine River motion. Would there be leave?

Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House not to see the clock at twelve?

An Honourable Member: No.

Madam Speaker: No? No, leave has been denied.

* (1150)

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, can I then ask if there might be leave to have this motion considered at our next Private Members' Business, which is next Thursday? So perhaps we can then allow it to go to a vote.

Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House to have this matter dealt with as the first order of business in private members' hour next Thursday?

Point of Order

Mr. Lamoureux: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, there are a number of resolutions that are coming forward dealing with health and so forth, and those too are important resolutions. If the member wants to have a vote, then he should just sit down, and we can call for the question and allow the resolution to pass.

Madam Speaker: Is that the will of the House then? Is the House ready for the question?

* * *

Mr. Ashton: In fact I am glad that the member for Inkster is now saying that we will put this matter to a vote. I want to urge all members to support this resolution. Immigration built this province. We have some very negative things happening from the federal government particularly, and I call it a head tax. It is a head tax. I know families in my own community are affected by this. I know families who are affected by what I consider some questionable practices by Immigration. Madam Speaker, it is important we speak out, because this province has been hit the hardest by what is happening in terms of family reunification, and all members of this House should be speaking in favour of this resolution. I know the Conservatives are already onside. I ask the Liberals to join with us, and let us send a clear message to the federal government today by passing this resolution.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

An Honourable Member: No.

Madam Speaker: No?

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, it is very important for me to speak to this resolution because, in my constituency of The Maples, it has been the benefactor of immigration. I recently spoke at Maples Collegiate in regard to a unity conference that the students of Maples Collegiate had, and I cannot recall the figures off the top of my head, but, looking at the last two times Census Canada did census in The Maples, there was a dramatic increase in the population of The Maples. As a result of that dramatic increase, it has made a major effect on the commerce, the construction and generally the style of living in The Maples. There is no doubt that immigration has benefited my constituency. So this is a very important issue, and that is why I consider it very important that I have the opportunity and speak to this resolution.

One of the reasons why I chose, when I was married, to live in The Maples--my wife was from outside the city. I lived in East Kildonan. When we were getting married, we had to decide where we would buy a house. One of the factors that made us choose The Maples was the high percentage of immigrants, because we know that along with immigration comes a strong work ethic. We wanted our children to have the benefit of living amongst people who had that strong work ethic. The other part of it is that we wanted our children to live in a community where people from all communities live, from all different ethnic origins. That diversity that is an energy coming from the different cultures, bringing the best, makes Maples a wonderful constituency, as it makes the entire province a wonderful place to live.

Before I go on, I should speak for a few minutes about that unity conference that I mentioned at Maples Collegiate. This was something that the students of Maples Collegiate initiated. Last year at their leadership conference, they identified as the lack, not the lack, but they were dissatisfied with the amount of racial harmony within their own school, within their community. It was said that living next door to someone from another country, sitting in a classroom in a chair next to someone, does not make you a stronger community unless you are sharing your joys, you are sharing your pains, you are working together.

What was happening in the Maples, quite often, is we were developing ethnic solitudes. For example, if I went to the cafeteria at Maples Collegiate and I walked in at lunch hour, I would see all the Portuguese kids sitting in one corner, all the Filipino kids sitting at another table, all the Hindu kids sitting at another table. That was so sad to see, because in the same community, if you go into a Grade 1 class, or you go to an elementary school and see recess, you will see the kids, no matter what ethnic background, all playing together. If you ask them to identify one of their friends, they will identify them either as the one wearing the red shoes or the blue shirt. The last thing they would think of identifying someone was because of their ethnic origin because it just does not occur to them.

But something happens between Grade 1 and by the time they reach high school; they become ethnic solitudes. Even though we have the benefit of all the ethnic cultures in our community, too often we end up in solitudes. For example, if I belong to the Ukrainian professional group, then I go to a church that practises religion in Ukrainian, and then I send my daughter to the Ukrainian community, I do not get the benefit of living amongst so many different cultures and everything that they have to offer.

Sometimes our multicultural policy in Canada, it has been very beneficial, but that is one of the negative effects of it in that at times it has promoted ethnic solitudes. And that is one of the reasons why I got into politics in the first place, because I wanted to show leadership and to show that in my position as an MLA, that whether it was my staff, whether it was my volunteers, whether it was the projects I do, it would address all communities.

When I first started the Maples Youth Justice Committee, one of the first things I did was I went to the then-MLA Gulzar Cheema and I went to the M.P. Dr. Rey Pagtakhan. I said I wanted a committee that was representative of the community, not only of different ages, different economic groups, but of different ethnic origins. If you look at the original 12 members of the Maples Youth Justice Committee, you will see that it truly reflects the make-up of our community.

That is why this resolution that addresses immigration is so important, because I had the benefit of living in the constituency of Dr. Rey Pagtakhan, the federal Liberal M.P., who has been a person whose integrity, whose dedication to service has been recognized by many, and a person who--immigration cases have been a large part of his constituency work and is one concern that he consistently addresses. Dr. Pagtakhan and myself, along with other members from this Legislature, have continued to lobby for an immigration policy that is beneficial to Manitoba, and just as the member from St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), earlier in this year when there were some federal funding reductions in the area of St. Boniface College, worked with his federal counterparts, not trying to embarrass them by putting a resolution forward whose the main purpose was to try to embarrass the government--no. Just as when there was a riot at Headingley, I worked with other people to make sure that the lives were in safety. In the same way, all members of this Legislature should work with the federal government.

Is the true purpose of this resolution to effect change, or is it to embarrass? Before, when the Minister of Immigration, the Honourable Sergio Marchi--yes, we had many phone calls about it--I did put many of my concerns and our provincial party's concerns, both to his staff and to himself, about the federal immigration policies.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for The Maples will have four minutes remaining.

* (1200)

The hour being 12 p.m., this House is recessed and will reconvene at 1:30 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed at 12 p.m.

________

After Recess

The House resumed at 1:30 p.m.