Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon twenty-seven Grade 5 students from the Lord Roberts Community School under the direction of Mrs. Terry Welch. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford).

We also have twenty Grade 11 students from Gordon Bell High School under the direction of Ms. Anne Monk. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen).

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

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the acting Acting Premier. Media reports last week confirmed questions that we have been raising in this House that over the last five months the control of the Manitoba Telephone System through stock sales is slipping from the ownership of Manitobans.

I would like to ask the Acting Premier or the minister responsible for telecommunications: What is the present percentage of shares owned by Manitobans, and do they meet the test of the alleged promise that was made a year ago?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, I guess the minister responsible for telecommunications.

Madam Speaker, Manitobans very vigorously bought MTS shares when they were offered. Manitobans also have the right, any shareholder has the right to do what they want to do with their shares. I am very pleased to see that the share value of MTS has held very, very well since the shares were issued so that Manitobans have a very good investment and that Manitoba Telephone System is doing exceedingly well in the telecommunications competitive marketplace.

Mr. Doer: The minister did not answer the question. Last year the minister, when he made his announcement, said that he and the government will ensure that decisions continue to be made in Manitoba by Manitobans for Manitobans.

I would like to ask the minister: How is he going to ensure that this phone system continues to be owned by Manitoba shareholders, consistent with his promise, or was that just another promise like the promise they made in the last election campaign that they would not sell the Manitoba Telephone System?

Mr. Findlay: When the bill was introduced, it was identified in the bill that the majority of the board of directors would be Manitobans, and they are, currently are, and after the annual meeting they still are. But the shares went on the marketplace, and people have the right to do what they want to do. It does not preclude Manitobans from buying more shares than they currently own today. The actual amount the member wants to know, I do not have that information at my fingertips. It may be available; it may not be.

Mr. Doer: The government, in Hansard, the Premier (Mr. Filmon), in Hansard, the Minister responsible for Telephones, in Hansard, said that they would ensure, they would guarantee that the telephone system was owned by Manitobans for Manitobans.

How can we trust this government to deal with the Manitoba Telephone System when they have no way of keeping their promise that they made last year; they have no way of keeping their promise that they made in the election campaign, and why should anybody trust this government in dealing with Manitoba Hydro after all the betrayals we had from this government on the Manitoba Telephone System?

Mr. Findlay: We said that the shares would be made--the majority of them--available to Manitobans, and Manitobans purchased those shares to the tune of over 70 percent. When the shares were listed, they were oversubscribed by Manitobans, and the issue of the board of directors still remains in place as the bill described.

* (1350)

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, last Thursday in this Chamber we tabled two letters from outside organizations discussing the government's unilateral decision to charge user fees in the sum of $400,000 on the backs of individuals who need to purchase, for their health reasons, orthotic devices.

Like so many issues in health, be it Connie Curran under the previous minister, the home care privatization under the most immediate predecessor and now this issue, this issue came right out of nowhere, a $400,000 saving on the backs of sufferers.

My question to the Minister of Health is--he had a different version in the House last week from what he said in the hallway. Can the minister specifically outline what the government's plans are for the $400,000 clawback, the 400 penalty and tax on users of these devices?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): On this particular issue, I certainly appreciate the concerns that were expressed by several of the organizations that were spoken to about the matter, and I appreciate the need, I think, to have consistency, transparency and equity in many of the things we do. I think when you look at the whole area--whether it be devices or whether it be Pharmacare or other services or products that the public provides for, or support for individuals in their health needs--we have not had in Manitoba, going back to the 1970s, a truly consistent approach. One thing I would hope that we can accomplish is a consistent approach, and that may require more work on the part of the ministry to do that.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, is the minister saying in his comments that the government is not going to impose a $400,000 penalty, be it in the form of a deterrent fee or a user fee or a tax on the individuals who require these devices for necessary medical needs?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the context in which this issue arises is one, just to put it in perspective, of the fact that we have had some very significant reductions in transfer payments. I am not trying to get into that issue today, but it is a reality. When you get into those realities, you are often forced to look at ways of making programs more affordable, obviously, to within the budget process and to also look at where you rank compared to other provinces. That was done during our budget process.

