Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today 15 senior officials from the national and provincial governments of South Africa. This delegation is in Canada under the sponsorship of Canada's International Development Research Centre and has been undertaking a study of intergovernmental relations within the Canadian context. Ours is the only provincial capital which the delegation will be visiting prior to returning to South Africa.

Amongst the delegation is Mr. Raymond Motsepe, member of the Standing Committee on Local Government from the Northwest province, which is twinned with the province of Manitoba.

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this morning.

Also seated in the public gallery this morning, we have eighty-one Grade 9 students from Garden City Collegiate under the direction of Ms. Donna Babick. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this morning.

I would like to also ask all honourable members to draw their attention to the table and assist me in welcoming JoAnn McKerlie-Korol, our Journals Clerk, to the table. Joann will be on duty at the table every second Friday to enhance her procedural knowledge and to provide the House with a backup in the event of illness or emergency.

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you.

* (1010)

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, there are long-term consequences to the policies of this government, because what has happened over the period of this government is that we have created two Manitobans. There are those who have jobs and those increasingly who are in part-time and intermittent work and whose real wages are falling year by year. There are those who have been made poorer by the cuts to welfare and those who have been made richer by the sale of public property. There are those who can afford to purchase education and those who cannot afford the user fees, increasingly a part of public education as a result of his continuous cuts. There are in my riding people who can no longer feed themselves and whom I hear from on a monthly basis from St. Matthews Church.

I want to ask the Premier to recognize the long-term damage to the province and particularly to the city of Winnipeg that is being sustained by his policies and to ask him to tell the House when he is going to do that U-turn, when he is going to rebuild the increasingly deep pockets of poverty that report after report are describing across this province.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I am glad that the member for Wolseley has cited the long-term consequences of policy decisions that are made, because that, of course, is in essence what this government has had to deal with with respect to all of the things that have happened since we have been in office. We came into office having to deal with the consequences of a government that had tripled the net provincial debt and more than quintupled the amount of money that was transferred away from programs and then was spent on interest, interest on the debt that they had run up, the New Democrats, for six and a half sorry years in this province.

So, in having to deal with that, Madam Speaker, what did happen--and, of course, I have cited Free Press articles in 1988, early '88, that talked about this transference of money away from programs, away from being spent on health, on education, on social services, and onto interest that was being paid to bondholders in Zurich, in New York, in Tokyo, in London and all over the world. Those are the kinds of consequences, long-term consequences, of the terrible decisions that were made by New Democrats when they had a chance to make decisions in this government and in this province. Those long-term consequences, of course, have resulted in the decisions that we have had to make, the difficult choices we have had to make. That, of course, is what that member for Wolseley stands for--stands for spending money on interest, stands for spending money that goes to the people in Zurich and Tokyo and all the financial capitals of the world and not on services to people. That, we think, is a terrible choice that they made. We are making better choices.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, the tragedy is that we have a government who wants to live in the past and not deal with the poverty on its--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member, to pose her question now.

Ms. Friesen: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Report after report on the government's desk tells us of the increasing burden that is falling on schools and teachers, the agencies which are in daily contact with the children who are facing the consequences of this government's policy. Yet the government is actually reducing the proportion of government expenditures on public education year by year.

I want to ask the Premier to make a straightforward and simple commitment to the people of Manitoba that those schools which daily are dealing with the burdens of the poor can be supported and that the increase to public education will begin to rebuild public education across Manitoba. It is a simple commitment and it is small step, but it is an important one.

* (1015)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I have always said that the public school system is a fundamental cornerstone to building a stronger future for this province. I am proud to say that I am a product of the public school system, that my children are products of the public school system, that the public school system does things for our society that are absolutely fundamental to our future goals to be achieved.

Madam Speaker, what we are doing is ensuring that we can build a sustainable future in every respect. The member opposite talks about reductions in spending, but we know from the figures that are available to us that, while the New Democrats were in office, the proportion of money that went to education in this province actually reduced between 1981 and 1988 when they were in office. We know that the proportion of our budget that goes to education has been increasing since we have been in office, because we are now starting to make that transference away from spending the money on interest and now into having the money invested in the future growth of our people and the development of our people.

