Madam Speaker: I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this morning fifty Grade 5 students from Linden Christian School under the direction of Mrs. Michelle Grove. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

We also have twenty-one Grade 11 students from Teulon Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Alvin Reinsch. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer).

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

* (1025)

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, during the release of the Lavoie inquiry report the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) taunted questioners by saying: when you are the leader in the field, where do you go for advice? The truth is that this government's violence against women's program is inadequate. Today my colleagues and I are proud to table the grassroots community advice that the minister's government so sorely lacks, entitled Voices From The Front Lines: Community Response to the Lavoie Inquiry.

Madam Speaker, we thank survivors, front-line workers and activists for the benefit of their knowledge and experience.

My question is for the Premier. I would like to ask the Premier if leadership is what kept the AJI on the shelf, is leadership what closed down the Pedlar implementation committee and keeps Pedlar on the shelf, and will this Premier agree today to respond in writing to the report that I just tabled so that this report and the Lavoie inquiry itself do not become the next victims of this Premier's leadership?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for her question, and I know that her question is asked with the intent of ensuring that all of us should take the responsibility to address the issues that surround violence against women, to ensure that the incidence of death and injury and all of those things that occur as a result of domestic violence, that we do everything possible to address.

Madam Speaker, I can say that we as a government have taken that responsibility seriously in all the time that we have been in government. I recall that one of the first things that we did in 1988 was to double the funding that was given to women's shelters at that time, because we believed it was a high priority and something that ought to be dealt with. I have looked, for instance, at the latest figures as to the total money that we invest in family dispute agencies, including shelters and other agencies. In the time that we have been in office, something under 10 years, that funding has increased 308 percent. That is because we believe that it is a serious issue; we believe it is an important issue.

I know that the member opposite has other questions, and I will respond to her about our commitments to and the actions in response to the Lavoie inquiry report in response to her later questions.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Osborne, with a supplementary question.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Another question about leadership, Madam Speaker. I want to ask the Premier if leadership explains why abused women must wait six to 18 months in order to see a counsellor. Does it explain why existing programs funded by Family Disputes have been cut, contrary to what the Premier says, by 4 percent since 1993-94, though 81 women have been murdered and countless women lead lives of unspeakable brutality? Does leadership explain why service providers struggle to write funding proposals while the Premier flies to London to see the Winnipeg Ballet?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I regret the tone that the member places in her questions, because she clearly knows that it is important for us to ensure that we have a strong economy, that we have an economy that allows us to have the revenues that we need to support the services. I talked about the 308 percent increase in services.

Some of the services that she references were not available, for instance, when we took office. They have become a part of the delivery of government services in the area of family dispute, in the actions against family violence. So I can tell her that I do not want to politicize this, but the things that her government did, the government of the political stripe that she represents, when they were in office were woefully inadequate in most of the things that she talks about. They have been improved dramatically.

They are certainly not ever good enough when we still have continuing violence against women that we have to deal with, and so we must continue to try and improve what we do. That is why the government acted very quickly in setting up the implementation committee and committed resources--I believe it is $1.7 million--to a lot of these issues because we believe they are important. We believe that they are not things that should be politicized, but if the member chooses to do that, that is her choice.

Ms. McGifford: I would like to ask the Premier if he will assume the role of elder statesman, show some wisdom, repair the damage done by his government's miserly leadership and agree to Justice Schulman's recommendations, and that is additional funding to shelters, second-stage housing, women's resource centres and other domestic violence programs. I am asking the Premier to save some lives.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, when you consider some of the facts that I have put on the record about doubling, even in the first year that we took office, the funding to shelters, you realize how woefully inadequate the New Democratic's response was to those needs.

Madam Speaker, we have continued to increase that funding and have announced in a variety of areas of response to the Lavoie inquiry, as I said, $1.7 million of further action to be taken. I would suggest to the member opposite that if she would like people to respond in a statesperson-like fashion that she ought to perhaps look in the mirror.