One of the observations I make today is the inconsistencies that have been in our provision of those services over 30 years. We have had a response back from our consultation; we have had a proposal. I am in the process now with my colleague the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson). We will shortly be looking at this whole area, because I think the criticisms that the member opposite offers and others have offered, particularly with respect to inconsistencies in the way we do things, are certainly valid, but they have been there for 30 years and they are in need of some work, Madam Speaker, and we intend to look at them.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, this question could be for the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Health. How do you justify, in this budget, taking a program of $2.6 million of necessary medical devices to individuals, some of whom could not walk or move without these devices, and take $400,000 off that budget and still say they are not tax increases, still say you do not charge user fees? How does the Minister of Health or Finance even get to the starting gate on that kind of a proposal and talk about transparency and talk about being fair to the people of Manitoba?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the way one even gets to consider these types of issues is to put them in the context of the fact that our health budget, indeed our provincial budget in this area, has been generally under increasing pressure over the last number of years because of reduced federal commitment. We have had to make that up. There are a lot of pressures on the department. If you look at the area of physician remuneration, for one, currently, and other areas, all of them lead ultimately in that environment to looking at ways to ensure that you are delivering programs in a cost-effective and, I think, equal basis to what is happening across the country. In that particular area, in most other jurisdictions it is my understanding that there is a co-payment or deductible, and that is the logic behind having us in line with what is happening across the country.

In going out and having some consultation, some of these issues were flagged, and as I have committed, I want to spend some time with the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board on looking at this whole area to ensure that we have a consistent approach. We do have now, Madam Speaker, deductibles and co-payments in areas like Pharmacare. So there is a principle there, and it is not unreasonable to see how this would happen.

* (1355)

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I, too, have a question for the Minister of Health. There is no regular emergency service medical staff available at the Brandon General Hospital, and beginning June 30, family doctors in the Brandon area will no longer provide emergency services on an ad hoc basis except for their own patients, mainly because of an acute shortage of doctors and unmanageable workloads. Will the minister review this situation and ensure that the Brandon General Hospital is funded adequately to enable that facility to offer 24-hour, seven-day-a-week emergency service?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): The member flags an issue of emergency service not just in Brandon but across rural Manitoba and, indeed, even including Winnipeg. His suggestion in the House today about adequate funding for Brandon, I think, I would not accept that necessarily as the answer. I explain why, Madam Speaker--because, quite frankly, across the province we have very different ways of funding emergency physicians and services providing that emergency service in our rural hospitals. One thing that we are very committed to is getting an equitable transparent system in place for emergency across the province. We have brought together the Manitoba Medical Association, the College of Physicians and Surgeons, the regional health authorities. We did that two months ago. We are involved in a 90-day process considering options. I am pleased to report that that seems to be going well, and I am hoping by the end of June we will have the framework for a province-wide solution that is transparent and equitable.

Mr. Leonard Evans: Madam Speaker, by way of clarification--I am not clear--is the minister telling us that he cannot or will not give a firm commitment to provide the money to the Brandon General Hospital that was previously pulled out by his department so that Brandon General Hospital, which is the only major hospital between Regina and Winnipeg, will offer emergency service on a 24-hour basis, seven days a week?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, what I am saying to the member for Brandon East is certainly, we want to have a seven-day-a-week, 24-hour emergency service in Brandon. It makes perfect sense, but the way in which we approach this is not to ad hoc each facility.

I can assure the member that the way in which emergency coverage is now provided in a variety of hospitals across this province is one that is developed in an ad hoc fashion over 20 years or more. What we are finding is that each facility looks at the other to see who has what arrangement. Madam Speaker, that is why I think we have such discontent. So we have brought all of the stakeholders together, the parties together, and we are working on a model that will have building blocks that are transparent, that every physician can know what they are being paid for, that are equitable, and I think will give us a long-term solution that will apply right across the province, including the city of Brandon.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): On a related question: Will the minister review the doctor shortage in Brandon, which is having a negative impact on the Brandon General Hospital, and ensure that more doctors are available in Brandon so that the Brandon General Hospital's role as a regional hospital will be protected?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member and I, and I know the member for Brandon West (Mr. McCrae), all agree--I think it makes only common sense that the Brandon hospital is truly a regional facility. It is the largest one in western Manitoba, and that is why, in fact, on the Brandon health authority there will be a cross-appointment from both neighbouring regional health authorities, because we appreciate that significance.

