Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, would you call for second reading Bills 32, 49, 72, 73, 76 and 54.
SECOND READINGS
Bill 32--The Council on Post-Secondary Education Act
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ernst), that Bill 32, The Council on Post-Secondary Education Act; Loi sur le Conseil de l'enseignement postsecondaire, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of the House.
Motion presented.
Mrs. McIntosh: I am pleased to speak to Bill 32, The Council on Post-secondary Education Act, which provides for the creation of a council on post-secondary education. As you know, the creation of such a council was one of the principal recommendations of the University Education Review Commission chaired by the Honourable Duff Roblin.
The council was intended to bring better co-ordination, articulation and planning to the post-secondary education sector by bringing universities and community colleges together under a single body, thereby bringing a system perspective to post-secondary education in the province.
The seven institutions included under this act will be Keewatin Community College, Assiniboine Community College, Red River Community College, the University of Manitoba, the University of Winnipeg, Brandon University and College Universitaire de Saint Boniface.
While the college will bring better macromanagement of the system, universities and colleges will retain their autonomy through their respective boards of governors.
The Colleges Secretariat and the Universities Grants Commission will be replaced by an administrative unit for the council. The Universities Grants Commission Act will be repealed giving away to The Council on Post-Secondary Education Act. The creation of a council to oversee post-secondary education is a first in Canada. All provinces continue to deal with community colleges and universities separately, although some provinces such as Alberta and British Columbia have articulation arrangements between them, and Nova Scotia has a council for universities only.
The creation of the council brings a systems perspective to the planning of post-secondary education, something which has been sorely lacking in the past. The council will be comprised of not more than 11 members and will be appointed by Order-in-Council. Council members will serve a three-year term renewable once. The main functions of the council will be to develop a strategic plan for the system, allocate operating and capital resources to the seven institutions, establish a system-wide tuition fee policy, approve new programs, develop in consultation with the institutions a framework for accountability, develop in consultation with the institution strategic program specializations, provide leadership in the application of communications technologies to the learning process, co-ordinate and monitor system-wide credit transfer arrangements and seek advice from various internal and external interests. The council will help us gain a better sense of our post-secondary education priorities as a community. It will allow us to look at university and college programming simultaneously and invest strategically to ensure excellence.
Madam Speaker, with these few brief remarks I conclude my brief indication of the contents and intent of Bill 32, The Council on Post-Secondary Education Act.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): I move, seconded by the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett), that debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Madam Speaker: Second reading, Bill 49--
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Would you, Madam Speaker, defer Bill 49 until the end of the bills for second reading.
Madam Speaker: Bill 72 then?
Mr. Ernst: Yes, please, Madam Speaker.
* (1450)
Bill 72--The Public Schools Amendment Act (2)
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Toews), that Bill 72, The Public Schools Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant la Loi sur les écoles publiques, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, thank you again for recognizing me so that I may speak on The Public Schools Amendment Act (2). This act amends various sections of Part VIII of The Public Schools Act which outlines the process and requirements for teacher collective bargaining. These changes come after an extensive process of review and consultation which included a series of public hearings across the province and several meetings with representatives of the Manitoba Teachers' Society and the Manitoba Association of School Trustees.
The amendments incorporate many, but not all, of the recommendations of the Teacher Collective Bargaining and Compensation Committee. These amendments deal only with the collective bargaining issues. Issues related to the structure of the teacher compensation system will continue to be discussed with interested parties over the coming months before any firm proposals are developed.
Madam Speaker, the current collective bargaining system for teachers and trustees has been in place for some 40 years. It has served the needs of students well in the sense that there have been no strikes during that period. The no-strike restriction, however, is only one element of the system requiring two relatively brief sections in a part of the legislation that contains over 125 sections. Very few things in life are so perfect that they cannot be improved. Over 40 years, things in society have changed, including things which impact on collective bargaining. If these changes had not affected collective bargaining, then it could be expected that all parties would continue to be satisfied with the current system. As we know, however, that is not the case.
A variety of questions had arisen over the last decade about the effectiveness of the current system in meeting the needs of students, school divisions and taxpayers. These concerns of all parties, but most particularly school trustees, have been expressed over the past 10 years. The dissatisfaction with the methodology that has evolved within the current system has led MAST to pass two resolutions, in 1994 and 1996, that request for a change to the current system and supported, as a last resort, introducing the right to strike and lockout into the system as the final dispute resolution method.
