4th-36th Vol. 47-Second Readings

* (1450)

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, would you be so kind as to call the bills listed on page 5, with this exception: call Bill 38 first and then Bill 29 and then following. Then, after those bills have been introduced, would you be so kind as to call Bills 6, 7, 5, 36, 9 and the remainder in the order you see them on the Order Paper today.

Madam Speaker, I would like to correct that: 6, 7, 5, 9 and 36, and the remainder in the order they are listed.

Madam Speaker: Okay. For clarification, second readings, first commencing with Bill No. 38 and then reverting to the order as listed. After second readings, then to proceed to adjourn debate on second readings commencing with Bill 6 and then proceeding in the following order: 7, 5, 9, 36 and then reverting to the order listed on the Order Paper.

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Bill 38, The Planning Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire et modifications corrélatives), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of the House.

Motion presented.

Mr. Derkach: It is my pleasure to introduce for second reading, Bill 38, The Planning Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act. The amendments to this bill come as a result of discussions that have been held between municipal councils over the last number of years. Municipalities, the developers, individuals throughout Manitoba have been calling for some streamlining amendments to the act, and basically the amendments that we are bringing forward today are for streamlining some of the processes that are involved in The Planning Act.

The objectives of the review that we have done have been to streamline and improve the existing land use planning and development review processes under The Planning Act, and also to standardize notice provisions of various processes as much as possible and to introduce more flexibility and cost-effective alternatives for local government to administer the planning process at the local level. The objective is also to improve the opportunity for the public participation in the planning process and to make a number of other administrative and housekeeping amendments that will improve the use of planning legislation by municipalities, developers, applicants, and the general public.

Madam Speaker, at the same time I would like to indicate that we are not advancing the larger or the fundamental changes to the planning process and the planning programs because there are still some discussions that are being held with the consultation group on sustainable development and implementation initiative and there is also further consultation that is taking place with stakeholders. However, our client groups and those municipalities throughout the province have urged for some time that, while the broader review is being undertaken, the world should not stop, and that we should proceed with some of the amendments that have been outstanding for some time. As a result, my department undertook a comprehensive review and consultation process leading to this bill that I am presenting today.

As a result of the proposed Planning Act amendments, consultation has taken place with major advisory groups, the stakeholder groups representing the two municipal associations--the Union of Manitoba Municipalities and the Manitoba Association of Urban Municipalities--the Manitoba Municipal Administrators' Association, planning districts, legal and consulting community and a departmental working group involving key government departments.

Given the administrative nature of the amendments, a public consultation process was not utilized especially because of the significant role played by the key stakeholders whom I have described above. However, it is anticipated that local government, developers, consultants and a majority of the public will welcome the streamlining measures and administrative improvements introduced in the development plan approval and other processes.

Madam Speaker, I would like to just very briefly highlight a few of the amendments of the bill, and I think the most significant amendment relates to the development plan process which will be streamlined. Development plans are currently approved by Order-in-Council, whereas basic planning statements require only ministerial approval. There appears to be some confusion by the public with having two types of plans under this legislation. The proposal that we are coming forward with is to shorten the process and to ensure that the entire process is conducted as one, rather than having two processes, one for the development plans and the other one for plan amendments.

In addition, I would like to indicate that all reference to basic planning statements will be eliminated, and the existing basic planning statements will now be deemed to be development plans. Municipalities or planning districts will now be able to adopt more comprehensive or less comprehensive development plans suited to the needs of the local situation.

Where publication in the newspaper is required, we have introduced more flexibility and have made it consistent with provisions under The Municipal Act. Standardization has resulted in modest improvements for public participation to some processes with respect to public notices now being required for adjacent landowners and the public in general. For example, for conditional use applications, in addition to public notices, the notices to adjacent landowners, municipalities will now be required to post a notice at the municipal office and two other public places to ensure a complete public disclosure of the intended development.

Madam Speaker, the amendments being proposed in Bill 38 will substantially shorten or reduce the time required for development approvals. This is something that has been requested of us by municipalities, by developers, and by the public at large.

So I believe that these small amendments will make a fairly significant difference for municipalities and local governments in helping them to deal with local planning decisions.

With these few comments, I would commend this bill to the House.

Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett), that debate be adjourned.

* (1500)

Motion agreed to.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), that Bill 29, The Statute Law Amendment (Taxation) Act, 1998 (Loi de 1998 modifiant diverses dispositions législatives en matière de fiscalité), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mr. Stefanson: On March 6 I was pleased to deliver the 1998 Manitoba Budget Address and to present our fourth consecutive balanced budget. I was also pleased to remark that the key measures in the 1998 budget reflected the input of thousands of Manitobans who participated in our consultations. In meeting after meeting, Manitobans advised that we should live within our means and spend wisely, that we should reduce the accumulated debt, which threatens the next generation, that we should prioritize and enhance spending in health care and provide more resources for education, children, families, and justice, and also that we should keep taxes competitive.

Bill 29, The Statute Law Amendment (Taxation) Act, 1998, provides specific legislative authority for the tax changes announced on March 6 as well as for minor technical and housekeeping amendments.

Today I will briefly describe the contents of Bill 29, and I look forward to hearing members support the important tax reductions it includes. As in past years, I will provide the opposition with detailed explanations of the provisions of this bill prior to the committee stage.

In terms of income taxes, one of the signal rates of a competitive tax system, Madam Speaker, is the personal income tax rate. Manitoba's personal income tax rate has been 52 percent of basic federal tax since 1989, when our government was last able to reduce it. I am pleased that Bill 29 will amend The Income Tax Act to reduce Manitoba's personal income tax rate to 51 percent of basic federal tax for 1998 and to 50 percent for 1999. This reduction will provide proportional savings for all Manitoba income tax payers and will complement the reductions in federal basic income tax and surtax announced earlier this year. As a result, Manitobans will pay over $60 million less in Manitoba personal income taxes next year.

In the Budget Address, we outlined a comprehensive approach to supporting post-secondary education in Manitoba, including enhanced direct assistance to students through loans and bursaries, interest relief, debt reduction, and scholarship and bursary initiatives. The budget also announced increased operating support for post-secondary educational institutions and a reconfigured Manitoba Learning Tax Credit. In total, the program changes will provide an additional $16.4 million in support this year.

Bill 29 amends the Learning Tax Credit provisions of The Income Tax Act. The rate of the credit will be reduced from 10 percent to 7 percent of eligible tuition fees and education amounts. A maximum annual credit of $700 per student will also be introduced. At the same time, education amounts for part-time students will be included in the base for the first time. In its new format, the Learning Tax Credit will cost $15 million in 1998-99, and it is the only credit of its kind in all of Canada.

In addition to the expenditures outlined above, Manitoba personal income taxes will be reduced by $5.9 million due to changes in federal tax rules for students. Overall, direct and indirect support for post-secondary education students will increase by more than $20 million. In combination, these measures will ensure that access to post-secondary education in Manitoba remains amongst the least expensive in all of Canada.