I can tell him on emergency services and doctor recruitment, the key, in my opinion, to coming to a successful conclusion is to have appropriate transparent and equitable tools for our regional health authorities to be able to recruit the physicians they need.

An Honourable Member: Transparent?

Mr. Praznik: Ask me a question; I will explain it more.

* (1400)

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, I have been raising concerns about the federal Liberal government's cuts and offloading of social housing to the provinces, and the increases in poverty, urban decline and eventually homelessness. I have a letter from the federal minister for housing dated March 7, '96, which says, and I quote: Incremental savings in social housing expenditures amount to $7 million in '97-98 and $152.8 million in '98-99 will be achieved. These reductions will come from efficiencies anticipated in these years.

I want to ask the Minister of Housing if he can confirm if that actually--in plain English--means a cut, and how that cut of $152 million will affect Manitoba.

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Madam Speaker, the member raises a very interesting situation, because the correspondence that she was referring to is a letter that was sent by the minister of housing, Darlene Marleau, I believe it was. I think she is still the minister. Anyway, the member is reading it correctly. These are indications of perceived cuts by the federal government in their downloading and offloading of social housing onto the provinces. On top of that number that she has indicated, there is also a number of, I believe it is somewhere around $240 million that the federal government has also cut from the social housing program across Canada. It does have an impact here in Manitoba as we have to adjust our Housing portfolio in the expenditure line to compensate for the cutbacks by the Liberal government down in Ottawa. The member is correct in her assumptions.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, I wanted the Minister of Housing to tell us how this $152-million cut in the next fiscal budget will affect Manitoba in dollar figures, but given the fact that the Liberals may have more inclination now to listen to how their cuts are affecting social programs in the provinces, I want to ask the Minister of Housing will he now contact the new minister for housing for the Government of Canada and tell him that these cuts to social housing affecting Manitoba must stop and must be reconsidered.

Mr. Reimer: I look forward to working with the new minister of housing, whether it is a him or a her. It depends on what Mr. Chretien does with his new cabinet. However, that is one of the items that we will be bringing up. There is a tentatively scheduled housing meeting sometime in this late fall. It was scheduled. I hope it is still on the federal government's agenda to pursue this meeting of Housing ministers. That is something that would be brought up, in all likelihood, because of our concerns to the cutbacks. I look forward to working with the federal government in trying to achieve our goals with social housing and to try to stop this hemorrhaging of their responsibilities and their transfers of funding through the social envelope to this government.

Ms. Cerilli: Given that this letter from the previous housing minister also says that the offloading of housing to the provinces is optional, I am wondering if the minister can tell the House: When is he going to decide to accept this offer or not, and what are the conditions in Manitoba for accepting the offer to take over the CMHC social housing portfolio?

Mr. Reimer: Madam Speaker, I am sure the member recognized that with the federal election now behind us as of yesterday, everything was on hold for the last approximately a month to six weeks. At that time, we were in negotiations with the federal government in their downloading proposition. I can tell her that a meeting has been convened on senior management level. In fact, I believe it is within the next week or two weeks that officials from right across Canada on a senior management level will be getting together to discuss the tentative arrangements or possibly tentative agenda for future meetings between the federal government and the provincial government Housing ministers as to how this will unfold. As for Manitoba, we are still in the process of trying to evaluate their program. We were not able to do a proper analysis because of the interruption of the federal election. Now that that has stopped, I am sure we will be able to get back to the bargaining table.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Last week I asked the Premier (Mr. Filmon) about the transfer payments and what his position was with respect to the tax points versus the cash transfers. Given that last week we had a Western Premiers Conference, over the summer we are going to be having a Premiers' conference, it is important that Manitobans have an idea in terms of what direction ultimately this government wants to take health care.

My question to the Minister of Finance: Is the government's position that there has to be some sort of a cash flow coming from Ottawa, that tax point transfers are not acceptable, that the province will advocate in Premiers' conferences, in First Ministers' Conferences for a minimum base cash transfer?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): I think, Madam Speaker, what is most important of all with this issue is that the federal government stop any further reductions in funding for health, education and support to families, whether it is in cash or whether it is in transfer of tax points, that there be no further reductions on the heels of what had been 35 percent reductions from the current federal Liberal government--in the case of Manitoba, some $240 million.