At the outset of the review process, five principles were set out by the government. Key among these was that any changes should be designed to ensure that the needs of students are addressed. Our analysis on the feedback received during the public consultation process has resulted in a decision that the right to strike and lockout would not be in the best interest of students. Teachers, as well, indicated that having strike could prevent them from having good relationships with people in the communities where they live and they spoke against strike. Trustees spoke about strike interrupting the learning process.
It was very clear that there was no party who would accept strike as a choice of preference. Therefore, these amendments are designed to improve the current bargaining and binding arbitration process while continuing to prohibit strikes as a dispute resolution mechanism. We also, Madam Speaker, will be eliminating lockout, which I think would be to teachers' benefit.
The amendments are intended to accomplish several things: to provide processes to ensure that collective bargaining is conducted in an effective, efficient and timely manner, allow all issues related to teacher compensation and working conditions to be negotiated unless they are already limited in legislation. In other words, all items that are currently allowed to be negotiated will continue to be allowed to be negotiated within the limitations imposed by The Public Schools Act as has been written many, many years ago.
The amendments are also intended to accomplish the insurance that the ability to pay is given an appropriate degree of weight by the arbitrators in making a decision, while at the same time ensuring that it is not the only factor considered. The definition of ability to pay combines those elements identified by trustees and includes those elements identified by teachers, so we believe it is the definition that will meet acceptance on both sides.
It will also ensure that the ability of locally elected trustees to manage schools is maintained by restricting four items from being determined by a third party. These are items that are clearly identified in The Public Schools Act and have been for many, many years as basic management functions that are required to run a division--as well, of course, items such as the time of day of school breaks and those kinds of things which will always be decided in the best interests of students. It will also ensure that teachers are afforded the protection that divisions must act reasonably, fairly and in good faith in administering their policies and practices with respect to the items, those four that, while negotiable, will not be referred to arbitration.
This is a major victory for teachers in that they have long sought in collective agreements statements and clauses about actions being fair and reasonable and in good faith. We now see it actually in the act itself--as I say, a major victory for teachers and something I think that will go a long way to assure them that they now have a grievance process in place for anything that they feel is being done unfairly to them, specifically identified with those items that cannot be referred to arbitration.
As with any system of collective bargaining, it is expected that most agreements will be arrived at between the parties without any third-party intervention. In a negotiated settlement and a negotiated agreement, both divisions and teachers are accountable for the results and can determine for themselves where priorities lie. It is only when negotiations cannot be concluded that it is necessary to ensure that there is a process in place that provides some measure of accountability for third parties when they make the decisions on behalf of others. We hope that these particular amendments will encourage boards and teachers to settle locally rather than take the easy route out and just simply apply for the more expensive, costly and time-consuming procedure of arbitration.
This act will now provide for two approaches to bargaining and dispute resolution. The first is essentially the existing approach of collective bargaining, followed by provincial government conciliation and finally, binding arbitration. The key difference will be that proceeding with this approach will require agreement by both parties. The second method will be bargaining followed by mediation and binding arbitration with the same individual serving as both mediator and arbitrator. The parties may jointly select this approach at any time, and either party may do so after a minimum of 60 days has passed from the date notice to begin bargaining is given.
In order to ensure relevant financial information is available to both parties and the relevant expenditure period is reflected in collective agreements, notices to commence bargaining will be provided in April after division budgets are set and agreements will expire on June 30 so that collective agreements will coincide with the school year.
* (1500)
One of the major concerns raised by school trustees is that decisions raised by arbitrators often did not reflect the realities of a division's ability to pay. The new definition now included in the act will indicate that an arbitrator must take into consideration certain items regarding ability to pay, and that definition, as I indicated, contains factors identified by teachers and factors identified by trustees. I understand that this has met acceptance with both sides, and I am pleased about that.
It does include that the arbitrator must consider other factors such as the economic conditions in Manitoba, the division, the compensation of comparable employees and the need to recruit and retain teachers. I think that will help with both sides.
In the interests of time, I will not detail more of the issues in the bill because I believe we will have ample opportunity to debate them in committee. The members have received a copy of the bill, plus the press release which has the details. All members have received those. So, Madam Speaker, at the urging of all members here, I will conclude my remarks so that other bills can now be given second reading.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): I move, seconded by the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), that debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 73--The Construction Industry Wages Amendment Act
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education (Mrs. McIntosh), that Bill 73, The Construction Industry Wages Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les salaries dans l'industrie de la construction), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mr. Toews: This bill follows many years of study, review and consultation with labour, business and other interested parties on the future of The Construction Industry Wages Act. The intent of the bill is to update, streamline and simplify the legislation and, in doing so, will attempt to address a number of problem areas identified by the construction industry. The amendments are intended to make the Act more workable, effective and enforceable.