Madam Speaker, the film and video production tax credit our government introduced last year has been extremely successful in expanding Manitoba's film and video industry. Recent media reports have highlighted the impact of Manitoba's tax credit on the number and value of productions planned for Manitoba this year. Bill 29 includes amendments to incorporate into The Income Tax Act the provisions of the film and video production tax credit previously set out in regulation. A new clause will also permit the Lieutenant Governor in Council to modify by regulation the meaning of certain terms to allow the program to keep abreast of the rapid evolution in the film industry.

Madam Speaker, Manitoba's unemployment rate is at its lowest point since 1980 and average wage increases in Manitoba are the second highest in the country. More Manitobans are working and they are gaining more income. Over the last decade, our government has worked at making Manitoba a more competitive province in which to live and work. One of our key strategies has been to remove as many of the impediments to employment as we could. For business, this has meant reducing the breadth and scope of taxes such as payroll tax, capital tax and sales tax.

Bill 29 provides legislative authority for further business tax reductions. The Health and Post Secondary Education Tax Levy Act, the payroll tax, is amended to reduce the rate of tax from 2.25 percent of payroll to 2.15 percent of payroll effective January 1, 1999. Over the decade, Madam Speaker, we have removed from the tax rolls almost 80 percent of employers who were subject to the tax, back in 1988, by increasing payroll tax exemptions. Next year, all the remaining employers will see a reduction in the tax rate, making employment in Manitoba a little less costly and offsetting in part the impact of higher Canada Pension Plan costs.

The Corporation Capital Tax Act is also amended to increase the exemption from $3 million to $5 million of paid-up capital for taxation years ending after January 1, 1999. Almost one-quarter of corporations currently paying this tax will be removed from the tax rolls.

Madam Speaker, the year 2000 computer problem poses a significant risk to all users of computer software which is more than a few years old. Many businesses are faced with potentially debilitating problems at the beginning of January 2000, unless year 2000 compliance software is put in place. To help business cope with the costs associated with the year 2000 challenge, retail sales tax will not be charged on the modification or purchase of custom computer software after March 6, 1998. This initiative will also support the expansion of high technology businesses in Manitoba.

For the mining sector, Madam Speaker, Bill 29 introduces an exemption from motive fuel tax on propane fuel used in drying mineral or concentrates and heating mining facilities effective October 1 of this year. For first-time buyers of a new house, Bill 29 will extend the new home rebate program under The Retail Sales Tax Act for a fifth year. The rebate of up to $2,500, representing the average sales tax paid on materials used in construction of an average new bungalow, will be available on homes purchased before April 1, 1999.

In addition to these measures, Madam Speaker, Bill 29 clarifies certain provisions in the tax legislation and introduces a consistent set of collection and administrative provisions under The Corporation Capital Tax Act, The Gasoline Tax Act, The Health and Post Secondary Education Tax Levy Act, The Mining Tax Act, The Motive Fuel Tax Act, The Retail Sales Tax Act, The Revenue Act, and The Tobacco Tax Act.

The measures contained in this bill will continue to nourish Manitoba's expanding economy and help create more jobs and opportunities in Manitoba. I commend Bill 29 to all members, and I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Interlake (Mr. C. Evans), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Motion presented.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to introduce a bill that provides for the forfeiture of motor vehicles used in the solicitation of sex. This continues our government's response to the problem of street prostitution and, in particular, the plight of child prostitutes who are coerced at a particularly vulnerable age into a life of street prostitution.

This bill responds to the problem by requiring police officers to seize vehicles that are being used to commit prostitution-related offences. The bill provides that, where a conviction is obtained for a prostitution-related offence, the vehicle or the security tendered in lieu of the vehicle would be forfeited. The net proceeds of the forfeiture would support or deliver programs designed to reduce the incidence of street prostitution in Manitoba. This bill continues our government's commitment to reduce the incidence of conditions leading to crime, especially street prostitution.

During the last session our government introduced a john school program that is designed to educate johns who are first-time offenders about the harm caused by their actions. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to advise that the john school program has been very successful. The bill I am introducing today will go further to suppress the conditions contributing to the incidence of street prostitution.

The bill contains a number of provisions designed to ensure its fair implementation. For example, there are special provisions in the bill to respond to situations where it would not be appropriate for the vehicle to be forfeited, such as where the vehicle has been stolen. Further, the bill would allow for the release of the vehicle upon payment of security and, in certain situations, registration of a notice under The Personal Property Security Act.

We have worked hard to develop a program to remove from johns the most significant property they use to solicit sex. Cruising in motor vehicles is the preferred method for communicating with prostitutes. Traffic congestion created by pimps and johns cruising in motor vehicles is one of the most visible signs of the harm caused by street prostitution. We believe these measures will constitute powerful disincentives to these kinds of disruptive activities in our community. This, in turn, will reduce the frequency of these prostitution-related offences, leave the roads clear for other traffic, and keep neighbourhoods free of traffic congestion related to street prostitution.

I introduce this bill to the Assembly with a firm conviction that these measures will play an important role in our efforts to address the many aspects of this problem.

* (1510)

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): I move, seconded by the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Motion presented.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to introduce a bill which will provide those Manitobans living with the fear and reality of domestic violence and stalking, the strongest civil remedies to address such behaviour anywhere in the country.

Manitoba has taken a strong stand against both domestic violence and stalking. Our Domestic Violence Court, created in 1990, was the first of its kind in Canada and has proven to be an invaluable tool in the war against family abuse. Our government has made a firm commitment, through its zero tolerance policy, that domestic violence cannot and will not be tolerated in Manitoba.

We have had the benefit of an intensive review of the handling of domestic violence cases in Manitoba and extensive recommendations for further improving the handling of these cases through the public inquiry conducted by the Honourable Mr. Justice Perry Schulman into the tragic murder of Rhonda Lavoie. The committee I established to review and implement the recommendations in Mr. Justice Schulman's report has been hard at work since the report's release last summer.

Madam Speaker, this government was also instrumental in convincing the federal government, which has exclusive jurisdiction over the creation of criminal offences, to enact provisions to make the stalking of one person by another a criminal offence. We have also been able to persuade the federal government to enact other changes to provide additional protection to persons subjected to stalking. In June 1997, the Manitoba Law Reform Commission released a report on stalking which reviewed the nature of the problem and the existing remedies with recommendations for change.

Recognizing that this government cannot enact criminal penalties for domestic violence or stalking, those being matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, this bill I am tabling today will provide victims with the ability to seek a wide range of meaningful civil remedies to address the circumstances of their own situations. These remedies will supplement the criminal penalties and strengthen the remedies available to victims of domestic violence and stalking.

