ORDERS OF THE DAY

Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments for Monday (July 12) at 2:30 p.m., or whenever the committee gets to work, be amended as follows: the member for Morris (Mr. Pitura) for the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).

I move, seconded by the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs for Monday, July 12, at 2:30 p.m., be amended as follows: the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) for the member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger).

I move, seconded by the member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations for Monday evening at 7 p.m., July 12, be amended as follows: the member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger) for the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) and the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) for the member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Stefanson).

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs be amended as follows: the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) for the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford) for Monday, July 12, at 2:30 p.m.

I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be amended as follows: the member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers) for the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) for Monday, July 12, at 7 p.m.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with respect to today's business, first of all I would like to announce that the Committee on Municipal Affairs that is scheduled at 2:30 p.m. will meet at three this afternoon. I would like to put it back a half hour. The minister requires a little bit of time rather than to be scurrying about, so that committee will sit at 3 p.m. rather than 2:30 p.m. as scheduled.

Madam Speaker: Just the one committee?

Mr. Praznik: Just that one committee.

Madam Speaker: The Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs previously scheduled for 2:30 p.m. this afternoon will now sit at 3 p.m. this afternoon.

Mr. Praznik: I would like to also announce that the Committee on Law Amendments which is hearing Bill 40 will also be called for 7 p.m. tonight should additional time be required to hear presenters, and it will also be called for 10 a.m. tomorrow morning should all presenters be finished to deal with the clause by clause.

Madam Speaker: The Standing Committee on Law Amendments will meet this evening at 7 p.m., Monday, July 12, to continue to hear presenters on Bill 40, and the Standing Committee on Law Amendments will reconvene tomorrow morning, 10 a.m., to continue to consider Bill 40.

Mr. Praznik: I would also announce today the calling of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources to meet tomorrow at 10 a.m. for the consideration of a number of annual reports of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission.

Madam Speaker: The Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources will meet Tuesday, July 13, 10 a.m., to consider a number of reports including the Liquor Control Commission.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, first of all I would like to see if there is a willingness to waive private members' hour?

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to waive private members' hour? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I would ask if you could call report stage on Bills 14, 24 and 31, and then if you could call for third reading Bills 20, 21, 23, 28 and 30.

Following completion of that, I would ask for the necessary leave for a number of reports from this morning's committees. I believe they require leave of the House. We are waiting for the translations to be completed. If they are completed by that point, we will be calling them following that process and hopefully receiving leave to be able to move them into report stage. We would ask then you return the Chamber to the concurrence process.

Mr. Helwer: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Faurschou), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments for Monday, July 12, at 7 p.m., be amended as follows: the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) for the member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger).

I move, seconded by the member for Portage la Prairie, that the composition of the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations for Tuesday morning, 10 a.m., be amended as follows: the member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan) for the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine); and the member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Vodrey) for the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed).

Motions agreed to.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Environment (Mrs. McIntosh), that Bill 14, The Amusements Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les divertissements, reported from the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs be concurred in.

* (1440)

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Environment (Mrs. McIntosh) that Bill 24, The Municipal Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs, be concurred in.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Environment (Mrs. McIntosh), that Bill 31, The Association of Manitoba Municipalities Incorporation and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi constituant l'Association des municipalités du Manitoba et modifications corrélatives, reported from the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs be concurred in.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Stefanson), that Bill 20, The Chiropodists Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les chiropodistes, be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I did not really get the opportunity during second reading to put just a few words on the record with regard to Bill 20, but suffice to say that we acknowledge that, in essence, the bill is just to recognize examinations from out of jurisdiction, out of the province of Manitoba, that is, and for that reason and given the proceedings of committee, we have no problem in terms of the bill passing through third reading.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading Bill 20, The Chiropodists Amendment Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Stefanson), that Bill 21, The Ophthalmic Dispensers Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les opticiens d'ordonnance et modifications corrJ latives, be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, again, very briefly, much like Bill 20, it is a question in terms of internal trade agreements and the primary reason why it is that we have the bill that we have before us. As I indicated with the previous bill, we do not have any problem in terms of its passage.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading Bill 21, The Ophthalmic Dispensers Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Deputy Premier (Mr. Stefanson), that Bill 23, The Order of Manitoba Act; Loi sur l'Ordre du Manitoba, be now read a third time and passed.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Deputy Premier (Mr. Stefanson), that Bill 28, The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act (2); Loi no2 modifiant la Loi sur l'AssemblJ e lJ gislative, be now read a third time and passed.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable House leader (Mr. Praznik), that Bill 30, The Veterinary Medical Act; Loi sur la médecine vétérinaire, be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable deputy House leader have leave now to proceed to third reading on the bills previously agreed to at report stage? [agreed]

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move (by leave), seconded by the honourable House leader (Mr. Praznik), that Bill 14, The Amusements Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les divertissements, be now read a third time and passed.