When it comes to the issue of cash or tax points, there are advantages to tax points if they are fully equalized tax points, that there is an adjustment that fully equalizes the tax points, because a tax point is worth a different amount in each province across Canada. So the one advantage of tax points, if they are equalized, it does give more autonomy and more certainty to provinces, but at the end of the day what we are looking for, first and foremost, is a firm commitment from this federal Liberal government to not further reduce funding for health and post-secondary education and to do everything that they can to start enhancing funding in those areas as they start to work toward a balanced budget here in Canada.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I believe that the commitment is there. The question specific to the Minister of Finance is: What is this government's commitment toward arguing and advocating for cash transfers, not tax points? Cash transfers are what are going to protect medicare across this land, not tax points. What is this government's position?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, what is going to protect transfers is an ironclad commitment from the federal government, whether it is cash or whether it is transfers. Again, we have just gone through three years in Canada where the current federal government has reduced funding for those very important areas, the most important areas for all citizens of Canada, health and post-secondary education. They have reduced funding by 35 percent when they have reduced all of their other expenses by about 6 percent. Those are absolutely the wrong priorities. They do not reflect the priorities of Manitobans, they do not reflect the priorities of Canadians, and they certainly do not reflect the priorities of this provincial government.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, is the Minister of Finance saying that, on behalf of this government, they no longer favour cash transfers, that they would be inclined to accept tax point transfers? If in fact that is the position of this government, the government is wrong. They are not protecting the interests of Manitobans. We ask that they look at the cash transfers and advocating--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, the advantage of the transfer of fully equalized tax points is that then shifts that tax responsibility to the province so that the province gets that revenue directly from the taxpayers of Manitoba and from Canada, thereby not having to depend on the whims of the federal government. I think there should be cause for concern of all Canadians based on the past practices of this federal government that has just reduced funding across Canada by some $7 billion, some 35 percent in the case of Manitoba in the last three years, $240 million, so certainly tax points can give you more certainty and more autonomy. But having said all of that, the most important thing at the end of the day is that the federal government lives up to their responsibility and their commitment to provide appropriate funding for health and post-secondary education and support for families, and we will be sure that they do that.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.

In my constituency, families have lined up at four in the morning to ensure that their children are placed in alternative education programs, a flexible education program represented in 12 Manitoba schools which depends on a high level of parental participation, multi-age classrooms and an atmosphere of co-operation. It is a situation which any Minister of Education, teacher, trustee, or parent ought to be applauding.

I would like to ask why the Minister of Education has rejected the appeals of those parents to continue their program as they and their trustees have chosen without the intrusion of standard exams that they believe to be inapplicable to their philosophy.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I do indeed very much appreciate the alternative programs that schools are able to have in Manitoba and that school divisions are able to provide for students that parents, again, can have choices in the kinds of learning experiences their children have. I think that is extremely important, and I am pleased that parents are generally happy with the kinds of alternative education they have chosen, or their regular programming. Certainly they should have the learning experience that they prefer. But they should also have the right to be assessed, and pausing at year end to have a simple standards test to assess that learning has taken place and that standards of achievement have been met, does in no way whatsoever interfere with the alternative learning and teaching experience.

* (1410)

Ms. Friesen: When she is faced with two conflicting principles, that, on the one hand, this is a government which believes that standard tests are the only legitimate form of assessment, and on the other hand, this is a government which listens to parents, could she explain why, when faced with that conflict, it is the views of parents which are tossed out of the window? They have no choice, and they do not have the philosophy they have applied for.

Mrs. McIntosh: First of all, I really do not like to have to keep correcting preambles or denying preambles because it wastes question-and-answer time, but I at the same time cannot allow certain things to be on the record. There is no way at any time that anybody in this government has ever said that standards test are the only method of assessment. The member is dead wrong when she says that, but standards tests are an extremely important method of assessment.

Standards tests have been put in place for a variety of reasons. First of all, this is happening not just in Manitoba but in Saskatchewan, British Columbia, all of the other provinces in Canada, North America and, indeed, internationally. This is what is happening in education, and we do have to have standards that are measured. That is a very important part and parcel of learning, but they in no way interrupt any particular form of learning or any particular style of teaching. They simply assess at the end of the experience how much has been absorbed and how much can be applied.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us why she believes it fair that 20 percent of Manitoba students do not have to write the exams because of reasons of weather, but all of those who do write, in fact, can choose whether their marks should count or not, when all the children in alternative programs are required to submit to the government's rigid ideology of standards testing over the express wishes of their parents?