Last summer, a Department of Justice working group was established to review existing civil remedies for victims of domestic violence and provide recommendations for change, including the creation of civil remedies for persons subjected to stalking. This working group was composed of representatives from Prosecutions, the Family Law branch, Courts, the Women's Advocacy Program and the Women's Directorate, as well as the former executive director of the Manitoba Law Reform Commission, and was chaired by the director of the Family Law branch. A thorough review was conducted of the Law Reform Commission's stalking report, the civil remedies presently available to victims of domestic violence contained in our Family Maintenance Act and elsewhere and the related recommendations made in the Lavoie inquiry report.

The working group's efforts have also been closely co-ordinated with those of the Lavoie implementation committee to ensure that a comprehensive, consistent approach was taken. They benefited from the invaluable input of members of the community advisory committee on civil remedies for stalking and domestic violence. This community advisory committee, established by the Lavoie implementation committee, brought to the project expertise and experience related to both domestic violence and stalking.

Madam Speaker, as I mentioned, the bill I am introducing today will provide victims of stalking and victims of domestic violence with the ability to seek a wide range of civil remedies that addresses their individual needs. For the first time in Canada, there will be comprehensive legislation enabling persons to seek civil orders to remedy a stalker's behaviour. We will also have available the widest range of civil remedies in all of Canada for persons being subjected to domestic abuse.

The bill creates two different types of orders, protection orders obtained from a designated justice of the peace of the Provincial Court of Manitoba and prevention orders obtained from the Court of Queen's Bench. I will describe each of these orders in turn.

Victims will be able to seek protection orders from designated justices of the peace quickly, simply and inexpensively. Like the nonmolestation orders currently available from designated magistrates in domestic violence cases, there will be simple procedures. In order to ensure that orders are granted speedily, no notice need be given to a person against whom orders are sought. The orders will be available without court fees. Applicants will have to provide evidence under oath about the stalking or domestic violence. A justice who finds that the stalking or domestic violence has occurred and that the victim reasonably believes it will continue will be able to obtain a protection order.

These orders may contain as many of the following provisions as are necessary for the immediate protection of the victim: prohibiting the respondent or other person from following the victim or attending at the victim's residence or place of employment; prohibiting the respondent from following the victim; prohibiting the respondent from contacting or communicating with the victim directly or indirectly; giving the victim possession of necessary personal effects; peace officer assistance to remove the respondent from premises and/or to ensure the orderly removal of personal effects; requiring the respondent to turn over weapons; and, authorizing the police to search for weapons.

While applications for protection orders will be able to be made in person, procedures will also be in place to enable applications by telephone with the assistance of a police officer or a lawyer. Persons needing immediate relief will be able to apply to request an order at any time of the day or night.

Provisions will be clearly worded to ensure that both parties understood what behaviour is prohibited. While providing victims with meaningful remedies, the proposed legislation will also ensure that the rights of those accused of stalking behaviour or domestic violence are recognized. Although protection orders will be made without notice, respondents will be able to ask the Court of Queen's Bench to set an order aside and will be given the opportunity to present evidence.

Madam Speaker, the second type will be prevention orders granted by judges of the Court of Queen's Bench. In making prevention orders, judges will be able to grant all the protective relief available from designated justices of the peace. In addition, because these orders are generally made with notice to the respondent, judges will be able to order other provisions they feel are necessary to protect the victim or remedy the domestic violence or stalking. These additional remedies include sole occupation of the family residence, temporary possession of specified personal property, seizure of items used by the respondent to further the violence or stalking, recommending that the respondent receive counselling and prohibiting the respondent from damaging or dealing with property in which the victim has an interest--to name only a few.

As well, judges of the Court of Queen's Bench will be able to order the respondent to pay compensation for any monetary losses the victim has incurred due to the domestic violence or stalking. These losses can include expenses for counselling, security measures, new accommodations or lost income.

Where the court is satisfied that a respondent has operated a motor vehicle to further the stalking or domestic violence, the judge can order the respondent's driver's licence be suspended and prohibit the respondent from operating a motor vehicle. The bill will allow applications to be made for interim or temporary orders without notice to the respondent if the court feels an order is required on the basis of ensuring the victim's safety. The respondent would then, in accordance with the court rules, be given notice of the court's order and an opportunity to respond.

Madam Speaker, the bill will also create a new tort of stalking, enabling victims who wish to do so to sue stalkers for damages they suffer. At present, this can only be done if the stalking behaviour fits within an existing tort such as assault or battery, and this is difficult and often unsatisfactory.

* (1520)

Madam Speaker, I recommend this bill to the Assembly with pride and with the conviction that it will make a meaningful difference in the lives of Manitobans suffering from domestic abuse and stalking.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): I move, seconded by the member for the Interlake (Mr. C. Evans), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. McIntosh), that Bill 43, The Victims' Rights and Consequential Amendments Act, (Loi sur les droits des victimes et modifications corrélatives), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mr. Toews: I rise in the House today, Madam Speaker, to address an issue that is of the greatest importance to all Manitobans and indeed to all Canadians. It concerns the important role that victims of crime play in our society and more particularly in our criminal justice system.

Madam Speaker, not that long ago, a person who had been victimized by criminal activity was thought of primarily as someone who could go to court, testify as to what occurred and supply the evidence necessary to convict the person accused of the crime. Unfortunately, this approach overlooked the trauma that victims of crime experience at the time of the offence and during the course of any resulting court proceedings. This approach has also overlooked the fact that victims of crime should not be considered as being victims on the sidelines in the criminal justice process. They are important persons whose views should be taken into account and who should be treated compassionately and fairly by those employed in the criminal justice system.

Madam Speaker, the government of Manitoba rejects any notion that victims of crime are mere spectators on the sidelines of the criminal justice system. I am pleased and honoured as Minister of Justice to introduce a bill that would give to victims of crime a sense of dignity, a sense of autonomy and a sense that they can play an important and valuable role in our justice system. In my view, victims of crime are entitled to a criminal justice system that alleviates their pain and certainly does not increase it.

A few years ago, a leading jurist made the following comments that I think are particularly appropriate; first and foremost, the simple matter of distributive justice. A decent and compassionate society should recognize the rights of its victims and design its criminal justice system to alleviate their pain, not increase it. The crime victim has already suffered the psychological trauma of losing control over his or her destiny. Inconsiderate treatment by the criminal justice system can serve to aggravate the trauma. The system's true purpose is to heal it.