* (1450)

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I just want to put on the record the concerns expressed by our critic, and I would like to indicate that we feel that the course of action taken here is not as strong as it should have been. We believe in far more than a voluntary system.

I believe that those of us who are parents and have sort of hit the stage of being parents of kids who have access to video games are quite aware of what is really out there. I certainly take my responsibilities as a parent very seriously, but I would like to see a stronger system put in place. I think we would generally because what is at issue here is not the parental role; it is the ability of a 12-year-old to walk into an electronics store and basically buy pretty well anything. [interjection]

Yes, there is some Duke Nukem and there is grand theft auto. I do not know if people are aware of some of the stuff that is out there. I have certainly come across it. There are a lot of demos, if you actually buy computer magazines. I have had the opportunity to see some of the games that are on those demos, and the degree of violence and gore is quite frightening, quite frankly, Madam Speaker.

I just want to put on the record not just as MLA for Thompson but I think in terms of our entire caucus that we feel that this is half a step, and there needs to be one step taken further. I point out, by the way, that we do not allow kids access to certain kinds of videos. We certainly restrict access to movie theatres. Quite frankly, the degree of violence in a lot of the video games is far greater than anything you will find on a movie screen or on a video.

I realize there are some difficulties. A lot of games are now available over the Internet. That is a bigger problem. The fact is, though, most games are commonly bought at electronics stores here in the city and in my own community, and we do not think it is too much to require that there be a system that not only labels video games–which, by the way, exists currently anyway. A lot of the games are labelled. An industry process has been set up.

But I think it is not too much to say that if we say you cannot attend certain movies or rent certain videos because they are violent, why not for video games? And I just want to finish on that because, when I look at the current situation in our society, I think to a large extent we are ignoring the impact of certain influences on our kids.

You know, I have talked to a lot of teachers, and there are a couple of influences that go into some of the very violent behaviour that they are seeing acted out in their schoolyards, and I hate to say it, but one of them is actually wrestling from TV. You talk to a lot of teachers. They will tell you that kids are acting out some moves that are done by professional wrestlers that are, with the exception of the–in fact one wrestler was just killed recently. These are people who are very trained at this, but you are getting kids now acting that out in the schoolyards. There was actually a case just recently of a seven-year-old that killed a four-year-old in acting out a wrestling move. It shows the degree to which kids can mimic behaviour, not realizing its danger.

It is the same thing, by the way, if you look at video games. You will see a lot of kids, and I do not want to mention specific games, but there are a number of games out there that you will see kids following, and just to put on the record, these are not just simulated violence. You are getting to the degree now with the degree of animation that you are seeing blood and gore, you are seeing some very interactive behaviour, to use the term that is appropriate. I realize we are living in a world where you cannot stop kids from having access to all of these kinds of influences, but one of the reasons we have a violent society is because we have this kind of "entertainment" available.

One way of dealing with that is to have a tougher control on it so that 12-year-olds cannot walk into a video store and pick up one of these games. I had this exchange with the Premier. He said, well, parental responsibility. Well, even the most responsible parent cannot stop kids from walking into a store or borrowing games from other kids who have gone and done that. What we can do, though, is we can make sure if it is violent and it is restricted, we can stop kids in a very formative stage from doing that. That is why we raised concern about this bill. It is not that there are not positive elements in terms of what is being dealt with but we certainly would like to have seen far more.