* (1030)

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): To the Premier: in distinction to the Premier's Justice minister, who on the release of the Lavoie report arrogantly asked: when you are a leader in this area, where do you go to for advice, we say we will do all we can in our power, whether it is opposition with positive ideas or as new government in this province, to ensure that what happened to the Pedlar report will never happen to the Lavoie report.

Would the Premier now commit, out of respect for the life of Rhonda Lavoie, indeed the 81 women killed since 1989 in relationships in this province, that he or his ministers of Justice and Family Services will report in one year on the Lavoie report's implementation progress at a new directly democratic innovation, and that is community sessions accounting directly to the community?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I know that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) and the Minister responsible for the Status of Women (Mrs. Vodrey) have both committed very strongly to implementing recommendations of the Lavoie report. They acted quickly in setting up the implementation committee. The committee has chosen immediately to consult with the community so that they have the input that they require before action is taken. Meetings are already taking place, and I believe that departments are acting and are prepared to act as soon as recommendations from the working groups are received. The working groups, of course, contain 27 community members, six of 10 shelters are represented, 10 members are from outside Winnipeg, six have aboriginal backgrounds. I know that the implementation committee is anxious to ensure, as much as possible, that their recommendations reflect the needs and are action oriented.

Madam Speaker, second-stage programs in women's resource centres are involved in the process as well, and I believe that the committee intends to have addressed all the recommendations by October of 1998. I know that this government will be held accountable and will stand up and be accountable for the actions that emanate from the implementation committee's work.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Would the Premier, who never answered my question and who should be admitting that six months after the government received the Pedlar report we have no new programs, no action yet--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Mackintosh: I ask the Premier, who regrettably and amazingly in his throne speech neglected to make any commitment to straightforward changes to the law, as recommended in the Lavoie report, to introduce legislation this session modelled on Saskatchewan law to better protect Manitobans from domestic violence, because if they will not, we will introduce the law.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): The throne speech referred to the intended introduction of legislation, Madam Speaker, and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) has also indicated that, and I am sure that the member opposite will be interested to see the import and the impact of that legislation when it is introduced.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, with a final supplementary question.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): I think there are some revisions in there--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Mackintosh: My question to the minister is--and I hope he did just commit to legislation on domestic violence. It was not in the throne speech. Will the Premier commit to legislation this session to deal with the terror that is experienced by Manitoba women from stalking, as recommended by the Law Reform Commission report that was issued in June of 1997? Because, if not, we will ask Legislative Counsel this afternoon to begin preparing the law.

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question. I do want to indicate to him that of the four working groups that are presently working that will be addressing half of the recommendations from the Lavoie inquiry, the Advisory Group on Civil Responses to Stalking has almost completed its work, and those recommendations will be coming forward to us and legislation will be introduced.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, yesterday the impression was left by the Minister of Health that the government's disastrous plan to privatize home care was dead in the water. Since the initiative grew out of the Premier's Office, and since the Premier has been the strongest advocate of the privatization of home care, will the Premier today be prepared to stand up and categorically indicate that it is his government's policy that the home care privatization plan is over, that those programs that have been privatized are going back to the public sector and that the government will return to the public sector all of those programs? If that is in fact the case, will the Premier confirm that this is in fact government policy now?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, since this administration came to power in 1988, we have continually attempted to improve the delivery of public service to ensure that the citizens of Manitoba are receiving the best service possible with an efficient delivery mechanism and in a very cost-effective manner, and this is important because every dollar we waste in the delivery of public service is one dollar less for high priorities in health care and education and family services.

Madam Speaker, when we embarked on an attempt to test our home care system--and it is a good thing because no area of public service should not have to undergo a test to see its delivery mechanism--we went through that process with a tendering process last year. We discussed that in this Legislature and in Estimates. We had one contract awarded out of that. We had only one bidder that met both the tests of quality and of price. We have gone through with that. We expect to have that evaluation done. My comments yesterday and ones we made in April commented on the results of that test.