Madam Speaker, my comments today might be somewhat longer than has been my practice in the past, but I feel it is important that the members of this Legislative Assembly fully appreciate the background to the issues raised, the plight that traditionally has faced victims of crime and the manner in which this government proposes to deal with those issues. As a result, my comments will be divided into two basic areas; first, a description of some of the social, political and legal considerations that point to the need for legislation that will support victims of crime. Second, I will describe the thrust of the bill and will highlight the means by which we propose to elevate the role of victims of crime and support them as they are proceeding through the criminal justice system.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair

Throughout the 1970s and the 1980s, considerable attention was directed toward the rights of those persons who are charged with criminal offences. Little attention was given to those who had been victimized by that same criminal activity. There was a growing sense of frustration on the part of victims of crime, and, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that came to a head in 1988 when all Attorneys General throughout Canada, both at federal and provincial levels, endorsed the Canadian statement of basic principles of justice for victims of crime. That statement echoed principles in an earlier United Nations declaration which Canada had co-sponsored at the international level.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to say that many of the principles adopted by Attorneys General in 1988 find expression in the bill which I am now introducing for consideration by this House.

I am proud to say that from the very onset, this government has recognized the need to support victims of crime. That support has found expression in a number of different ways, and I think it is important for me to refer to any number of them as they lay the foundation for the bill for which I now seek the support of this House.

One of the first steps involved the establishment of the Family Violence Court in Winnipeg in September of 1990. As Dr. Jane Ursel from the University of Manitoba has noted, the Family Violence Court was the first of its kind in Canada, and along with this government's policy of zero tolerance when it comes to domestic violence, the court has proven effective in the suppression of violence against women and others who are particularly vulnerable in family situations.

At this point, I pause to emphasize something which is important in understanding the role that this government and indeed this Legislature can play in the suppression of crime. While the Province of Manitoba has a responsibility for the administration of justice in this province, it is only the Government of Canada that can enact criminal laws designed to prohibit criminal behaviour and indeed criminal procedure.

Against this background, a series of events took place in Manitoba during 1992 and 1993 which prompted this government to act by pressing the federal government to legislate further protections for victims of crime. Mr. Deputy Speaker, during this two-year period, several men who had been stalking women terrorized and killed their victims in broad daylight on the streets in Manitoba. We pressed the federal government to criminalize this insidious behaviour and, in the summer of 1993, the Parliament of Canada responded to Manitoba's concern by passing Canada's first antistalking legislation in the Criminal Code.

I would like to add, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that the federal government's legislation in this area came only after Manitoba took the virtually unprecedented step of having the assistant deputy attorney general in charge of criminal prosecutions testify before a parliamentary committee in support for tough new legislation to deal with humans who stalk other humans.

During the next few years, Manitoba continued to press the federal government for further protection for the victims of stalkers. Proposals put forward by Manitoba became known in Justice ministry circles, even in Ottawa, as the Vodrey proposals, because it was the then Attorney General of this province who once again was championing the rights of victims of crime at the national level.

I am pleased to say that many of these proposals were ultimately passed by the Parliament of Canada and form now a part of the national Criminal Code.

During the past few years, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this government has continued to press for reforms to support the position of victims of crime. I would like to comment on a few of those initiatives.

In 1995, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this government established a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the killing of Rhonda Lavoie at the hands of her partner. Mr. Justice Schulman, who headed the inquiry, provided this government with a number of recommendations, and last year, together with the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), I established an implementation committee under the leadership of Dr. Jane Ursel.

The majority of those recommendations were speedily implemented, and the implementation committee is now in the process of working its way through the balance of the recommendations with a view to their implementation. In May 1996, at a federal-provincial-territorial meeting of ministers of Justice, Manitoba tabled a motion proposing the development of a national strategy in support for victims of crime. That motion was agreed to by ministers, and Manitoba agreed to co-chair the initiative.

* (1530)

I am very pleased to say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that when ministers of Justice met last December, the issue of victims of crime was at a the very top of the list for discussion and planning by all 10 provinces, both territories, and the federal government.

I am very pleased with the fact that we have been successful in moving victims of crime to the top of the national criminal justice agenda, and I look forward to leadership on the part of the federal government in this area.

In the meantime, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this government has not stood still while the federal government seeks to catch up to Manitoba in support for victims of crime. During the past two years, this government has taken a series of initiatives designed to achieve that very objective.

In 1996, this government introduced legislation under which parents would be held financially accountable to victims of crime for the deliberate destructive behaviour of their own children. Indeed, last year this government established a Public Safety Branch with two primary mandates: first, the prevention of crime through grassroots initiatives; secondly, the development of initiatives to support victims of crime. We have launched a number of successful initiatives, but one of the most significant developments was to seek the views of an independent organization to see how we could best support victims of crime over the years, if not the decades, to come.

Prairie Research Associates, who are well recognized in this area, conducted an intensive study and provided my department with a report which outlines a number of recommendations on this issue. Three of these recommendations are especially noteworthy. They are No. 1, the government issue a bill or a chart of victims' rights. Number 2, that the Department of Justice create a victims of crime branch reporting directly to an assistant deputy minister; and No. 3, the current Criminal Injuries Compensation Act be rescinded and the Criminal Injuries Compensation program be included in new victims of crime legislation.

In respect of the creation of the branch reporting directly to an assistant deputy minister, we have done exactly that with the creation of the Public Safety Branch in 1996. That brings me to the point of my remarks here today. The bill before this House responds directly to these recommendations. It repeals the outdated Justice for Victims of Crimes Act passed by the former administration in 1987 and replaces it with a Victims' Rights Act that will lead the country in its support for victims. It also recasts the criminal injuries compensation scheme in the manner recommended by the Prairie Research Associates.

I have outlined at some length the background to the emergence of victims' rights in this province during the past 10 years. I did so for two reasons: first, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to demonstrate in some detail that during the past 10 years this government has shown its commitment to the victims of crime through a series of innovative and thoughtful policy initiatives, in fact, has assumed a leadership role in this respect throughout Canada. Second, I wish to advise that this government would now like to take the next step by legislating a series of victims' rights and support that will further confirm Manitoba as a leader in Canada, if not in North America.

I propose now to describe the bill in some detail and describe some of the innovative thinking that has led to its creation. You will see that at the commencement of this bill, we have set out a preamble which describes in general terms the important role victims of crime play and the manner in which that important role ought to be recognized by the various players within the criminal justice system. This government believes that victims of crime should be treated compassionately and fairly by persons employed in the criminal justice system, and so we have said that in the preamble. We also believe that victims of crime should receive helpful information about the proceedings in which they are involved and their rights in those proceedings. So we have included that in the preamble, as well.

However, we recognize that in a democratic system of government, no rights are absolute. Indeed, even those rights set out in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is a part of our country's Constitution, are subject to limitations that are demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. As a consequence, the preamble notes that the rights of the victim need to be considered in a manner that is consistent with the law and the public interest in a way that is reasonable in the circumstances of a particular case, and this particular issue is very important, given that the criminal law and criminal procedure is federal legislation. So it is not that we are only being consistent with Manitoba law, but constitutionally we are required to be consistent with the Criminal Code of Canada.