The amendments I am proposing today remove the house-building sector from the application of the act to better focus and simplify the legislation, remove the routine maintenance, repair and redecoration provisions, but continue to cover the more significant renovation work and construction, clarify that the assembly or installation of equipment or machinery is covered by the act provided that they are integral with the building or structure, increase a range of factors to be considered by the wage boards when recommending wage levels, to clarify and designate transmission line construction and demolition work under the heavy construction schedule, and to provide for public interest input and advice through the establishment of the construction industry advisory committee.
A number of problems have been cited with the public understanding and enforcement of this unique Act. The legislation is extremely complex with a multitude of wage schedules and classifications. Many of the boundaries affecting wage schedules are arbitrary, lacking currency in relation to today's more mobile workforce. Technological changes have long overtaken the more traditional approaches to work. Changing business practices have had impacts on employee/employer relations. There has been a growing concern that the legislation has had a negative effect on recruitment and skill development of young persons in the industry.
Finally, the department has found it increasingly difficult to effectively administer and enforce the act. The review of the act was initiated by the Honourable Darren Praznik in May of 1991 in response to growing concerns that the legislation was out of date and not responding to the changing nature of the construction industry.
A second phase of the consultation was completed in April of 1996. At that time, construction industry stakeholders were given the opportunity to comment and provide advice on proposals to amend the act. The clearest message conveyed through the external review and consultation processes was the desire by the industry to retain the act, along with the widespread recognition that if the legislation is to be effective, it needs to be revised.
Unfortunately, however, the stakeholders did not always agree on how to revise the legislation, and based on feedback and advice received by the stakeholders as a result of a consultation paper that was circulated earlier this year, a number of the initial proposals for change were either dropped or modified.
There are some, I think, significant changes to this act, and I know that in the interests of time I will not go through all of these amendments, but I do wish to state, Madam Speaker, as I have stated publicly, that these amendments are a starting point in what is a very complex and unique piece of legislation. I am looking forward to discussing Bill 73 with the construction industry and perhaps with the opposition critic over the summer and receiving their input and suggestions regarding the proposed amendments or, indeed, additional amendments if the opposition or the industry feels that additional or different amendments are required.
Madam Speaker, the construction industry is an important sector of the Manitoba economy. It is my intention that the changes that have been proposed in the bill will help the industry to grow and prosper and to create better employment opportunities for young Manitobans. I believe, however, that if we work together, both with the opposition critic and myself and the construction industry, that we could even do better for the province. Thank you very much.
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): I move, seconded by the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 76--The Gaming Control and Consequential Amendments Act
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): I move, on behalf of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 76, The Gaming Control and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi sur la Commission de régie du jeu et apportant des modifications corrélatives, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, in March of 1995, our government announced the establishment of a 14-member working group to conduct a review of lottery and gaming policy in Manitoba. The diversity of this group, its interests, its expertise, ensure that the group's recommendations were reflective and representative of all stakeholders in the lottery gaming industry.
Earlier this year, our government publicly released the results of that group's deliberations, and at that time our government announced its intentions to act on the group's recommendations to establish an independent gaming commission to regulate and control gaming in the province.
Madam Speaker, since the first provincial lottery was held in Manitoba 25 years ago in celebration of the province's centennial, the people of our province have benefited from the programs and initiatives that have been funded and supported through lottery and gaming activities.
In 1996, lottery and gaming revenues were used to protect priority programs which have been identified by Manitobans as being critical to the well-being of the people of this province. The provisions outlined in this proposed legislation will ensure existing lottery and gaming structure is strengthened. It is the intent of this proposed legislation to incorporate the best regulatory practices observed in other jurisdictions while creating a framework particularly suited to the manner in which gaming is developed in Manitoba, to emphasize regulatory effectiveness through the most appropriate authority in the positioning of that authority rather than through the scale of its operations, and to retain the status quo for those activities where the integrity of the industry and public confidence are not compromised. The proposed legislation will establish an independent structure to regulate and oversee gaming activities conducted in Manitoba.
* (1510)
The Act will mandate a Gaming Control Commission to monitor public interest in gaming activities and ensure a balanced, responsible approach to gaming. The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation will focus strictly on operational activities and will be regulated by the commission The creation of an independent commission will remove any perceived conflict of interest in carrying out these responsibilities. This will allow the Lotteries Corporation to concentrate on the continued success of its gaming operations and allow the commission to focus on the larger policy and regulatory issues. The new commission will take over some existing responsibilities which currently rest with the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation. At the same time, new functions covering the scope of gaming and related regulatory activities will be included in the commission's mandate.