I think you can predict that if we are in the position in the next period of time, of course, with the election, if we are in a position in government, if we are successful in that election, I think this is one of the first areas we are going to revisit because, quite frankly, anybody who knows what is going on, and I have teenagers, by the way, and I trust them. My son, who is a regular video game player, is very careful what he plays. He knows I will find out anyway. We have a good relationship back and forth. He is very responsible. You know, even he, just to be fair too, with a lot of kids, there are some games he will not play because they are just too violent. He can tell you, you want to find out which ones to restrict, ask a 14-year old. I know my son would tell you.

So with those few words, we do have concerns about the bill, not enough to vote against it, but we put on notice that this is not good enough. We need to go further. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

Madam Speaker: The question before the House is third reading, Bill 14, The Amusements Amendment Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move (by leave), seconded by the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 24, The Municipal Amendment Act: Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités, be now read a third time and passed.

Motion agreed to.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move (by leave), seconded by the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs and Housing (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 31, The Association of Manitoba Municipalities Incorporation and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi constituant l'Association des municipalités du Manitoba et modifications corrélatives, be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, I might be of some assistance. I am wondering, if there is still work required on that, if the next step we are looking at was getting into concurrence. So if we could go into concurrence until a certain time, we could then perhaps reassemble the House and deal with those other bills at that point in time, if that would be acceptable to the government.

Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs and Housing (Mr. Reimer), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

* (1500)

Mr. Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): The committee will come to order. While the member for Inkster is waiting for the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) to get here, and I am sure he is on his way, he might have a question.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I have a number of questions that I was wanting to pose with the Minister of Urban Affairs, the Minister of Housing (Mr. Reimer), and in case the Minister of Education will want to know, it will probably be a little while. So whether it is 15 or 20 minutes, a lot depends in terms of the dialogue that is created between myself and the Minister of Housing. I think that is the area in which I would like to start on. The other day I posed a question during Question Period. Actually there was a series of questions that I raised in regard to housing value, the assessments and so forth. What I wanted to do was to talk a little bit about the whole issue of revitalization.

I know on a personal note I have had experiences in the past, prior to being elected back in '88, in dealing with some of the communities and the deterioration that was actually occurring. I know in many different older neighbourhoods, and that does not even just apply to the city of Winnipeg, areas in rural Manitoba and the city of Winnipeg where you see a certain amount of deterioration that has occurred. Having studied at least in part urban revitalization over at the University of Winnipeg, one gains a few ideas in the different types of things that government can do in terms of assisting our local communities.

Personally I have always believed that the best way is through empowerment of the local residents. That is something which I believe is critically important in terms of the long-term success of revitalization. If government chooses, for whatever reasons, to withdraw out of participating in that area, quite often what you will see is that downward spiral in which you see more and more slum landlords moving into houses that start to get boarded up before you know it. You have what would appear to be a very serious ghetto. Some might even, including myself in part, draw that ghettoization and compare that ghettoization to other major cities in North America, in particular south of Canada in the United States, and it raises a great deal of concern.

I, like no doubt all members of this Chamber, take a great sense of pride in the province of Manitoba, and we want to see it prosper.

One of the biggest concerns that I have as a whole is our housing stock. The housing stock is one of the things that ensures a certain standard or a certain quality of living. Every day I drive from my riding into the Leg. It seems that you see more and more of that dilapidation of homes, and it is quite discouraging.

Over the years I have seen housing prices just literally bottom out, and maybe they still have not hit the bottom yet. You have these beautiful homes, two-and-a-half-storey homes, of great character that are selling for literally peanuts, if in fact you can sell them.

I was driving down Burrows and there was one, this is a while back, home that was $10,000. For a city like Winnipeg and our size, I think if you mentioned that to any other citizen across Canada they would say, what, $10,000 for a house in a major metropolitan area, that is just a phenomenal price. For me, what it does is it really highlights the seriousness of the issue. I know the Free Press has done some stories in regard to some of the fire problems. It was quite sad to see the one house that implied burn me down, as in burn the house down. I think that is the mentality that many people are starting to have, and that is, the only way in which we are going to see the type of revitalization that is necessary is if we start to see some very serious vandalism and homes being burnt down and people just in essence giving up.

You have many seniors in the north end that have invested their life savings into their homes, now today to only see a good number of those homes drop in terms of prices. It was something which I was hoping to be able to address in the Housing Estimates, but unfortunately time did not allow for any form of dialogue with myself and the Minister of Housing (Mr. Reimer) on this issue. So that is the reason why I chose to bring it up in concurrence.