Madam Speaker, we will continue that process. We will continue that process because, above all, we are working on building a healthier economy. That is why we, in the last month, had all-time record levels of employment in this province. That is why last year, for instance, our average weekly wage went up. That is why the disposable income keeps going up for people, because we are taking less away from them in taxes and having more money in their pockets to be spent. Those are the kinds of positive long-term changes that we are making.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, I would like the Premier--who is prepared on the one hand to argue outside this House that the problems facing Winnipeg are as a result of the influx of, I think he said, poorly educated aboriginal people and on the other hand wants to boast

about his low unemployment numbers--will the Premier begin to show some intellectual honesty and to include all Manitobans in his unemployment statistics and particularly aboriginal Manitobans?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, we believe that the best social program is a job, and that is what we are working on. We are creating jobs and opportunities for people. Our efforts are being invested in growth and wealth creation that creates jobs and money in the pockets of individuals so that their family circumstances can be improved, so that they have access to the kinds of things and quality of life that we all want for all Manitobans.

That is why, as I say, last month we had all-time record levels of employment in this province. That is why our economic growth numbers for the past three years have remained in the upper echelon of Canadian provinces. That is why the capital investment in our province has grown for now this will be the sixth consecutive year, the only province in Canada that can say that, because those investments create jobs and opportunities, things that we know will answer many of the criticisms that members opposite are putting forward, because we know that, despite the fact that they may want to encourage people to continue to strive for welfare and social programs, we are continuing to encourage people to strive for jobs and long-term security and get off the dependency that New Democrats preach and get onto independence and self-sufficiency, because that is what they really want.

* (1020)

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, in October we raised major problems at Holiday Haven Nursing Home. The former minister promised us at the end of November there would be a solution. In December a report was done on the deficiencies at Holiday Haven Nursing Home. Extraordinarily, in a letter to me the minister indicated he did not have a copy of the report done in December chronicling the difficulties at Holiday Haven Nursing Home. Someone is lying, or someone is covering up something at Holiday Haven.

My question to the minister is: Did the department have a copy of the report done in December and fail to act upon it, consequently resulting in a death, or did the department not have a copy of the report, which indicates gross negligence and incompetence on the part of the Department of Health in not having a copy of the report for an institution we pay $4 million a year for?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, first of all, the member for Kildonan draws a host of conclusions without having put together, I think, all of the facts or considered other options. First of all, with respect to the report, the report, as I understand it, that was commissioned by Holiday Haven is the property of Holiday Haven. Only they have the legal ability to release that. Having said that, however, our department, the Department of Health, was aware of difficulties there, was working with the people there. When those were brought to my attention as the new Minister of Health, certainly when we had an incident--and the member makes a conclusion that the death of that particular individual was the result of issues involving care at Holiday Haven. That is yet to be determined by the Medical Examiner, and it is the subject of an inquest. But having said that, we acted, I acted on this very quickly to put a new management team in place. That management team has been in place for two years, and their goal is to work toward accrediting that facility.

Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister explain how it is that we pay this private facility $4 million a year and have done so year after year, Madam Speaker? We supply the patients; we supply the regulations; we regulate it; we look after it. There are deficiencies raised and a report is done, and the Department of Health washes its hands and says they cannot get access to a copy of a report done on deficiencies at a home we pay $4 million for. That is gross negligence or incompetence or a cover-up.

Mr. Praznik: It is none of the issues or none of the claims that the member for Kildonan makes. What it simply is is the proprietary right for the person who owns that report. But having said that, the Ministry of Health still has a responsibility as the licensing body to ensure that the facility is properly managed. They were aware of complaints, they have worked with that facility, Madam Speaker, the end result of which was the decision of myself as minister to ask them to voluntarily give up control of that facility to a new management team, which they did. If the questions of the member for Kildonan flag one problem in our existing system, it is the powers that the minister has and the department has in licensing facilities and the requirements for information. That is a difficulty and one I intend to address.

Mr. Chomiak: Is the minister, who is privatizing portions of home care, who is privatizing portions of lab service, who is privatizing home oxygen service, saying if there are problems in those functions under those private companies, then those private companies have the proprietary right to keep that information in their hands, and we who pay all the money for those services and the patients who are affected do not have rights to get at that information? Is that what the minister is saying in his privatization scheme, because that is in fact what he is saying?

Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Speaker, the member for Kildonan actually is quite right in terms of the limited power of the government and of a minister in conducting the operations. I do not intend to offer that as an excuse. It is a deficiency in the way we govern systems.

Just this week, I dealt with an issue at the Dauphin hospital. The Dauphin hospital at one point, because of decisions by its governors, could have been in a position of not being able to make payroll, and the power for me as minister to step into that to ensure the safe operation of the Dauphin hospital, as I discovered, was very, very limited. The reason is we are living with a situation that we as a Legislature fund these facilities, and yet the scheme which governs them in most cases provides us with extremely limited powers with respect to those who provide the services. That is one of the deficiencies that we are attempting to correct as we move into regionalization. The member for Kildonan is quite right. It is a problem.

* (1025)

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, I have a new question. How does the minister explain to the people of Manitoba that when questions are raised about proprietary private-run homes, of which there is a proliferation under this government, and people have concerns and there is no appeal mechanism and there is no response, how can Manitobans be assured that this government--now they have been in power for nine years. They have had report after report after report on personal care homes. The minister said trust me, trust me. We have trusted this government and three ministers for nine years, and still we have the same problems. How can we have any assurance that patients will be protected and will have the right to have that information, and does that not justify the reason for a provincial public inquiry into personal care homes?

An Honourable Member: Defend the patient, not the private owners.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) from his seat says, "Defend the patient, not the private owners." I could not agree more, and that is why in a number of issues that have come to light, it is not just with proprietary homes.

The Dauphin General Hospital brought to my attention this week the limited powers in legislation for a minister who, responsible to this Legislature that votes almost $2 billion a year for health care--the limited power and control we have over the institutions that provide it is really phenomenal. Part of the exercise of moving into regionalization and part of the powers--and I will be bringing shortly another piece of amendment legislation to Bill 49 which will correct some of those deficiencies. The members opposite rightly flag an issue in terms of the limited powers of ministers and I intend to correct them.

Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister assure this House that he will bring forward legislation, which we are prepared to pass on Monday, that will grant those powers to the minister? We are prepared to pass that legislation, if he will guarantee that he will have a public inquiry into the goings-on at Holiday Haven and other nursing homes in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, as we have said on this side of the House before, let us await the results of the inquest of the Medical Examiner. I think that is a very important piece of information we require with respect to Holiday Haven, which is the basis on which he makes his request for an inquiry. In the last while, I think a number of issues have been flagged in terms of deficiencies in the ability to ensure that patient safety is there, and it is not just in proprietary homes.

I discovered this week, because of issues in Dauphin where it was a possibility that the Dauphin General Hospital would not have been able to maintain their line of credit and their ability to financially function might have been in doubt, that my ability as a Minister of Health would have only been to deny their licence. We would have had no ability to move in to ensure patient safety, and that is a deficiency in our legislation. It might come as a surprise to the member for Kildonan, but that deficiency has been in our legislation for decades. It was not corrected by the Schreyer government in the '70s, the Lyon government, the Pawley government. Now we hope to correct it.

* (1030)

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, if there is not a cover-up of information or lies going on about Holiday Haven Nursing Home, if that is not the case, how does the minister explain writing to me saying on February 3 he was going to be in receipt of information from Holiday Haven Nursing Home outlining recommendations that would be done, and in another subsequent letter to me dated April 1, said on February 3, we received recommendations from Holiday Haven talking about how those should be improved? Is that not justification for a complete provincial inquiry, not just a limited inquest that is covering up--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, much of the contents of that report, which the member for Kildonan in this House indicated some time ago that he was aware of recommendations, many of those recommendations in that report were made available orally to our staff. The fact of the matter, to my regret as well as to his, is that there is a proprietary right in the actual report. In attempting to obtain it to table, as members requested, my staff discovered that there is a proprietary right. Do I believe that is right or wrong? It does not matter. The fact of the matter is, at that time, that nursing home has a proprietary right in that particular document.