Lotteries Corporation is currently responsible for licensing, auditing and investigatory requirements of charitable gaming, fund-raising activities in Manitoba. These licensing functions along with hearings, appeals, and complaints in respect of licences or suspensions as well as activities related to First Nations gaming will be transferred to the commission. The commission will take on the responsibility of being the policy advisory on economic and social impacts of gaming independently, as well as through consultation with similar organizations in other jurisdictions, the community and the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba.
It will perform a registration and licensing function relating to suppliers of gaming products and equipment, employees, individuals and businesses that function in Manitoba's gaming industry. Technical compliance requirements and monitoring will also come into the purview of the gaming commission, taking on the responsibility to independently provide additional assurance to the public about the integrity of gaming activities. The commission will employ a team of inspectors to investigate applicants for licences and registration. They will monitor compliance with the act and the regulations and those similar functions that are currently performed by the Lotteries Corporation will be transferred to the commission. Hearings as to appeals of suspension of licences, registration and complaints will now be the responsibility of the commission.
Beyond the working group's recommendations, this bill also recognizes the changes that have also taken place in lottery and gaming industry over the past quarter century, changes that are clearly evident in other Canadian and North American jurisdictions. Gaming has become an accepted form of entertainment for many people. As such, the establishment of the commission in Manitoba is a natural progression in the evolution of the gaming activities and their regulation.
Bill 76 includes some consequential amendments to The Lotteries Corporation Act, and these amendments are fairly minor housekeeping items that are required to ensure The Lotteries Corporation Act and the proposed Gaming Control Act are compatible, and they together serve as strong legislative instruments in the control of the operations of lottery activities in Manitoba.
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 54--The Municipal and Various Acts Amendment Act
Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 54, The Municipal and Various Acts Amendment Act (Loi concernant les municipalités et modifiant diverses dispositions législatives), be now read a second time and be referred to the committee of the House.
Motion presented.
Mr. Derkach: It gives me great pleasure to introduce today for second reading Bill 54, Manitoba's new Municipal Act.
Bill 54, officially known as The Municipal and Various Acts Amendment Act, heralds a new beginning and a new direction for local government. Over the years, The Municipal Act has undergone a series of revisions. However, Bill 54 represents the first time in a hundred years that our municipal legislation has been changed so fundamentally. To meet the challenges and opportunities of a changing world, municipal leaders and officials asked us to look at creating new legislation that would be more consistent with current realities.
The new directions contained in Bill 54 have come about because Manitobans wanted, needed and asked for them and, above all, they had a hand in shaping the new municipal legislation being tabled today.
As you know, the review process began back in 1993. At that time, we appointed an independent review panel and distributed a discussion document for Manitobans to consider. Following were two rounds of public consultations throughout Manitoba, which included the participation of close to 800 Manitobans, who made 200 oral presentations and submitted more than 250 documents for the review panel's consideration.
As you can see, Madam Speaker, we have been diligent in ensuring Manitobans have had an opportunity to tell us about the kind of municipal government they should have in place. Bill 54 is centred on the premise that municipal governments should have greater autonomy and more flexibility to be able to respond to local issues and local needs. Bill 54 provides the legislative framework that guides and directs municipalities while still providing them with the ability to address the challenges of today and tomorrow.
While it would not be possible for me to speak to every aspect of Bill 54 in the time allotted, I would like to focus on some of the highlights of The Municipal Act.
Municipalities will have greater power and authority to form partnerships with other municipalities--local authorities, the province, federal government and private sector. Community economic growth, vital to the future of rural Manitoba, is going to be enhanced with the new act. There is more authority to promote economic development, and municipalities have been given the tools to build and strengthen the rural tax base.
This new act will also help to encourage greater co-operation. Municipalities will have the ability to share taxes with other municipalities and even provide municipal services in other municipalities. Municipalities may also choose to develop areas of expertise which can be shared amongst other neighbouring municipalities. Municipalities will have more control over local finances since we will be reducing the number of instances where provincial approval will be required. Municipalities will have the day-to-day flexibility they need to be able to operate efficiently and effectively. However, we will continue to supervise and monitor financial matters to safeguard the strong financial position of Manitoba's municipalities. The scheme for municipal government will be simplified as a result of Bill 54.
The types of municipalities have been reduced from five to two, urban and rural, all with the same powers and authority. Urban municipalities may also exercise their preference for being called a village or a town with a city designation being limited to populations of at least 7,500 people.