I think the way in which you need to deal with it is community by community. My personal experience was in the community of Weston. When I had got out of the military, I had moved into the north end of Winnipeg and into the community of Weston and very quickly got involved with the Weston Residents Association. In every meeting there was a lot of dialogue from local residents, and I was really impressed with the number of people who chose to attend these meetings to express their concerns. Even though this is a number of years ago, we are talking 14 years ago, the issues that were being brought up were stop signs. Of course, it seems always to be somewhat of an issue, but next to the stop signs was the condition of the housing stock.

For a lot of the long-timers, the individuals who want to see their communities prosper or at least at the very least to prevent its deterioration, they are prepared to put in some time and make the sacrifices that are necessary in order to contribute to that community's development. Well, that is what we saw with the Weston residents group, with individuals like Ron Keller and Les, and so many, Olie–wonderful individuals who were sacrificing their time and coming up in terms of solutions, how we could prevent it. Fortunately, for me, in using their expertise and being taught at University of Winnipeg some urban revitalization programming, we came up with a number of what I believe were good ideas.

* (1510)

At the time, we used to have the in-fill housing program. The in-fill housing program, for those who are not familiar with it, was a program in which we saw whether it was a vacant lot or a dilapidated house, a house that was completely boarded up and really making the neighbourhood around it look that much worse. It is kind of like a dominoes effect. It has a negative impact on the neighbour's home. So what would happen is government would go in and, through subsidy, acquire and put up an in-fill house.

I am not too sure in terms of the actual number that we put up in the city of Winnipeg, but what I do know is that the community of Weston was fairly aggressive with that particular program. It is a program that, ultimately, I believe would work well in a number of different communities. It provided those residents who were wanting to participate in revitalization, a program that was very worthy. They did not mind investing some of that time in finding these homes and working with the government to try to change them.

Well, the community of Weston, and particularly along Alexander Avenue, had significant changes in the appearance of homes. That was done through things like the in-fill housing program, also beautification programs that were driven by residents. Then we had a wonderful opportunity through the Weston revitalization program which opened the window for really real involvement from the residents in the sense that they were able to come up, in many cases, with their own program. So whether it is parks that were greatly enhanced for community kids or providing facilities for our seniors who were living in the community, it really provided the opportunity for the community to come to grips and try to improve the area in which they live.

Mr. Chairperson, I believe that Weston, at least in part, because of the action of some local residents, has been able to keep its head above water, if I can put it in such a fashion. Had it not been for those residents, ultimately, we would have seen a community that would have deteriorated even more so. That would have had a negative impact in so many different ways. So I think that there are a number of programs that government needs to express its will to develop and ensure that residents in the many different communities across the province have the opportunity to participate in.

So my first question for the Minister of Housing is: what core programs does the Minister of Housing see as those types of programs in which residents would be able to directly participate in in terms of maintaining the appearance and the social fabric in a positive way in the many different communities across the province?

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Mr. Chairperson, the member brings up some very interesting commentary in regard to not only his involvement with housing but also, I guess, his involvement with the social aspects of constituency involvement and constituency work that I think we all get involved with in our willingness to try to help not only our constituents but the residents and the people of Manitoba.

The member alluded to his former times at the University of Winnipeg studying urban studies. I guess he may have been one of the students or possibly in the same class with also another prominent Liberal in this province, Mr. Lloyd Axworthy. I am not too sure, but I think Mr. Axworthy taught at that time, maybe, because the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has still got youth on his side, so I imagine he has had the exposure of Mr. Axworthy.

Housing is naturally very much of a concern, and it has been coming to the concern of many of us just recently because of some of the articles in the paper and some of the incidents that are not very enviable or very noteworthy in regard to the fires and some the vandalism in regard to boarded-up housing. We are naturally concerned about that, not only as a government and as Minister of Housing but also as Minister of Urban Affairs in working with the city and trying to make Winnipeg the greatest city in Canada. We are striving to work with the city and the mayor and council and EPC, trying to work with their goals and their aspirations and working for the same outcome.

As Minister responsible for Housing, naturally my portfolio is involved with the administration and the upkeep and the maintenance and the improvement of our public housing throughout Winnipeg and throughout all of Manitoba. At one time, there was a participation between all three levels of government but predominantly the senior level of government, the federal government in housing in Canada, they were very much a partner in the establishment and the expansion of public housing throughout all of Canada.