Members opposite raise issues about control of records and security of records. This is one where a legal right exists. Do I think that is appropriate? No, I do not. Are we going to take some steps to ensure that we have access to information for publicly funded facilities that are in the public interest? Of course, and that is really what the issue is about.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, clearly the SmartHealth contract of October 1996 gives SmartHealth the right to sell records and information to third parties, despite the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) statement yesterday naming the province as trustee of records and information. I would like to ask the Minister of Health: What are the protections afforded Manitobans? What is the range of records and information that can be sold?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): With respect to the specific provision, before I give the member a detailed answer she is obviously entitled to, I would like the opportunity to take it as notice and check specifically to see if that in fact is what is indicated and the context in which that is being provided. But I can tell her that it is clearly not the policy, intention or commitments of this government to make personal health information to be owned by SmartHealth, the Royal Bank or any other provider. The Premier has indicated that clearly in this House, as have I. I think the public of Manitoba, when they see our privacy legislation tabled shortly when the final work is done on it, will be able to rest assured that that will be the case.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, in the absence of any privacy legislation, I want to ask the minister to define confidential information as outlined in Section 4.8 of the SmartHealth contract.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the schedule for any part of the SmartHealth program coming on line, in which that information would be on it, will take place after and only after this Legislative Assembly has passed privacy legislation.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, is it not time for this minister to admit that proceeding as he has done with SmartHealth before privacy legislation is truly putting the cart before the horse and risking the confidentiality and privacy of Manitobans?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, absolutely not. If we followed the suggestion of the New Democratic Party, what we would have is probably a piece of legislation that enacted a host of principles that might not even be applicable in working terms for the kind of system that is being developed. The nature of an information system, whether it be a paper system as we now live with or an electronic system, by and large determines the kind of governance it needs to ensure privacy. There is a process here that has us developing the framework of SmartHealth, knowing what the nuances and the structure of that will be. The privacy piece and the privacy legislation that is absolutely critical to this project is being developed around it, so it will be applicable to the kind of technological system SmartHealth is building. If we had done it the other way, quite frankly, it might not have worked.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Health. The Provinces of Quebec, Ontario and B.C. have acknowledged the importance of Betaseron as a drug that has helped individuals suffering from the crippling disease of MS. I asked the minister a question a few weeks ago in terms of what the Department of Health was prepared to do with respect to it. I received a letter that was dated back in December in which it says--from the department--your submission regarding Betaseron has been reviewed by the Manitoba Drug Standards and Therapeutics Committee and has not been recommended for inclusion in the Pharmacare benefits list.

Madam Speaker, my question to the Minister of Health is: Is the government seriously looking at overturning that recommendation, so individuals that are suffering from this crippling disease will have reason to have some hope?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): I know the member has raised this in the House before, and he is quite correct that the committee of experts, who give recommendation to myself as minister on these matters, has recommended it not be listed.

Madam Speaker, in the provinces that he has outlined, their listing is for only very limited strict-criteria cases. I, at this stage of the game, have not decided to either accept or reject that particular offer. I have asked to see if we can determine from those provinces, where they have approved it on a limited basis, if it is producing some result that overcomes the material that is available on the literature.

Madam Speaker, if this particular drug is one that does provide a benefit, more than just an extremely limited benefit for its cost, it is certainly one we are going to want to consider, so I have asked for that kind of analysis.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would then specifically ask the minister: Given that he has made reference to it, is the government prepared then to accept individuals on a case-by-case basis, given that there have been other provinces that have done just that? Will he make that commitment this morning?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, let us understand that the recommendation and the review of this particular drug, this new drug, is that it does not arrest the progress of the disease, of MS. It does not cure it. It does not extend a life. It may, from what I understand, reduce one incident in three years, which is some distress obviously to the people involved. Its estimated cost for treatment, and I understand it requires injection every second day, is in the neighbourhood of about $50,000 for that particular time. We want to ensure that it is a drug that has some value to the people being involved, and I think it is very important.

As I said, three provinces are providing it on a very limited basis. We want to see what result is there. If we were to agree to do that, we would have to have criteria, and that is one thing I want to establish. I want to make sure that it is a drug that actually has some benefit to the people who are receiving it.

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Education. Given that we are in the same situation this year at the Collège de St. Boniface for the funding and cutbacks, will the minister advise this House today: What is the status of a long-term plan in the funding for the collège this year and on the long-term plan?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): The question is timely, because we have received notice from Ottawa that after long and arduous debate and lobbying--and I indicate to the member for St. Boniface that I appreciate his ardent lobbying, because I have heard of the fairly aggressive stand that he took recently. I appreciate that, as I appreciate the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) intervention with the Prime Minister. We do now have the federal commitment to honour its obligation in fighting for St. Boniface and commitment both provincially and federally to put in place long-term funding arrangements, so my thanks to all of those who assisted in that lobbying effort: the member for St. Boniface, the Premier and others who worked so hard.