While my department was in the process of developing the policy underlying this bill, we were told on numerous occasions by individual victims and by victims' groups that there were three things that victims sought above all else. Those three needs are, in my view, both reasonable and modest. First, victims of crime would like to have information concerning criminal proceedings which have been brought against the person who committed the crime against them. In most instances, this could simply involve the status of the proceedings, when the case is adjourned to, whether bail has been ordered, the point at which restitution orders may be sought or the date upon which the accused may be sentenced should he or she be found guilty. Other information may be important as well, depending on the circumstances of the case.

Secondly, victims of crime seek to have meaningful involvement in the criminal proceedings which have been brought against an accused person. That is not to say that victims seek to dictate what changes ought to be laid or what sentence ought to be imposed. That properly falls to others who have roles and responsibilities within our criminal justice system. It does mean, however, that they seek to have a role other than simply providing evidence and watching the proceedings in silence. This bill is an important step in providing victims with that role.

Third, victims have told us that they wish to have their views taken into account, or as a part of that, wish to ensure that judges, Crown attorneys and accused understand the impact that the crime has had upon their lives and the lives of their families. This is an important point and one which this bill addresses in very specific terms.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, this bill has set out a series of definitions, a few of which are pivotal to an understanding of this legislative initiative. First, the term crime is defined to include all crimes under the Criminal Code as well as those brought in the Young Offenders Act. Second, the term victims is defined to include the person against whom a crime has been committed or is alleged to have been committed, and where that person is deceased or incapacitated, includes other persons such as a family member or a designated representative.

The bill describes a series of general rights of victims which will arise as the victim progresses through the criminal justice system in connection with charges that affect him or her. For the most part, they reflect the principles adopted by the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of Justice in 1988, to which I have made reference earlier in my remarks. These rights include the right to be treated with courtesy, compassion and respect, to receive information about their particular participation in criminal proceedings, to have their views considered, to have reasonable measures taken with respect to their safety, and to have ready access to information about their rights under this bill.

The bill also provides for an unqualified right to free legal advice about a victim's rights, regardless of their station in life and regardless of the circumstances in which they find themselves a victim of criminal activity. I believe this provision is unparalleled in Canada. The bill provides for an entitlement to be given access to free independent counsel, and access to personal information about them is sought under Section 278.3 of the Criminal Code. We have included this right in response to a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, which has the potential to expose personal information about a victim to the court process. We are concerned about this possibility, and we thought it important to provide a victim with full access to legal counsel to ensure that his or her views are fully understood by the courts when making decisions under the Criminal Code. During our consultation process in the development of this bill, we are told that if this provision is enacted, it will be unparalleled throughout Canada and will place Manitoba in a clear and distinct leadership position across the country.

The bill also provides that a victim is entitled, in appropriate circumstances, to have restitution requested, and when stolen property is recovered to have it returned at the earliest possible date. Once again, in our consultations we were told repeatedly that victims of crime are frustrated when their property cannot be returned in a timely way.

* (1540)

The bill also provides that victims are entitled to be informed about their rights, potential involvement in restorative justice programs as well as the status of criminal proceedings which have been brought against a person accused of a crime against the victim. This is again one of the situations where this government has endeavoured to ensure that in describing the rights of victims, we do not interfere with a police investigation or criminal prosecution which has been commenced in support of that victim. For that reason, we have made it clear that the entitlement to information concerning the status of police investigation or any resulting prosecution needs to be balanced against the need to ensure that neither the investigation nor the prosecution is prejudiced through the improper release of information.

During our consultation, we were informed by victims that this is the last thing that they would like to see happen. As a result, we have endeavoured to preserve the confidentiality and integrity of police investigations and public prosecution through this provision.

We have been told time and time again that victims of crime are very interested in preparing a victim impact statement that describes the impact which the crime has had upon their life and the lives of their family members. Recognizing that the Parliament of Canada has responsibility for enacting criminal procedure, this government has, through this bill, made it clear that all victims are entitled to participate in Manitoba's victim impact statement program by preparing a written account of the impact the crime has had on them. Again, in this context it is important that our Victims' Impact Program be consistent with the requirements of the Criminal Code. Those who think that we can simply adopt a Victims' Impact Program that does not take that into account are proceeding on very precarious legal and constitutional grounds. Indeed, they have no appropriate legal or constitutional basis.

This bill also provides for a series of rights involving the Corrections division of the Department of Justice which I feel are important and deserve some commentary. Victims have told us that while information concerning the criminal proceedings is, because of its public nature, available to them, often information about the offender or his or her status becomes unavailable once a conviction has been entered and the person has been placed into a correctional facility or is under supervision in the community.

This bill seeks to overcome this deficiency without, at the same time, compromising the security of our institutions or the safety of correctional staff. It provides that a victim is entitled, on request, to be provided with certain information concerning the offender, and we believe that this is in fact an appropriate balance. It also provides that a victim is entitled to be notified promptly and to be provided with relevant information where an offender who continues to pose a threat to the victim is about to be released or has escaped from custody.

The bill also provides for a victim to confront the offender in a controlled and secured setting and to permit the offender to hear first-hand the impact that the crime has had on the victim and the victim's family. This provision is, once again, unparalleled in Canada, if not North America. I would like to point out as well that under the bill no new cause of action, right of appeal, claim, or other remedy exists in law simply because of this portion of the act. It is clear that this provision ought to be read together with the preamble of the legislation.

The purpose of this legislation is not to provide a foundation for a lawsuit. Rather, its purpose is to ensure that victims of crime receive appropriate information, have meaningful involvement in the criminal proceedings which have been brought against an accused person, and have their views taken into account during the course of criminal proceedings. Put another way, the legislation is not intended to be used by an accused person to defeat the criminal charges brought against him or her. Rather, the legislation is intended to underscore the role of the victim of crime and to ensure that he or she receives appropriate information and is treated appropriately.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, the bill also establishes a scheme to ensure accountability on the part of my department and anyone involved in the criminal justice system who has contact with victims of crime. The bill cures that issue, the problem of the prior legislation, which was toothless. This legislation is unparalleled in Canada, if not North America. Where a victim believes that he or she has not been dealt with in accordance with their rights under the bill, that person can complain to the director of victim support services. The director is required to investigate each complaint and then to take any steps that may be necessary to address those concerns or address systemic concerns. The director is required under this bill to provide the victim with a report. The director, equally, is required to give the victim an opportunity to comment on the report. The director is then required to prepare an annual report which must include a summary of any comments received for victims during the investigative process.

As I have indicated earlier, the Prairie Research study provided us with a recommendation to rescind The Criminal Injuries Compensation Act and to include the provisions in new victim legislation. They also proposed that the program, which is currently administered by the Workers Compensation Board, be amalgamated into the Department of Justice, and we have agreed that those recommendations have merit.