But I think as the member is aware, the federal government, in most recent years, has pulled themselves completely out of public housing. They had initially informed the province back I believe it was in 1993 or '94 that there would be no more funding programs available for new construction of public housing in Manitoba or for that matter in Canada.

It was then further expanded to I believe it was 1995, where the funding that the federal government was participating in was capped, and the province was notified that there would be no new funding. In fact, the funding would be capped, and with that cap, there was a diminishing number of dollars that would be flowing to the province because of the payout on certain mortgages and loans that were made during the expansion of public housing. So, in essence, the major partner of public housing has pulled out, and that left either the municipalities or the provincial government to fill in the vacuum, and this could not be accomplished because of the tremendous costs involved.

What we have done is we have embarked on a program of modernization, of improvement and of upkeep on our public housing so that they do remain in a very liveable condition, so that people can still have access to a quality of public housing that they would expect from government. So we have continued that commitment.

The expansion of new housing, like I say, is not coming about, but we do have the ability, I guess putting on my Urban Affairs hat, to work with the communities in revitalization programs. One of the most beneficial programs that we did have was the Manitoba-Winnipeg Community Revitalization Program. That was matching dollars, that we had worked with the City of Winnipeg in actually three components. There was a five-year program that goes back approximately 12 to 15 years ago. I believe that was just over $6 million provincially and $6 million citywise. That was a program where there was emphasis put in various communities where there was a need for revitalization or improvement or community involvement, community participation, and it proved to be very successful.

It was renewed for a second program which was, I believe, again, over $6 million. There, again, this was a joint initiative between the city and the province, and it proved to be quite beneficial because a lot of existing and older communities that were on the fringe, if you want to call it, of deterioration were revitalized. For example, I know that Fort Rouge received funding and revitalization within their communities and in some of their areas. I know the Elmwood area was involved with the MWCRP program; the St. Vital area was involved with the MWCRP program. So they have proven to be fairly beneficial in directing funding to improve and to enhance neighbourhoods within Winnipeg.

* (1520)

There is provision in our budget for another program, if you want to call it a third program under the MWCRP program, but to date we have not had a response from the city as to how they would like to proceed with this new program, this second program. This one here has $7 million earmarked for it provincially and $7 million from the City of Winnipeg. But here, again, plans were more or less presented to the previous mayor and council and EPC. It seemed to have gotten a favourable response and a favourable recognition by the former administration and the mayor. It was then put over, with the election last October, to the new mayor and the new council to make the final decision on it, but I guess there was a different direction that was proposed or intended, and the city has not responded or has come back saying that they want a different type of program.

So there is a program out there that is waiting to be used and utilized which we are willing to participate in, but there has not been a formal alternative brought forth by the City of Winnipeg as to how it could be utilized. That component had a fairly strong housing sector in it in regard to revitalizing, revamping or renewing housing structures and renovations throughout this component, this program. So there is that availability of possibly looking at incentives for housing upgrades in that area.

There is a program that is available called the RRAP program, which is the Residential Renewal Assistance Program that has a total funding of $1.8 million, I believe it is, $1.8 million, $1.9 million. The provincial contribution of that–I believe it is $616,000 that we participate in that. That is a joint program with the federal government. But that RRAP program is a program that is utilized by all of Manitoba. It is utilized not only here in Winnipeg but throughout Manitoba, and, in fact, it is mostly picked up by the rural residents. In that component, I believe that the amount of money that is available is a maximum of–I do not have the exact numbers with me, but I believe there is funding available of around $16,000 maximum with a $12,000 forgivable portion of it. I believe that is in southern Manitoba, and in northern Manitoba I think the numbers are even higher.

So that program is available, but it is very, very severely oversubscribed. There are a lot of applications for that program. I understand that there is quite a waiting list for that program. That is a program that is available for residential rehabilitations. Like I say, I believe that the total for all of Manitoba, with the federal and the provincial contribution, is about $1.8 million or $1.9 million.