As a result, we could have three more cities in Manitoba. The conversion of local government districts to municipalities acknowledges the ability of LGDs to effectively govern themselves. Population requirements for incorporation of a new municipality has been increased from a minimum of 750 people to a thousand people. The ability to form local urban districts within rural municipalities ensures services to urban-type areas in rural municipalities may be delivered more efficiently and effectively without having to incorporate into a separate urban municipality.
The legislation also gives municipalities administrative flexibility through the broad granting of by-law making powers which vastly reduces the need for legislative detail. Instances where by-laws are needed have been limited, streamlining decision-making at the local government level.
Municipalities will also have the flexibility to choose the size of local council that works best, with a minimum of five and a maximum of 11 councillors. The head of council will now have to vote on any motion, unlike previously when the head of council could only vote in a tie situation.
A new process for handling tax sales balances the interest between property owners and municipalities. Municipalities will be obliged to return excess funds received from the sale of property to the owner.
Madam Speaker, while municipalities will have more authority and flexibility, they will also be more accountable to their constituents. The public's ability to be informed about council activities is enhanced by the adoption of the principle of open local government. More open public meetings, greater access to municipal information and wider applications of municipal council conflict-of-interest provisions are examples of how local government will be more accountable.
Youth will also have a role to play in local government now that councils will have the ability to formally appoint a youth member to their council.
The ability of ratepayers to have a voice in the municipality has been enhanced by the expansion of the eligibility qualifications for candidates of municipal elections. Property owners in all municipalities, provided they are Manitoba citizens as well as local residents, will now be able to run for office.
* (1520)
I have just touched on some of the highlights of Manitoba's new municipal act. Thanks to Manitobans who participated in its formation, I believe Bill 54 places Manitoba at the forefront of local government initiatives.
Once again, Madam Speaker, I want to extend my appreciation and thanks to the review panel, and with your indulgence, I would like to point out that Mr. Henry Wiebe, who is the chair of the panel, and Mr. Jack Nicol, the president of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities are with us here this afternoon as we present this bill for second reading. They were members of this panel, so I extend to them and to the members of the panel, our extreme appreciation for the effort that they made in their participation in a comprehensive and exhaustive process which led to the development of Bill 54.
Upon passage of this legislation, we will have a new act which I think we can all be proud of and will be proud of to take us into the future with courage, confidence and conviction. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): I move, seconded by the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), that debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 49--The Regional Health Authorities and Consequential Amendments Act
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 49, The Regional Health Authorities and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi sur les offices régionaux de la santé et apportant des modifications corrélatives), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to create regional health authorities with the power to administer and provide for health services in specified geographic regions of Manitoba.
Even though my speech is very short, it is historic and very important. This bill is the result of four years of planning and consultation about the renewal of health services in our province. The process began in May 1992 when my predecessor Don Orchard released Quality Health Care for Manitobans, The Action Plan. This document detailed a path to healthier Manitoba communities. It also proposed the establishment of the Northern and Rural Health Advisory Council with a mandate to provide advice on issues related to the renewal of health services in northern and rural Manitoba.
In May 1995, after two years of work as well as extensive public consultations in northern and rural Manitoba, the council delivered its recommendations for governance of northern and rural services. Bill 49, Madam Speaker, reflects the majority of the recommendations made by the council.
This past January 10 regional health associations were incorporated as nonprofit corporations, and their board appointments are being finalized. Bill 49 will continue these bodies as regional health authorities and will give them the power they need to plan and direct health services in their regions. This bill outlines the relationships between the authorities, existing health and hospital boards in rural and northern Manitoba and government.
It sets out a mechanism for existing boards to transfer their operations and assets to the regional health authority if they decide to do so and for two or more authorities to amalgamate if they want to do so in the future. Madam Speaker, the bill allows for appointment of a commissioner to inquire into and make recommendations respecting labour relations matters in the context of transition to regional health authorities.
Finally, Bill 49 contains consequential amendments to seven other acts to bring them into compliance with the bill with respect to regional health authorities. I look forward to the discussions that will flow from the presentation of this legislation and to the decisions that will be made in the future respecting health care in all parts of Manitoba.
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I wonder if, before adjourning the debate, the honourable member would submit to a question of clarification.
Madam Speaker: Does the member for Brandon East have leave to propose a question to the honourable Minister of Health?
Mr. McCrae: Leave.
Madam Speaker: Leave has been granted.