But I say to members opposite, we have learned many things out of this process. We have learned and made and are making many improvements to our system. We also have some guidelines in our cost-effectiveness that we have learned by which to test our system and will continue to do so.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, is the Premier (Mr. Filmon) prepared to indicate what he has learned from this disastrous experiment of the government, and is the Premier prepared to say that his government will no longer privatize home care services, health care services, will renounce the Olsten contract, the Central contract and the other plans for privatization of various aspects of health care because the Premier has learned that the public of Manitoba does not want a privatized health care system but in fact supports the publicly funded and supported universal health care system that we have, or is he not prepared to make that commitment today?

* (1040)

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, one of the things, for example, we learned, and I know in discussions I have had with the Premier over the last number of months--and an area that we have improved and are improving in our home care delivery system is separating our assessment function from the delivery function to ensure in fact that we are not only assessing the proper needs of home care clients in a uniform way, but we are also ensuring there is proper follow-up, that we are not providing service long after the need is there. One thing we learned in the home care strike last year which was interesting was that on a number of occasions we had clients whose need for home care had ended but the service was continued because there was not the proper follow-up.

We continue to learn ways of improving the system. The member asks of the Premier and myself to make an ideological statement, to say beyond any doubt that we will do this or that. If there has been one lesson of our government, it is we are pragmatic. We want to do what is best for the people of Manitoba and delivers them the best service possible, and we will do that.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, since the Premier is not prepared to commit, even to categorically deny the privatization scheme, is the Premier prepared to jointly, together with us in the opposition, write to all of the private nursing firms that have mushroomed up in this province like Aaron's Angels, Classic Foot Care, Creative Care, Gentle Touch, Health Care Plus, Omni Care out of the United States, Quality, Realcare, all the private companies, many of whom have mushroomed recently--is he prepared to write to them categorically and outline what his minister has sort of said today but he is not prepared to say, that the government is not going to be providing contracts for private nursing homes out of our public system to these private firms? Is he at least prepared to do that?

Mr. Praznik: Again, when a party decides to make all of its decisions on the basis of ideology, the people who suffer are ultimately the citizens of the province.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

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

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, we in this government have proven time and time again that by testing the way we do things, by looking for new ways to do things better--sometimes we do not always find what we thought was there; many times we do. I am reminded of the fact that in this Legislature we saw the New Democratic Party oppose terribly the move to dual marketing, and yet this week we see in hogs--and this week we see the result: 1,100 good jobs for the province of Manitoba.

They were wrong, Madam Speaker. We saw time and time again in our hospital system, in imposing many of the--the change at the Grace Hospital, a change that has resulted in 184 more hip and knee surgeries this year. They were wrong. Why? Because they are fundamentally afraid to look at things from a new approach and try to do things better. This government is always committed in looking for ways of doing things better.

Mr. Chomiak: A point of order, Madam Speaker. I believe my question to the minister is: would the minister be prepared to jointly write together with us to the private home care companies that have opened up to indicate where the government's policy is supposedly nonprivatization?

Madam Speaker, the minister is talking about dual marketing of agricultural commodities and is attempting to draw a parallel between that and health care. I ask you to call the member to order. If he cannot answer the question and has to compare it to agricultural commodities, then I suggest he not answer the question at all.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Health, on the same point of order.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, my reference has obviously hit a sore spot in the opposition. My reference is to the fact that the New Democrats fundamentally are opposed to explore new ways of delivering service or governing the affairs of our province. The result is that you do not improve service to the people of Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, we are always prepared to look at new ways. The member talks about absolutely no private funders or users in home care. We use the Victorian Order of Nurses regularly. They are not a public body, and we will continue to use them.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Kildonan, I would ask the honourable minister to respond to the question asked.