There have been other programs that have been made available for community initiatives, because I think that it is not necessarily just a housing issue in the sense of how to try to renovate housing or get housing in a better condition. I think that there is also a responsibility for various justice initiatives in regard to vandalism or gang activity or graffiti. There is an overlap with some of the social programs and some of the programs that can be utilized in the community. There is very much a need for community participation. I know the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has mentioned that a few times. I agree with him a hundred percent, that if the community is not involved, if the community does not buy into the programming or part of the solution taking ownership of the problems and the solutions, these things just will not work.

It is not just necessarily government funding and government money that makes the difference of all the successes. It has to be a community participation and community leadership that gets involved and can take on the responsibilities of making results. I think that is where government can fit in as a catalyst funder or a supportive funder of sorts. The community itself would become the leader and the instigator of the change.

There is always room for those types of initiatives. I think that Manitoba and Winnipeg do have the advantage that we do have a lot of very active and very participative types of community organizations and people that do want to see a change. I think particularly in the last while people here in Winnipeg have become very, very proud of their city, and they do want to see it change. They want to see a difference in some of the problems that are always sort of highlighted by the press and by the media as to what is wrong with the city of Winnipeg, but Winnipeg has a tremendous amount of assets that can be capitalized on. It is this community capacity that we have to build. I think that those are the places where we can make significant changes and contributions as a government to be involved with these changes.

There have been various forums, there have been various studies, there have been various discussion groups as to what the alternatives are and what can be done. I think that that is the healthy part of decision making. To just go holus-bolus into communities with money and the offering of so-called change because somebody has identified a problem sometimes is not the best way to attack these programs, because I think that there has to be community involvement and community initiative.

This is one of the reasons why we have initiated the Take Back the Streets program. I think that that is the alternative to making change on a random basis, but more on a selective basis where things can change, where neighbourhoods can identify their problems and be part of the solution. It is for that reason that a lot of my colleagues and myself have been out into the communities talking to groups, meeting with groups, encouraging groups to come forth, identifying where they feel that there are problems.

I know that there is a conference coming up, I believe it is this Wednesday, initiated by the mayor, which I intend on going to. Hopefully, the House does not keep me here in the sense of time commitments, but it would be a very interesting discussion group to be at, because it is challenging the community to address some of the problems and to come up with some of the solutions.

So there are a lot of things happening that do not get the perspective and the notoriety because maybe they do not hit the front page or they do not make the television of the day, whereas the number of people who are out there working for change, wanting to be part of their community, I think is a very commendable number. It is those types of people that we have to reach out to. It is those types of associations and those types of groups where the positive changes and the community capacity can be built upon. That is where the opportunity lies for government and for agencies to be involved with not only the volunteer groups, but I believe there is the ability for private entrepreneurs and private businesses and the responsibility that the businesses have to put back into the community.

I think more and more businesses are recognizing that just as there is an economic dividend to be realized by doing business in a community, there is a social responsibility of putting back into the community. It is that type of synergy that we have to generate to get some sort of response back from the various players in making change in the community.

* (1530)

So I am not saying that everything is on the rosy side or anything like that, but I think that the opportunities for change and the opportunities for constructive directions are coming about because communities are recognizing that they have to be part of the solution, they have to be part of the change, and that the opportunities are there for them to do these things.

Like I say, I wear two hats in the sense of the Minister of Housing where there is a concern for having adequate and comfortable housing for people who are in need and then as the Minister of Urban Affairs, being very concerned about anything and everything that can be of benefit for the citizens of Winnipeg, and our commitment by this government to the city of Winnipeg goes unchallenged by any other provincial government in Canada for our continued support for the city of Winnipeg and for the citizens of Winnipeg. I think that those are some of the things that possibly deserve consideration when we talk about how we can make changes within our city and within our province.

Mr. Lamoureux: I think that where the minister and I agree is the need for community involvement. The minister has demonstrated that first-hand, I know, in terms of other projects which I have had opportunity to have some dealings with the minister on, in particular with respect to Gilbert Park.

But having said that, once we get past that, as I say, we do agree in terms of the involvement. You know, one of the things that I believe makes us noticeably different in terms of opposition parties is, in fact, the budget vote. I believe, very much so, that there are certain aspects of the budget that were presented in which we could have presented some better ideas. One could always be very nit-picky and so forth and virtually go through every department, and no doubt the minister might even ask, okay, if you are going to enhance resources here, where are you going to start cutting back in order to enhance those services, which would probably be a fair question to be placed.