Mr. Leonard Evans: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister whether the regional boards will have their own administrative staff or their own bureaucracy, and will there be a comparable reduction in administrative staff in the head office in the city of Winnipeg?
Mr. McCrae: Yes, and yes. In addition to the second yes, you will probably also see reductions not only in the government but also in the administrative structures of a number of hospital districts throughout the province.
Mr. Leonard Evans: I would move, seconded by the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Committee Changes
Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) for the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), the member for Charleswood (Mr. Ernst) for the member for River East (Mrs. Mitchelson), the member for Brandon West (Mr. McCrae) for the member for Morris (Mr. Pitura) and the member for Roblin-Russell (Mr. Derkach) for the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render).
Motion agreed to.
* * *
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Would you call for second reading of Bill 7, Bill 69 and Bill 74?
DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS
Bill 7--The Medical Amendment Act
Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), The Medical Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi médicale), standing in the name of the honourable member for Transcona.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): I have just a few comments before we are prepared to pass this bill through to committee.
Bill 7, The Medical Amendment Act, is a fairly straightforward piece of legislation with, I believe, the government's intent to make changes to the way that complaints are dealt with for practising physicians in the province of Manitoba.
Madam Speaker, there is a process set up dealing with the complaints committee and an investigations committee, and the bill explains fairly clearly the powers that are set out to each of these committees. Of course, the investigations committee will have censure powers as part of their responsibilities. The investigations committee can also accept voluntary surrender of licences of practising physicians in the province.
It is my understanding, too, that any costs for these investigations would be borne by the member that would have surrendered the licence voluntarily and that for any monitoring cost, it would be ongoing. It is also my understanding that there is a process in place through this legislation that will allow for any appeals of the investigation committee decision to the executive committee and that will allow for some redress for any person of the medical community feeling aggrieved in that they may have been dealt with unfairly.
It is also, in this legislation, fairly clear that where there is a serious risk to the public, the chair of the investigating committee does have the power to direct the registrar of the college to suspend the licence of a college member pending the results of an investigation. It is also my understanding that there would be a hearing to be held within 14 days of a notice of appeal.
It is one of the things that I have had some difficulty with in past years, even prior to coming to this Legislature, that there are several bodies within our province that have the power to undertake powers of investigation and take whatever action they deem fit, all of it, from my understanding, taking place behind closed doors. This process will in some way, through this legislation, allow for the public to be involved in any of the hearings that take place, although I do note that this piece of legislation is permissive in that the investigation committee, through the college, will allow for a decision to be made on whether or not these hearings take place in full public view.
* (1530)
I have some concerns in that these decisions may not be explained to the public, why it is going behind closed doors, but I think the public has a right to know. For any member of the public that is so charged and has to appear before the courts, unless there are some extenuating circumstances, the public has a right to be in attendance in those hearings, and I think, in many cases, the same could apply where there are serious matters to be dealt with by this piece of legislation dealing with members of the college.
There is also the ability to impose a censure or fines should a person be found guilty of some wrongdoing, and, while the fines are not extensive, I think they are in the range of some $10,000. If there is a very serious infraction involved, I think the committee has powers to suspend in some way permanently the licence of the individual found guilty.
With those few words, Madam Speaker, I am prepared, on behalf of my colleague, our critic for Health, to have this piece of legislation passed through to committee and let members of the public come forward and add their comments, should they choose to do so.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Very briefly on Bill 7, The Medical Amendment Act, we understand that there appears to be some will to see this particular bill go to the committee and possibly third reading and, ultimately, even possibly receiving Royal Assent prior to session. We do not want to prevent the opportunity of it to go to committee unless we hear otherwise in terms of strong comments, in terms of why this bill should not see passage prior to the end of June, and then we will be quite content to allow it to go through the process. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 7. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Madam Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.
Bill 69--The Real Estate Brokers Amendment Act
Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ernst), Bill 69, (The Real Estate Brokers Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les courtiers en immeubles), standing in the name of the honourable member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson). Is there leave to permit the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable member for Rupertsland?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Madam Speaker: No. Leave has been denied.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, this is one of those pieces of legislation which we believe ultimately is going to have the potential of seeing some of the older inner city areas, of the city of Winnipeg in particular, where we will see some sort of revitalization through monies that are going to be allocated for renovations to homes. On the surface it is a bill which we do not have any problem with, we are quite supportive of, and we would like to see this bill go to committee.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, I just have a few words on this piece of legislation. It is our understanding that the government wants to move this piece of legislation through to committee to allow members of the public to come forward, for those who may have an interest in doing so, and we are prepared to have this bill move to committee to allow members of the public to come before committee.