My department saw the recommendations as an opportunity to create legislation and a structure that was clearly focused on victims. It just did not make sense to provide services to victims under legislation and through an organizational structure that was established for workplace safety purposes with no understanding of or expertise in victims issues. Our primary objective in making these changes is to provide a service for victims which is effective, co-ordinated and easy to understand. With that in mind, we have drafted Sections 22 through 47 to provide for the operation of the victims' compensation program.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have, I know, gone on for some time, but I thought it was important to put these comments on the record. That completes my comments at this time concerning both the context in which this bill is made, as well as the manner in which this bill will operate to support victims of crime throughout the province of Manitoba.

I would like to say that I am proud to be the Minister of Justice, to table this bill and to be in a position to advance the rights of victims of crime in this province in a way that serves the public, the public interest and the administration of justice in this province, and I do want to thank my predecessors, the member for Brandon West (Mr. McCrae) and the member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Vodrey), who had a continuous hand in the development of this, leading us to the stage of introducing this bill. Thank you.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, first of all, on a point of order, I would just like to raise a concern that second reading is the part of the debate on the stage of bills where we deal with the principle. Ministers should not reference specific sections. That is the precedence, and I do not mean that necessarily in a critical way. But I find not just this minister but at times people are debating specific sections. That is more appropriate to third reading.

I would like to ask for your ruling on that, more as advice for ministers for the future on second reading.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, the honourable member for Thompson does have a point of order. Honourable members should not be referring to specific clauses of the bills during their initial second reading.

Mr. Toews: On the same point of order, if that is a concern, I withdraw the reference to the section numbers.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: I thank the honourable minister for that.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): I move, seconded by the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey), that Bill 47, The Brandon University Act; Loi sur l'Université de Brandon, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

* (1550)

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill 47, The Brandon University Act, as it enters second reading. The purpose of this bill is to provide separate incorporation of Brandon University. Currently Brandon University is incorporated under regulation 562/88R of The Universities Establishment Act. The new Brandon University Act will describe the structure of the university and the internal governance arrangements. Currently the only university incorporated under separate legislation is the University of Manitoba.

Bill 47 carries over the essential features of The Universities Establishment Act and the associated regulation into new legislation. It contains a number of provisions that are designed to ensure that it is similar in content to The University of Manitoba Act and to the proposed University of Winnipeg Act. Further, the act has been drafted using more modern language and includes some provisions that are becoming more common in post-secondary legislation in other jurisdictions in Canada.

The bill is also intended to contribute to the celebrations of the centennial anniversary of the university in 1999. It was a hundred years ago next year that Brandon College was founded. The government would like to congratulate Brandon University for its first 100 years of service to Manitobans.

Further, government has loosened the requirement to seek government approval for investments, allowing the institution to invest its money as a prudent, intelligent person would. This important step is symbolic of the institution's autonomy. Further, it allows the university more latitude in raising funds for the university's purposes. This type of clause is becoming more common in newer university legislation and, in particular, the legislation in Alberta.

The legislation also includes a provision for mandatory retirement to allow the institution to negotiate a mandatory retirement age with its bargaining unit, should it so desire. Government understands that the age-related policies that this clause allows are controversial in the university community. However, government believes that it is important that the university have the ability to negotiate policies that allow for creative solutions and flexible options for the university and for the various associations working at Brandon University. The inclusion of an age-related policy clause gives Brandon University equal treatment with the other unviersities in Manitoba.

This act also formalizes the movement towards more student representation on the board of governors for Brandon University. For a number of years, government has been appointing students to the board of governors through the Lieutenant Governor in Council appointments. Through this legislation, approximately 25 percent of the board will be composed of students of the university. We in government believe that, at a time when students are bearing more of the responsibility for their education, it is important they also have greater influence over how the institution is governed.

In summary, The Brandon University Act represents the recognition of Brandon University as having greatly contributed to Manitoba's post-secondary environment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I hate to interrupt the honourable minister, but I would like to remind members that we do have new microphones in here, and the microphones do tend to pick people up who are in line with them. If they could carry on a conversation in the loge, it would be more appropriate.

Mrs. McIntosh: Okay, and I was so enjoying their comments there.

This act represents the recognition of Brandon University, as I said, as having contributed greatly to Manitoba's post-secondary environment. We are pleased to bring it forward, and know that it will now be recognized as a legal incorporation called Brandon University. We hope that this new legislation will provide Brandon University with the flexibility and strength to continue to provide service to Manitoba for many years to come. I would like to encourage all members to support this bill as it enters second reading.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed]

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would move, seconded by the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Bill 48, The Mennonite College Federation and Consequential Amendments Act, Loi sur la Fédération des collèges mennonites et modifications corrélatives, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the purpose of this Bill 48 is to incorporate the Mennonite College Federation, an organization of existing private religious colleges, which proposes to create a Mennonite university in Winnipeg. The bill outlines the terms of the federation, how the three participating colleges, Menno Simons, CMBC and Concord, will interrelate as they create the new university and once the university is created.

The university will offer degrees, diplomas and certificates in a number of subject areas. The three colleges involved in the creation of the university currently offer undergraduate degrees, diplomas and certificates in conflict management, selected fields of business administration, some areas of general arts programs as well as church music and religious studies. At the outset, the new university will offer similar programming.

The Mennonite College Federation Act outlines the structure and function. There will be a board of governors and a senate, both of which will have powers that are comparable to the powers granted to the governing structure of the current universities. This university will be similar in structure to Manitoba's other universities; however, it will be different in that it is a private institution that will approach post-secondary education with a very well defined set of values and principles.

We in government believe that this is consistent with the mandate of a university. Such an arrangement is not without precedent in Manitoba. United College, after 1967 called the University of Winnipeg, had and continues to have close links with the United Church. A portion of the board of governors of the University of Winnipeg is selected by the church, 10, to be specific, and the Faculty of Theology at the university is closely linked with the church council. I have noted that such linkages have not had a detrimental effect on the high quality of education provided by the University of Winnipeg.

I have full confidence that the new university will fit into Manitoba's post-secondary system and provide top quality education and contribute to the cultural diversity and economic strength of this province.

This government has stated its commitment to expanding access to post-secondary education in the province. In an effort to promote post-secondary education in all its forms, government wants to ensure that the students in the private religious colleges are adequately considered in the development of policy regarding post-secondary education.

Further, because of the structure and community commitment, these seats are available to lower cost per pupil than other public institutions; thus, the creation of this university allows for an increase in accessibility to university education as well as an increase in options for students at a lower cost.

The Council of Post-Secondary Education has begun to work with all of the private religious colleges not just those involved with the Mennonite College Federation. Our objective is to increase flexibility for all students by working with institutions to improve credit transfer and increase articulation in our post-secondary system.

Private religious colleges have contributed to Manitoba's overall post-secondary system for many years and decades. It is time that these colleges be finally and formally recognized for their contribution.