Why is that fair?

Mrs. McIntosh: I have indicated that standards tests have been brought back into the learning experience after 20 years absence because it is a worldwide trend for a variety of extremely good--it is extremely good research which has shown what the absence of those tests has done. I invite the member to ask me in Estimates today about the research into standards tests and why they are needed.

I also indicate, Madam Speaker, that here in Manitoba standards tests were brought in at the express request of parents. We had two parents forums, 500 parents, first come, first served. The overwhelming direction that came from those and from other sources--but if she is talking specifically parents, the No. 1 item that parents asked for in both of those, parents from right across the province, not specially chosen parents--the No. 1 thing they requested was a measurable standard.

The member I think would do well--and I hope she will ask me for the detail into the research there. I have to say, Madam Speaker, we have a policy for exemptions that is applied universally in the province. That policy for exemptions is what is being applied this spring in Manitoba.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Through Vision Capital and through the Manitoba capital corporation and other forms of investment in capital, Manitobans, either directly through their government or through groups like the Workers Compensation Board, MPIC and other government-controlled entities, have somewhat over $20 million or $25 million invested in a number of Manitoba companies.

Can the Minister of Finance tell the House whether he is satisfied that the accounting for these investments and the results of the investments are well and adequately known to Manitobans?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, the member is generally correct. There are a few capital funds in Manitoba. In fact, if we go back to the task force on capital markets done in Manitoba about three years ago, it pointed out that one of the greatest needs for business opportunities, businesses to expand is access to capital. So today we do have Vision Capital; we do have the Manitoba Capital Fund. There is an initiative like the Crocus Fund here in Manitoba and so on.

Certainly, collectively, they are doing a very good job of meeting the needs in terms of access to capital, all in different ways. In terms of the information, I believe certainly the information is provided in various cases to the ministers responsible. I encourage the member to ask the various ministers responsible during the Estimates process or directly to their offices for any information, but I am certainly satisfied with the reporting relationship back to government and the information that is provided back to government in terms of those capital funds.

Mr. Sale: Can the minister tell the House where in Public Accounts we might find a list of those companies in which investments have been made by the various capital funds in which Manitoba is a partner, what the value of those investments is and the number that has been written off, the companies that have failed, the companies that have succeeded, Madam Speaker? Could he direct us to a source of that information?

Mr. Stefanson: I can certainly direct the member to various departments that are responsible. For example, the Vision Capital Fund--the department responsible is the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism. They have recently been in Estimates. I believe the member for Crescentwood participated in that Estimates process. I believe he asked the minister responsible for some information in these various areas. My understanding is the minister is certainly providing everything that he is capable of providing, recognizing in many cases there are areas of third-party confidentiality that have to be protected.

Mr. Sale: The minister did not answer my question. I will put it again, Madam Speaker. Could the minister point out what source in Public Accounts, Volume 4, Volume 2? Where in Public Accounts or in any public record for which the minister is responsible could Manitobans who are interested in finding out the fate of the capital dollars which they have invested over the last number of years through these various mechanisms, where could a member of the public go and find the names of those companies, successful and unsuccessful? That is the question, not the question of I, T and T.

Mr. Stefanson: The funding through Public Accounts will be reflected in the department that is responsible for the individual program. In the case of Industry, Trade and Tourism, the funding for Vision Capital will be reflected as part of their expenditures through the Public Accounts.

Again, the member had an opportunity during the Estimates process to ask questions about various entities. I am led to believe that in some cases there is some information that cannot be provided for reasons that I have already indicated as it relates to third-party confidentiality and so on. Our objective throughout all of this process is to provide as comprehensive information as we possibly can, and when you look at our detailed Estimates process, when you look at our Public Accounts, when you look at our annual reports, collectively we provide a great deal of information to this Legislature and to the taxpayers of Manitoba. I would suggest we provide as much, if not more, information than most provincial governments in Canada.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Prior to and during the federal election, we heard all kinds of announcements of compensation for flood victims and, in particular, compensation for farmers. However, it is very disappointing to learn that, although there have been many announcements, the discussions for assistance to farmers have reached an impasse.