* (1040)

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, in March of 1989 and again in 1995, this government signed agreements with Repap, virtually giving away the company finally for $20 million, agreements the province has never made Repap live up to, and yet Repap Manitoba is the one consistently profitable part of that troubled company's operations.

Madam Speaker, why has the Premier allowed a profitable company to evade its responsibilities to the point where its future is now threatened by the unprofitable elements elsewhere in that chain?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the member opposite, of course, with his limited knowledge of finance and business, chooses some very, very narrow points on which to base his question. He totally ignores the fact that Repap took over a chronically unprofitable Crown corporation that had in fact under New Democratic management lost as much as $32 million a year.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable First Minister, to complete his response.

Mr. Filmon: Thank you, Madam Speaker. That company had lost under public ownership, under New Democratic management, as much as $32 million a year. Repap, in taking over the corporation, has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades of all sorts of areas, certainly significant upgrade to the environmental side. Under the New Democrats, they had engaged in just virtually an unlicensed ability to pollute over decades, and all of that was cleaned up. Investments were made by Repap and in the consequence of that Repap did create, firstly, long-term stability for the jobs. Again, under previous public ownership of all political stripes, the employment levels kept going up and down and, in many cases, there were layoffs of hundreds of people. This has become stablilized. There has been major investment made and, yes, we believe that it has resulted in them being a profitable part of the Repap operation.

Those things are all to the benefit of the community of The Pas and, indeed, to the communities of Manitoba, because the jobs are in the wood supply, the jobs are in the town, the jobs are throughout the economy. Those are positive things and, in that respect, we believe it is important for us to continue to work with the ownership of that company to try and ensure that those jobs remain secure and that the economic opportunities for Manitoba remain secure both for the workers and indeed for all Manitobans.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, the fact remains that his government has not enforced any of the agreements that they made with this company.

My question for the Premier: What steps, specifically, has this government taken to protect the current jobs and operations of Repap in The Pas during the last critical six months when this company has clearly been in serious difficulty? What specific things have been done to protect this operation?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I think that I should caution--you know, when the cat's away, the mice will play. The member opposite, his Leader is not here today. We had an extensive discussion--[interjection]

Madam Speaker, I withdraw any reference to the presence or absence of any member in the House.

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable First Minister.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, even though the Premier may have withdrawn that reference--and I want to assure the Premier, by the way, that our Leader is not in Davos, Switzerland, or in any international location. But, Madam Speaker, you are allowing the First Minister a great deal of latitude in, should I suggest, not answering questions.

I would like to ask, Madam Speaker, if you would enforce Beauchesne Citation 417 that says: "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." The Premier was asked a very serious question about Repap. I would appreciate if you would enforce the rules of this House to ensure that all members follow the rules, particularly members on the government side and the Premier in particular.

Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order.

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I think the First Minister, without any prompting or being requested to do so, withdrew a remark which inadvertently was a breach of the rules. That gesture, I think, demonstrates the efforts of the First Minister not to promote the kind of disorder that the honourable member for Thompson is speaking of.

Madam Speaker: I thank all honourable members for their advice. I will take the point of order under advisement and report back to the House.

Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, to respond to the question.

Mr. Filmon: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I appreciate--[interjection]

Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, to quickly complete his response.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the point that I make is that we did have this discussion in Estimates the other evening, and the member's Leader is well aware that we are involved in ongoing discussions with Repap as well as with others, who are vitally interested, from the community in perhaps looking at ways in which they can secure that company as a Manitoba company for the long-term future for the benefit of the employees and those people in The Pas and surrounding area. We are very much involved in the process, and if the member just wants to make cheap political points, he can carry on with his discussion. If he wants to be of assistance, he might talk to his Leader to find out what his attitude is to this.

Mr. Sale: What we want to do, Madam Speaker, is preserve the jobs.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Will the government today commit to establishing a liaison group representing the workers, the aboriginal and nonaboriginal community, the company and elected representatives to maximize the chances of protecting the jobs and the investment in northern Manitoba and to ensure that all options are canvassed to make a positive future for this company?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, there already is in existence a group of people from the company with whom we are dealing with respect to attempting to secure the long-term future. They have the support of the community, and they have the support of the people in the area who are informed of the issue, unlike the member for Crescentwood.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): My questions are for the Minister of Transportation.