* (1600)

The incorporation of three private religious colleges into one institution helps to foster a learning culture in Manitoba and recognizes the historic contribution that these colleges have traditionally made to post-secondary education in the province. I am proud to support this initiative and urge all members of the Assembly to support this worthy bill.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Motion presented.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to provide independent incorporation of the University of Winnipeg. Currently, the University of Winnipeg is incorporated through Regulation 563/99 R of The Universities Establishment Act. This is the same way, as I indicated earlier, that Brandon University is also incorporated. The University of Manitoba is incorporated through a separate piece of legislation, The University of Manitoba Act.

The bill essentially carries over the essential features of The Universities Establishment Act and the associated regulation into the new legislation. As we have done with The Brandon University Act, this act also contains a number of provisions that are designed to ensure it is similar in content to The University of Manitoba Act.

Further, the act has been drafted using more modern language and includes some new provisions which are becoming more common in post-secondary legislation in other Canadian jurisdictions. The bill also contains some specific provisions which highlight the uniqueness of the University of Winnipeg.

On reading the bill, one will note there is equal representation between the government-appointed board members and members appointed by the United Church of Canada to the board of regents at the University of Winnipeg. While this is different from other universities in Manitoba, it is the result of an agreement in 1966 between United College, the precursor to the University of Winnipeg, and the government of that day. Because this agreement is still deemed valid, it is thus included in this bill. The province and the United Church are also required by this legislation to appoint two student representatives from among their appointees so that student representation will be at 25 percent.

One will notice, as well, that the board of regents is much larger than boards of governors at other Manitoba universities. Again, historically, because of the evolution of the University of Winnipeg over the past 30 years, the board of regents there has developed a rather complex subcommittee structure which has proven quite efficient in terms of governing the university and was sought to be preserved by those working at that institution, and, again, government has preserved this unique character of the University of Winnipeg.

Some of the language and some of the provisions have been modernized as this bill has been drafted from the old Universities Establishment Act, and these updates specifically refer to the university being granted the power of a natural person, as well as the investment powers of the institution.

The long list of restrictions governing the ability of an institution to invest moneys held by that institution has been replaced by a provision that allows the institution to act as a trustee and invest with the judgment and care that a person of prudence, discretion and intelligence would exercise in administering the property of others.

While these provisions are somewhat technical, they are symbolic of the government's trust in the University of Winnipeg, trust to govern itself as an autonomous agency which serves the public good. We believe that the university needs effective tools in order to meet the demands of the next century. These new provisions provide some of those tools. These provisions are new to Manitoba's post-secondary system.

Madam Speaker in the Chair

The University of Winnipeg Act also contains an age-related policy provision which has been included to ensure that the University of Winnipeg, should it so desire, would have the ability to conduct contract negotiations with various employee associations. An age-related policy clause was added to The University of Manitoba Act in 1996 and will be provided in the proposed Brandon University act as well. It is enabling legislation.

The University of Winnipeg Act represents the recognition of the University of Winnipeg as having greatly contributed to Manitoba's post-secondary environment. While the University of Winnipeg has always been an equal partner in Manitoba's post-secondary system, that status will now be recognized in terms of the legal incorporation of the University of Winnipeg, and I would encourage all members of the House to support this bill as it enters second reading.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Madam Speaker: Second reading, Bill 50--no, pardon me, Bill 51, The Cooperatives and Consequential Amendments Act. The honourable Minister of--[interjection] Oh, it is 50. Sorry. I saw the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Radcliffe) standing, so I assumed maybe--

I move, seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, that Bill 50, The Universities Establishment Repeal and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi abrogeant la Loi sur la fondation des universités et modifications corrélatives, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, this bill is, in one sense, housekeeping because it repeals The Universities Establishment Act which incorporates the University of Winnipeg and Brandon University, and as has just been indicated to the House, these universities will soon be incorporated in separate, individual, autonomous acts. The act also makes the necessary changes to other pieces of legislation as a result of these two universities getting their own acts.

The changes to the 11 other pieces of legislation ensure that there is a consistency of definition of the term "university" throughout legislation. The amendment to these acts ensures that the term "university" refers to Brandon University, the University of Manitoba and the University of Winnipeg, as opposed to the current definition.

The bill, however, represents more than just housekeeping. It represents the recognition of these two universities as having greatly contributed to Manitoba's post-secondary environment and celebrates their legal incorporation.

Further, the proposed Brandon University Act will contribute to the celebration of that university's centennial anniversary in 1999. We want this House to recognize the tremendous contribution that Brandon University has made to post-secondary education throughout Manitoba, and we offer our congratulations.

* (1610)

The Universities Establishment Repeal and Consequential Amendments Act represents a key turning point in our post-secondary system. I use the word "system" very intentionally. In the past, there has been a tendency to view post-secondary education in Manitoba as equalling the University of Manitoba, and while we cannot nor do we wish to discount the contribution of Manitoba's largest and western Canada's oldest university, we recognize that our post-secondary system has grown beyond the boundaries of the University of Manitoba. So we must realize and ensure that we take into consideration all parts of our post-secondary education system, which includes community colleges, private religious colleges, as well as universities.

The Council on Post-Secondary Education has been working with all the elements of our post-secondary system towards realizing the goal of a true, system-wide post-secondary education environment. We see a post-secondary environment where all activity is centred on the learner. The Council on Post-Secondary Education is working on a vision of a system where a learner can, working with one or more of our post-secondary institutions, put together a program of a study which will provide that learner with the tools he or she needs to help realize that person's goals and ambitions.

Further, the system envisioned by the council would see the free transfer of credit from one institution to another to allow for the greatest possible flexibility for the learner. The council is also working with institutions to help ensure that technology can be used to reach those people who cannot, for whatever reason, come to a campus to take a program of study. In a virtual environment, using the Internet, interactive TV, and other technologies, our government sees a future for post-secondary education that will help ensure the widest possible access no matter where a person lives and no matter when in their lives that a person is able to take post-secondary education and training.

Thus, The Universities Establishment Repeal and Consequential Amendments Act represents much more than the technical correction of legislation which occurs concurrently with the introduction of other legislation. This act is a further step in the realization of a larger vision for post-secondary education in Manitoba. I encourage all members in this House to support The Universities Establishment Repeal and Consequential Amendments Act as it enters second reading. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Interlake (Mr. C. Evans), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to rise today and move, seconded by my colleague the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Bill 51, The Cooperatives and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi sur les coopératives et modifications corrélatives, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mr. Radcliffe: Madam Speaker, with this bill, Manitoba will make its first major revision in its co-operatives legislation in 22 years and position our province, our dear Manitoba, to participate in the many advances of the co-operative method of operation. In addition, we will join a movement towards harmonization of co-op legislation across our broad nation. Co-ops play a significant role in the social and economic well-being of our province. About 400 co-ops in Manitoba provide their members with a range of services, including housing, daycare, marketing, processing, employment opportunities, and recreation. They also provide jobs for Manitobans, especially in rural areas.