Can the Minister of Agriculture indicate what the problems are and when farmers can expect to learn the details of the compensation package?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Allow me to indicate to all members of the House that farmers in the province of Manitoba are receiving a very generous level of support. When I say that, I compliment the colleagues that I have in my government, and my Premier (Mr. Filmon). We quickly upped the limits from the $30,000 to the $100,000 for every farm home. In addition to that, an additional $100,000 program to help with the damages to property, farm property, machinery, to help restore the farm yard. In addition to that, there is some further support for the loss of productivity and income through the Western Diversification Program.

Madam Speaker, a great deal of support is being provided to those farmers in need. What my Premier and what my government have said, and what we continue to be at some loggerheads about, that, for the unseeded acreage program, it has to be province-wide. We have recognized and we recognize today that there are other areas of the province that are troubled with getting crop in the ground as a result of high waters, and it has to be province-wide. That is the area of difference, and my hope is that that will be concluded shortly.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, can the minister--who is well aware that the farmers in the Assiniboine Valley, Swan River farmers and farmers around the Interlake who have been affected by previous floods also feel that they should be compensated, as are the farmers who are affected by the 1997 flood in the Red River Valley--can he indicate why his government has not raised with the federal government the need to have a retroactive compensation for those farmers as well? Why has that proposal not been put on the table for discussion?

Mr. Enns: Madam Speaker, I need not be reminded of the fact that, yes, there were farmers who were in difficulty just a few years ago, particularly in the upper Assiniboine, and certainly I am aware that with some justification they are carefully monitoring what is being offered to farmers in 1997. That is precisely why we insist that it be province-wide. We cannot go back retroactively, but we can at least recognize their difficulties that they may face in the future. I am satisfied that now that the election is over federal officials and provincial officials will hastily come to an agreement on this.

* (1420)

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, can the minister indicate what the implications on Manitoba Crop Insurance will be for farmers who have already bought the unseeded acreage insurance? Are those farmers going to have their premiums repaid or are they going to be double compensated, since they bought insurance already and now there is a federal package being offered? Can the minister indicate what will happen to those farmers? Is it double compensation, or are they going to be punished for having purchased insurance?

Mr. Enns: Well, Madam Speaker, the honourable member raises the very question about why, on an issue like crop insurance, on an issue like farm policy of this kind, one ought really not to dabble with the game of politics as the federal minister, Minister Goodale, quite frankly, did in this instance. [interjection] No, the people who bought crop insurance, their contracts will be honoured, or else I may as well throw out my crop insurance program.

Secondly--and I thank Providence and the good Lord that we are getting the kind of weather we are getting--every day, as I speak, thousands of acres are being seeded, and it was far too early to jump into the fray to talk about an unseeded acreage insurance program back when the waters were just beginning to rise. I believe, Madam Speaker, that the largest amount of acres in the Red River Valley--unbelievable as it is to us who saw those raging waters over that land--that land will, in fact, be seeded.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer Affairs.

The minister will recall that the issue of fitness clubs selling long-term memberships is not a new one. In fact, we introduced Bill 26 in 1988 to limit such selling, and this government itself, under pressure tightened the rules in 1990. Given the recent closure of the Arizona Fitness club, leaving some consumers out as much as 10 months or more in membership fees, could the minister tell the House when this government learned of the impending closure and what actions they took?

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): I will take the actual date as notice and get back to my honourable colleague with that information.

I can tell my honourable colleague and you, Madam Speaker, that in fact the Consumers' Bureau has been investigating the owner of the fitness club and the business's practices under the Consumers' Bureau, and if there is any determination that any fraud has been committed, appropriate action will be taken.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, since the sale of the memberships is supposed to be no fewer than two payments for a year, something that was violated in at least one case in this case, could the minister tell the House how often the department checks the sales operations of these clubs?

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, the Consumers' Bureau deals on a complaint-driven basis, and if the particular constituent to whom my honourable colleague is making reference wishes to supply some information to the department, then the appropriate action would be taken.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask this minister: How and when will this minister start making it clear to businesses in this province that consumer protection laws that currently exist will be enforced so that scams such as occurred at the Arizona Fitness club will not be repeated?

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would state in this Chamber that one must be very, very careful not to make any undue conclusions or unjust conclusions that there have been any misdeeds or inappropriate action until there has been a suitable inquiry and a determination by the appropriate officials of our government. To jump to a conclusion today and to make reckless charges would be very inappropriate of any member of this constituent Assembly. So I would urge that we allow due process to occur before any conclusions be reached.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.