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): For over 10 years the Workers Compensation Board has been denying benefits to the families of deceased workers of Federal Pioneer Electric, workers who died of cancer caused by exposure to mineral oils which had been well documented to have carcinogenic properties.

The WCB has denied workers' claims based on the premise that dominant cause was not determined. I will table the WCB briefing note showing that the advice given to the CEO not to pay the claims based on dominant cause was in fact done in error and should not have been used as the criterion for rejecting these claims.

I wanted to ask the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer) now to recognize that dominant-cause test was the wrong test used to deny these claims in adjudicating the Federal Pioneer cases since this only became law on January 1, 1992, not 1980s, when these cases were raised, when the test should have been probable cause. Will the minister recommend that the WCB immediately reconsider the 10 outstanding cases of pancreatic cancer deaths so that these families do not have to wait another 10 years for justice?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): My honourable friend obviously was not listening very carefully. I indicated clearly yesterday that cases that were brought before the Workers Compensation Board in the 1980s will be adjudicated on the basis of the act that was in place at that time.

Any of these cases that were registered at that time will be adjudicated on that appropriate legislation. His reference to changes since then certainly do not apply in those cases.

Mr. Reid: The minister's own department did not even use the criterion that was appropriate for the time, which I have tabled--

Madam Speaker: Question.

Mr. Reid: I want to ask the minister to indicate what the WCB will be doing with the list of some 300 names of other Federal Pioneer employees who were blacklisted as involved with mineral oil and PCB oils. Will you be contacting these families and also contract to Dr. Anna-Lee Yassi to conduct further independent epidemiological studies to determine the impact on these people?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Madam Speaker, the blacklist that the honourable member talks about is a list that was prepared by the union, and I know it is available for distribution. The corporation will be dealing with the claims that come forward, and if any of those individuals wish to renew those claims, they can simply do that by contacting the corporation. They have indicated very clearly that they are prepared to review them. There is no statute of limitations involved on cases that were brought in the '70s or the '80s that were not dealt with appropriately. That can be done at this time.

* (1050)

Mr. Reid: Well, the minister will not commit to doing the study of these further 300 people then.

I want to ask the minister a further question, Madam Speaker. Considering that Mr. Gerhard Streuber died of stomach cancer, worked with mineral oils and PCB oils for much of his working life at Federal Pioneer, and considering that both oils are known to be carcinogens, will the Minister of Labour indicate that he is prepared to have the WCB review the case based on probable-cause test considering that the available medical evidence is there, and will the minister now commit to changing the legislation back from his dominant cause that his Minister of Health brought in a number of years ago and restore the probable cause as the test for these people?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Madam Speaker, the use of mineral oil was used in plants such as this prior to 1975. These cases came forward in the 1980s to the Workers Compensation Board. Certainly these cases do go back a number of decades with different boards and different staff, different government in place. They were reviewed at that time, and the board at that time and the administration at that time rejected those claims. New evidence came forward in 1996 that mineral oil was the probable cause. Now those are being reviewed and in fact have been accepted.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, we are not necessarily afforded the opportunity to be able to respond to the ministerial statement earlier today, but I wanted to, on behalf of my other two colleagues, express and echo many of the words that the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford), the Minister responsible for the Status of Women (Mrs. Vodrey) said at the beginning of Question Period, and I look at the button and read from the button that we are all wearing today inside the Chamber: In commemoration of the 14 women killed in Montreal December 6, 1989, and all women who have suffered from violence.

This is indeed a very important day for us not to forget, and I guess the question I have is to ask the Premier--there were thousands of women across this country, women's organizations across this country, police associations across this country that believed that gun registration was something that was positive in order to help protect women.

I would ask the government if today it has any sort of documentation that shows that gun registration was in fact not the way to go, and that is the reason why we see a court challenge.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews).