Prairie farmers have lost millions of dollars this year from backlogs of grain due to the failure of the rail companies to haul grain on time to the West Coast. The federal government, however, has decided to award these same railways an additional $15 million in freight rates.

Has the minister appealed this decision, and if so, can he table any response he received from the federal minister over this decision?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Well, Madam Speaker, the member relates to two particular issues that have happened in the transportation industry. One certainly was--serious problems that happened over the winter of '96-97 that have seriously affected the rural and farm economy of western Canada and particularly Manitoba. In that respect, the four western ministers have written the federal Minister of Transport asking for a significant inquiry into all the events that took place and to try and find solutions to prevent it in the future.

I have also had conversations with the SEO group, which is senior executive officers of all the people in the grain transportation and handling system, and they are prepared to come back together with the committee they had in place about two years ago. I have supported that initiative and asked the federal minister to be supportive of allowing that to happen to find solutions to the problems of the past year.

With regard to the specific application the member talks about to the Canadian transportation agency, again, the four western provinces together hired a consultant to present our case in front of that committee, that agency. That presentation was made during the process of the hearings.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): What action has the minister taken on the announcement by CPR that it wants to dump the Arborg subdivision?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, the member must be aware that the Canadian Transportation Act was changed rather significantly a year ago--

An Honourable Member: The Liberals.

Mr. Findlay: A Liberal government, yes. The four provinces in western Canada certainly again made representation that there were serious consequences of this, but the federal government in their wisdom saw fit to pass the legislation. Now the outcome of that legislation is taking place. Clearly, there are options for communities to buy those rail lines. There are opportunities for short lines to be set up to operate those lines. Those analyses are happening by the players, and they are making the decisions as they see fit.

Mr. Jennissen: Can the minister give us an update on the status of the Steep Rock, Cowan, Irwood Subdivision that CN is trying to dump?

Mr. Findlay: We have made presentation to CN that they package together all the rail lines that they want to abandon, with the idea of forming one unique unit of opportunity for a short line operator. Unfortunately, CN has declined that request.

* (1050)

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour. The government of Manitoba is holding preferred shares in McKenzie Seeds for up to seven years in order to ensure that operation remains in Brandon during that period. Since the agreement with Regal Greetings and Gifts has been signed in December of 1994, the president and two vice-presidents who were resident in Brandon have left the company.

I would simply like to ask the minister, and I hope I get a straightforward answer, can the minister tell us if and when these three senior positions will be filled?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): I would suggest to the member that he could contact that corporation and they would probably advance that information to him.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I have a supplementary question of the minister who I understand is protecting the taxpayers' interests in this matter, holding preferred shares on behalf of the people of Manitoba to protect those jobs. I would therefore think he would have this information.

Will the minister confirm that the major customers of McKenzie Seeds are in Toronto and that this is the reason why the marketing and sales office has been moved from Brandon to Toronto?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): The McKenzie company does business right across Canada. When we last discussed this in the House in 1994, the information provided to me at that time was that they had equal amounts of business in eastern Canada and western Canada.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Can the minister advise whether it is correct that a new position called new product manager is now being established in Toronto?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): I have indicated to the member that staffing decisions that the member would like to have information about can be obtained, I am sure, from the company. McKenzie Seeds has always had sales staff across Canada in places like Toronto and Calgary, and I assume that they will continue to have staff in those regional offices.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, indications are that the Department of Agriculture intends to distribute the elk which they captured over the last two years. When the regulations were made public, there was a loophole that allowed those people who were holding elk without permits to register them. The minister gave his word to the Manitoba Elk Growers Association that this loophole would be closed before they proceeded with the sales.

Can the minister indicate whether the changes to the regulations have been made and those people who were holding elk without permit will not be able to register them?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): I can assure the honourable member that all parties that have registered or indicated--reported, not registered but indicated--to the departments that they have elk in their possession will be dealt with in an equitable way. That will correspond to the formula that will be established for the sale of the elk that have been captured from the wild and be made available to those new entries into the program.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.