So, with those few words, Madam Speaker, we are prepared to allow this bill to pass.
Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is adjourned debate on second reading of Bill 69. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Madam Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.
Bill 74--The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment Act
Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey), Bill 74, (The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la loi sur la Cour du Bank de la Reine), standing in the name of the honourable member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). Is there leave to permit the bill to remain standing?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Madam Speaker: No. Leave has been denied.
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, the purpose of this bill, I understand, is to increase the number of judges available in the Family Division of the Court of Queen's Bench while reducing by one the number of judges available in the general division. The request to pass this legislation came initially from the bench of Queen's Bench largely in response to a problem of increasing backlogs in the Family Division.
It is our understanding that pretrial conferences are not available until the end of August, that trials are not available until November, and according to the Associate Chief Justice of the Family Division, as of May 30 the Family Division is setting trials of one week or more into the middle of January 1997.
Clearly, Madam Speaker, this is a serious issue, particularly when you consider that the matters before the Family Division are matters of great emotion and deal with very difficult circumstances for family members, particularly for children. When we are dealing with matters of custody, maintenance, divorce and separation, it is important that these matters be dealt with expeditiously as it is stressful enough that there be family breakup and even more stressful that one must resort to the court system and the confrontation inherent in that system, let alone have to deal with the backlogs that we understand now go to January of 1997. We do not recognize, though, that the solution to backlogs in Queen's Bench or any other court can be dealt with solely by increasing the number of judges. It is our view that increasing the number of judges may provide a short-term solution to backlogs. Therefore, we do not question the necessity, at least in the short term, of this legislation; but, in the long term, the way to deal with the backlogs requires a more systemic approach.
It is necessary to re-examine, for example, the restriction on the cases that go to Small Claims Court. It is necessary to rethink the role of mediation in settling disputes in our community, particularly in family issues that do not involve violence. It is necessary to look at the role of arbitration, particularly when we have very costly, time-consuming battles raging between large corporations, for example, regarding matters that really are between two parties, and yet those disputes can only be settled with the infusion of great taxpayer monies. We have to rethink whether the public and taxpayer money should be going to the extent they are today to the settlement of these disputes between corporate interests. We have to look at arbitration clauses and commercial agreements. We have to look at alternative dispute mechanism as is taking place in Ontario, where they have established on a pilot basis a facility to encourage out-of-court settlements, and we have to look at what Saskatchewan is doing.
I understand that the task force on civil court reform is engaged in some of that examination now. Of course, we do not have high expectations that the recommendations of that report will lead to anything. There is a long history of reports sitting in the Minister of Justice's (Mrs. Vodrey) office. I will not get into the long list right now.
We have to look at the role of preliminary inquiries in the criminal system at Queen's Bench. Now it is our understanding that reducing by one the number of judges in the general division is not going to increase the backlogs or reduce the ability of that court to deal with cases on a timely basis, and it is on that understanding that we gain from the minister, who advises us in writing that she is informed by her officials and as well the associate chief justice, that the civil and criminal matters in the general division will be dealt with on a timely basis. She writes that at the present time the general division is providing at least two judges to the Family Division each week. Upon the appointment of an additional Family Division judge, it may be that the number of general division judges to be supplied to the Family Division will be reduced by one; that is, it is critical that, by solving a problem in one division, we not create a problem in the other division. So, on that understanding, we accept this bill.
* (1540)
Finally, with regard to the urgency and why this bill is being moved quickly, the associate chief justice writes that the early passage of this bill will enable the court to have a new Family Division judge in place in Brandon for the start of the fall session of the court on September 1 and transfer Justice Duncan from Brandon to Winnipeg prior to then. Of course, the urgency is also dictated by the impact of backlogs on families that are in distress.
It is also our understanding that federal Justice Minister Allan Rock has made representations to the Justice minister of Manitoba that he will indeed appoint the additional judge on the passage of this legislation, and we hope to see that.
With that, based on the information available to us, we agree to this legislation and we support its urgency, and we are of the view that this should go to committee at the earliest opportunity. Thank you.
Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is adjourned debate, second reading debate, on Bill 74, The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Madam Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.
House Business
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I have a number of items of House business which will require some consideration.
Firstly, I wonder if there might be leave for the Committee of Supply to sit in three sections this afternoon, with Friday rules applying after 5:30 p.m.?
Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House to sit in three sections of Committee of Supply this afternoon, with Friday rules to apply after 5:30 p.m.? Agreed? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: In that case, it would be the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism in Room 255 until 6 p.m.; Justice, the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and the Status of Women in the House until 6 p.m.; and the Department of Urban Affairs, the Department of Housing and the Seniors Directorate in Room 254 until 5:30 p.m.
I wonder, Madam Speaker, if there is leave for Committee of Supply to sit in one section this evening--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Can we get clarification, please, from the honourable government House leader. I think there is some concern relative to the hours identified. It is my understanding that in Room 255, committee will sit until 6 p.m. to consider Industry, Trade and Tourism; in the Chamber, to continue the Estimates of Justice, followed by Aboriginal Inquiry and the Status of Women until 6 p.m.; and then in Room 254, I heard until 5:30 p.m. and I think that is--[interjection] Okay, Urban Affairs and Housing in Room 254 until 5:30 p.m.
Mr. Ernst: That is correct.
Madam Speaker: Agreed? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: I wonder if there is leave for the Committee of Supply to sit in one section this evening, with Friday rules to apply?
Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House to sit in one section of Committee of Supply this evening?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, for clarification, I assume the Chamber?
Mr. Ernst: That is, Madam Speaker, with Friday rules to apply.
Madam Speaker: With Friday rules to apply, but in the Chamber?
Mr. Ernst: Yes, in the Chamber.
Madam Speaker: In the Chamber. Okay. Leave? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: In that case, Madam Speaker, it would be the Department of Urban Affairs, the Department of Housing and the Department of Seniors starting at 7:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
Madam Speaker: Committee of Supply, this evening starting at 7:30 p.m. to consider the Department of Urban Affairs, Housing and the Seniors Directorate. Leave? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, I wonder if there might be leave to waive Private Members' Business tomorrow.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to waive Private Members' Business tomorrow? Leave? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: I wonder if there might be leave, Madam Speaker, for tomorrow morning for the Committee of Supply to sit in three sections from 9 a.m. until 12 p.m., with Friday rules to apply?
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to sit in three sections of Committee of Supply tomorrow morning, with Friday rules to apply? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: From 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.
Madam Speaker: From 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: In that case, it would be Industry, Trade and Tourism in Room 255; Justice, Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and the Status of Women, one following the completion of the other, in the Chamber; and in Room 254, it will be the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.
Madam Speaker: The three sections of Committee of Supply, as previously agreed to, tomorrow will sit in the following departments: In Room 255, Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism; in the Chamber, Justice followed by the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and then the Status of Women; and in Room 254, Culture, Heritage and Citizenship. Leave? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, by leave, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) be appointed the Chair of the third committee for this afternoon and tomorrow.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, I wonder if there would be leave to complete all outstanding Supply resolutions by whichever committee is deemed necessary by 12 noon tomorrow.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to complete all outstanding resolutions in the various committees by noon tomorrow?
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, just two points: One is, I understand there may be some difficulty in going beyond 5:30 in Justice. Perhaps that can be dealt with in the committee. But in terms of completion of Estimates, there is agreement to complete each department but not concurrence by noon. As long as that is understood, that concurrence would not be completed.
Madam Speaker: Just for clarification, the honourable member for Thompson, I believe Justice was to go till six. [interjection] Leave had been granted? [interjection] It was Urban Affairs and Housing. So is there leave?
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, if I may, the intent is to clear up all of the outstanding departmental Supply resolutions that may be outstanding. There are some that simply require passage of the resolutions. So rather than detail each of the departments, any outstanding ones such as the Leg. Assembly, Sport, Decentralization, things of that nature, will be required to have resolutions passed in the Committee of Supply, and we would do that by noon tomorrow.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, I wonder if there might be leave to have the Law Amendments committee sit concurrently with the House this evening.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to have the Standing Committee on Law Amendments sit concurrently with Committee of Supply this evening? [agreed]
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, I would then call the Committee on Law Amendments to consider Bills 7, 69 and 74 this evening at 7:30 p.m. in Room 255.
Madam Speaker: The Standing Committee on Law Amendments will sit this evening commencing at 7:30 p.m. in Room 255 to consider Bills 7, 69 and 74. Is there leave?
An Honourable Member: What time?
Madam Speaker: 7:30 p.m. Leave?
Mr. Ernst: There is no leave required for that.
Madam Speaker: Agreed? [agreed]
Committee Changes
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): I move, seconded by the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: Broadway (Mr. Santos) for Burrows (Mr. Martindale).
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Ernst: I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.
* (1550)
Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) in the Chair for the Department of Urban Affairs, and Housing; the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson) in the Chair for the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism; and the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the Department of Justice.