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the government can give some sort of indication in terms of what cost there is going to be to the Manitoba taxpayer because the Province of Manitoba is taking intervener status, I believe, with the Alberta case on this particular issue, and if in fact that money could have been better spent on programs to prevent abuse towards women.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will take that question as well on behalf of the Minister of Justice.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, what I would suggest is that all members might want to reflect on that particular issue. It is something that was recommended in the Pedlar report, and I would ask the government to reflect on that.

Mr. Filmon: I will take that question as well as notice on behalf of the Minister of Justice.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, domestic violence is a very serious issue, not only for urban women but for women in rural and northern Manitoba, but this government does not seem to understand that.

I would like to share with the minister a few comments made by rural women from the Lakeside women's resource centre and the Evergreen resource centre. These women say that with all the recommendations in the past, why is it that rural women are being ignored. Rural women are unable to utilize urban services. They say they need rural services that are visible and accessible. They also say: we feel very isolated and ignored by the present government.

Given these comments, when is this government going to start to show some compassion for rural and northern women and restore funding that has been cut, restore funding to crisis centres and ensure that further centres are not closed?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I thank my honourable friend for that question, because it does provide me with the opportunity to indicate that this government does care about family violence no matter where it happens throughout the width and the breadth of this province. That is exactly why, as we look at implementing the recommendations from the Lavoie inquiry, there will be significant representation, already is significant representation from rural and northern Manitoba on the working groups.

As a matter of fact, there are many, many communities that are involved. We have representation from the community in Flin Flon, The Pas, Dauphin, Moose Lake, Winkler, Selkirk and Brandon, Portage la Prairie and the city of Winnipeg.

Madam Speaker, we believe that those that need the services and support those that need services right throughout the province need to be included. We will continue to work with all of those communities, all of those people in the communities to ensure that the services are implemented and improved in the best manner possible for all Manitobans.

Ms. Wowchuk: If the government is committed to services throughout Manitoba, can the minister explain then why the Flin Flon/Creighton Crisis Centre was closed without review and women are forced to drive an hour to The Pas for shelter, and other shelters in rural Manitoba are operating at a bare-bones budget? When is the minister going to recognize that we have to have services in rural Manitoba because there is violence there also, and women are often left in very desperate situations?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Again, I thank my honourable friend for that question. I know that the communities of The Pas and Flin Flon are working very well together to try to ensure that all of the women in their communities that need support and services have those services, and we will continue.

We did increase funding to the shelter system and second-stage housing by $125,000 in this year's budget. We have more money committed in the Department of Family Services for implementation of recommendations from the Lavoie inquiry. As the working groups that have been set up and will be set up do their work, they will be providing to us information on what needs to be done right throughout Manitoba for services to women in instances of family violence.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, given that women outside of Winnipeg feel that the Lavoie inquiry is Winnipeg-based and the implementation committee appears to be a Perimeter committee and does not reflect the views of women living outside of Winnipeg, will the minister, will this government immediately agree to add two representatives to the implementation committee, one for a rural representative and a northern representative to ensure that the issues facing these people are addressed?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I thank my honourable friend for that question. What I want to indicate to my honourable friend is that we have done better than that. When all of the eight working groups are up and running, which will be by January, there will be 23 representatives from outside of the city of Winnipeg and there will be another 10 representatives from northern Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, there will be 57 community representatives, including 90 percent of those agencies that we fund. There will be victims included in those working groups, and there will be those consumers of the service involved in the working groups. We have made sure that we are consulting with community organizations, those that need services from the system, to ensure that a comprehensive package of support is available to all Manitobans.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, the Premier may believe that the road to success is always under construction, but nowhere is this less true than at the universities of Manitoba where nine years of Tory neglect are evident in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. Facilities are inadequate to meet new technologies. Animal care facilities in particular need immediate upgrading to meet the Canadian Council on Animal Care Standards for ventilation and exercise space. At one building, dogs must be exercised in the corridor with the obvious unsanitary consequences.