It is important that legislation governing co-ops reflect the needs of co-ops and provide the necessary flexibility to enable co-ops to compete on a level footing with other business structures. Nationally, the co-op movement recognized the limitations of the co-op legislation across Canada and the lack of uniformity.

Based on extensive consultation, the movement developed a new model Cooperatives Act which was to serve as a guide to provincial and federal governments in developing their own co-op legislation. The federal government was the first to move, and their new co-operatives act was given Royal Assent on March 31 of this year. Their bill generally incorporated the recommendations of the movement's model act.

Madam Speaker, our Bill 51, which I am introducing today for second reading, largely reflects the federal bill. Our bill was prepared after an extensive review of the present act by a committee of government members and representatives from a broad range of co-operatives. [interjection] It was indeed a co-operative effort, as my honourable colleague in the front bench here--[interjection] Ah, one of my House colleagues, yes, a prominent unnamed member.

In addition, a discussion paper was sent out to all the co-ops in the province inviting comments on significant issues.

An Honourable Member: And did they comment?

Mr. Radcliffe: Ah, indeed they commented, yes, indeed. Madam Speaker, because of the size and the complexity of the bill, I am only going to touch on the most significant changes from the existing act. The most important change will allow co-ops to issue no-par-value investment shares. The present act requires that all classes of shares of a co-op have a par value stated in the co-ops articles of incorporation. Therefore regardless of how successful the co-op became from a financial standpoint, the values of the shares would not change from their par-stated value.

This requirement generally limited the marketability of these shares as an investment and restricted the ability of co-ops to raise capital to meet their needs. By contrast, the value of no-par-value investment shares can increase as the net worth of co-ops increase. The introduction of no-par-value investment shares will facilitate the development of new generation co-ops. [interjection] That is right, Madam Speaker, this is a new generation. [interjection] Ah, they will be a steady continuum from here to the horizon, I must tell the honourable member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk). In perpetuity. Well, not to offend the law against perpetuities, of course.

The introduction of these shares will facilitate the development of these new generation co-ops, and this will normally need considerable amounts of capital in order to establish their business.

Madam Speaker, new generation co-ops are expected to play an important role in developing important opportunities for value-added processing of our agricultural products in our province, as so ably outlined by our eminent Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns).

* (1620)

The bill also addresses the role of government as regulators of co-ops. Historically, I can tell you about co-ops. Co-op legislation in most jurisdiction has given the regulators powers that exceed those normally associated with regulation of other types of aggregations. In this bill, the role of the Registrar of co-ops is reduced in a number of areas. For example, the act will no longer require the Registrar to approve the by-laws of co-ops or the amendments of those by-laws. By-laws will come into effect when the members approve of those by-laws. This will be democratic.

An Honourable Member: What does the Registrar say?

Mr. Radcliffe: Ah, the Registrar is in accord with this suggestion. In fact, he instigated this suggestion. Yes, he is co-operating with this.

Madam Speaker, the right of co-op members to appeal membership termination to the Registrar has also been removed. The role of the Registrar has also been reduced in matters dealing with the waiving of the appointment of an auditor and member dissent.

The bill also recognizes the uniqueness of housing and worker co-ops, which I think should appeal to members opposite, and sets these out in separate parts of this act. Yes, special provisions have been added for an appeal process for membership termination in housing co-ops, distribution of property on liquidation and dissolution, special requirements to be included in articles and by-laws, the make-up of the board of directors and membership requirements. Besides the other changes to this act, a number of sections and subsections have been rewritten to clarify intent and make them easier to understand, and I am sure that members opposite will accede to that suggestion.

Madam Speaker, co-ops are an important part of the lives of Manitobans. We believe the new act will open up new opportunities for both rural and urban Manitobans to establish the many kinds of co-ops that have emerged as organizational options for people working together to achieve common goals.

I am confident, I am very confident that this legislation will serve Manitoba co-ops well into the next century. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Interlake (Mr. C. Evans), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik), and seconded by the honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey), I move that Bill 52, The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'assurance-maladie), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, as recommended in the report of the interdepartmental steering committee which reviewed personal care homes, the department has reviewed the existing regulatory framework for the operation of personal care homes with the goal of ensuring a clear, up-to-date and effective framework. I am pleased to report that in this bill, we are taking the first step toward achieving this goal.

As a foundation, the bill will amend The Health Services Insurance Act to include provisions to enable the development and implementation of a more intensive personal care home licensing system. The new provisions will replace the outdated, limited provisions of the regulation made pursuant to The Public Health Act under which personal care homes are currently licensed.

The amendments also include provisions to enable the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to make a comprehensive, new regulation respecting standards in personal care homes. If a personal care home does not meet the prescribed standards or if the continued operation of a personal care home would be hazardous to the health, safety or well-being of residents, the minister will be empowered to suspend, cancel or refuse to renew the personal care home's licence. Licences may also be made subject to any terms and conditions necessary to ensure the continued provision of quality care.

In addition to the provisions respecting the operation of personal care homes, the bill contains provisions to prohibit surgical facilities from charging Manitobans additional amounts in relation to insured surgical out-patient services. The act currently contains such provisions for hospitals and physicians. The federal government is currently deducting $68,000 per month from our transfer payments due to their interpretation that such facilities charging a facility fee in respect of insured surgical out-patient services is in contravention of the Canada Health Act.

These amendments will ensure that Manitobans will not have to pay such fees and will bring us into compliance with the federal interpretation of the Canada Health Act. They will also provide us with the flexibility to have insured low-risk surgical procedures performed in out-patient surgical facilities rather than hospitals, where appropriate. As provided in the amendments, department staff will negotiate agreements with the facilities to cover the cost of the facility fees.

The bill also contains a provision to ensure that no extra billing occurs in relation to insured services provided to residents of other provinces and territories with which we have a reciprocal billing arrangement. The federal government has indicated that such extra billing may violate the Canada Health Act. Other provinces have made similar legislative changes which protect Manitobans from such extra billing when they access insured services in those provinces, and we support this type of co-operation.

The bill will enable the Lieutenant Governor in Council to enact a regulation to allow the costs of processing claims for payment filed by practitioners to be recouped. The bill will change the name of the Manitoba Health Board to the Manitoba Health Appeal Board to better reflect the board's main function. The bill will also enable payment of the remuneration of the members of the appeal board from the Consolidated Fund rather than the Health Services Insurance Fund.

Finally, the bill contains some housekeeping amendments. These include such things as raising the maximum fine in specific enforcement sections to $5,000. The general enforcement section of the act had previously been amended to raise the maximum fine to this amount. So this will ensure that the act is consistent in this area. It is with pleasure that I commend this bill to the thoughtful consideration and support of honourable members.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I move, seconded by the member for Interlake (Mr. C. Evans), that debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to.