I would like to ask the Minister of Education to explain why it is she is prepared to put at risk the $19 million of research money that comes to Manitoba and which, if these standards of animal care remain in their present condition, may well be forfeited.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, not accepting the assumption the member made in asking her question, we are aware of infrastructure problems at the University of Manitoba. We have been working very hard with university administration to identify those areas where we believe buildings need upgrading. We have just provided some $5 million for upgrading fire codes, things that do not show but that are necessary for safety and good maintenance, good stewardship of the buildings. We will continue in those efforts to ensure that the infrastructure at the university, which was not sustained the way it could have been in years gone by, becomes a focus of attention. I have been out to the university to look at these buildings, and as I say, we have set money aside and will continue to work with the university to overcome the many decades of neglect that have been there at the university.

* (1100)

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, I would like to table as a public document a document that the minister received, Urgent Renovation and Equipment Requirements at the University of Manitoba, which shows very clearly the nine years of Tory neglect of the infrastructure of the universities.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, to pose her question now.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister to explain why it is that she is prepared to tolerate the fact that the new college of nursing at the University of Manitoba has no disability access at all or that disabled students in a main arts building face a washroom journey to another building along a route that must be closed during after-office hours.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, again, not accepting the assumption inherent in the member's question that there is no caring on this side, a very incorrect assumption, I indicate to the member that I have been out to see the buildings that she has referred to in her question here. I have looked at the school of nursing at the University of Manitoba. I have asked for the material that I am receiving from the university as photographs, et cetera, that we could use, and I appreciate receiving same. I do not know if that is what she is referring to here, but certainly I have been out to tour the facilities. I have asked for photographs which I have received. That may or may not be what she has tabled, but we are aware of the problems and working with the universities to ensure that the far more than nine years--she seems to think for certain statistical purposes that the world started in 1988 but for other statistical purposes that it did not, and I realize that it is part of the need to be selective that they feel--but we are aware and consciously working on correcting any problems with infrastructure at the universities, plural.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, I was interested to read today in the paper that the Minister of Family Services' deputy has said that the Child and Youth Secretariat is now going to address the issues of poverty and the lack of affordable child care in our province. This is after the government has made sweeping cuts and changes to areas of large government programs in social allowances, foster care, subsidized child care, public schools, children's health programs, cuts of hundreds of millions of dollars. Now they have a Child and Youth Secretariat with a budget of $500,000 that is going to solve these problems.

I want to ask the minister why her original plans for the Child and Youth Secretariat which were to have government departments identify 2 percent of their spending on children and youth programs, which was over $12.25 million, were changed. Can she tell us how much money is going to be allocated to the Children and Youth Secretariat to deal with these problems--as outlined in the paper today--of poverty and child care?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for the several questions that were in her comments just put on the record. I do want to indicate that government departments will be very actively participating in all of the early intervention and new initiatives that will be undertaken as a result of the co-ordination of activities through the Child and Youth Secretariat, and that all government departments that are involved in the secretariat will be contributing dollars towards several of the initiatives that will be undertaken.

So, Madam Speaker, I think some of the questioning is a bit premature, and as we move through the next few months and we have a budget announced by our Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), a lot of the detail around where new initiatives and where new spending will take place will occur. I welcome the opportunity through the Estimates to have full and frank discussion with my honourable friend, around all of the good things that will be happening, to try to ensure that children get off to a healthy start to life.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, my supplementary for the minister is: why does the Annual Report for the Child and Youth Secretariat for '96 and '97 not identify any of the spending that they took from other departments and reallocated or spent differently? Can she tell us how much money last year was reallocated from government departments and spent, quote, differently by the Child and Youth Secretariat?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for her questions and comments. I do want to indicate that the Child and Youth Secretariat is there to facilitate co-operation and working together of government departments to ensure that children in Manitoba are best served through that co-ordinated effort. They are the facilitators of bringing community and government together to ensure that any initiatives, any programming that we are undertaking is doing the very best possible things for families and children that need our support.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.