Having said that, the RRAP program, the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program, is a program which I am quite familiar with. I would hazard a guess that if you go back to the late '80s, you will probably find the community of Weston definitely had–at least I would be surprised if it did not have not only its fair share in the province of Manitoba but in terms of Canada. That was because we aggressively, as a group of residents, saw the benefits of that particular program and made a decision to promote it extensively from within the community.

I know, myself, I had the opportunity to be able to literally knock on doors and talk to people about the program, and I believe that we had greater participation, I would suspect, than any other community. It was because the local residents took the initiative to say, hey, here is a great program, and what are we going to do to promote it? They came up with a number of ideas. In part, I was even paid to do some of that work.

But having said that, you look at the line of expenditure, what the minister is hoping is to spend somewhere in the neighbourhood of $1.8 million of which half would come from the province. If you take a look at the demand, and the minister makes reference to the demand, the demand far outweighs, as well, as I would have expected it to under a normal situation, let alone if you started to promote the program, the supply. There is very little doubt in my mind that this particular program, whether the feds cough up more dollars or they do not or maybe we approach the city and put more of an emphasis on this particular program than even some of the revitalization programs, the government has committed $7 million, I believe, is what the minister has said to revitalization programs, even using some of that money in order to promote the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program. The primary reason for that is because, as the minister points out, it is not a program that is just focused necessarily in one area, that it can have an appeal to all communities in Manitoba.

The thing that you have to watch out for is the parameters that you set around the criteria for those who would be eligible to receive some form of assistance. What you need to do is you have to look at the overall housing stock in the province of Manitoba. In some areas of the province, a program of this nature might be wonderful to have, but the need is not as great. In certain areas of the province, and the area that I am most familiar with, north Winnipeg, I know the demand is exceptionally high.

Now if we at this Legislature started to promote this particular program, I really and truly believe that you could virtually quadruple the amount of money that is being provided in this program, and you still might not be able to meet the need, the demand for it. Right away one might say, well, how much money are you prepared to throw in? What you need to do is you have to look at the consequence of the dollars that you are spending. If you look at the administrative costs, let us say, of the revitalization program compared to a RRAP, on the surface, I do not know where they are in reality, but one would hope that the administrative costs would be less at the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program, and that could be wrong on that point. The point is that we need to better focus on those communities that can assist in the promotion and getting some of that housing stock fixed up. I really believe that the problem is going to get a lot worse before it starts to get better unless the government makes the political decision to get deeply involved.

A couple of years ago, the government had a program–and it escapes me. It was in the budget announcement or possibly the throne, a couple of years ago, for housing renovations. That sort of a program in allocating money out for that kind of a program, again, there is merit for it, but what we really have to start looking at when we talk about our housing stock is the question of need. Where you neglect, where the need really is, you are going to see those communities continue to deteriorate. Last Canada Day weekend, I was out doing some driving around along McGregor and Salter between, let us say, Burrows and Selkirk, maybe a few blocks south of Selkirk. It gets quite depressing in terms of the poverty that you see and the housing conditions that you see. I would find it quite difficult to live in some of those blocks, because they even give a scary appearance.

Now if you are a seven-year-old or a six-year-old, I guess, if you grow up there you have a bit of a different focus, but I think that these are areas in which I believe there is a very strong need for programs of ensuring that the housing stock is maintained. That is why again you have to look at the residents, the community local residents, to empower them to start watching over the communities, promoting the different programs, getting people excited about the programs. You know, tying in or providing no interest loans to low interest loans for some of these areas, through a modified RRAP program, could go a long way in ensuring that windows that are boarded up get windows put in, or glass put in as opposed to boards; could ensure that roofing, doorways and things of this nature–in fact, those sorts of renovations–do, in fact, take place. It is through those types of changes, the cosmetics, that will ultimately, I believe, assist those communities in terms of overall development.

That is why, when I look at the bottom line, the bottom line being the 600-and-whatever thousand dollars going into RRAP, I personally do not believe that that is, in fact, enough money, that the need is so great today that the Minister of Housing needs to re-evaluate that need and what it is that the government is prepared to provide. If we address it today, it could save a number of communities even outside of north Winnipeg, because north Winnipeg is not alone; there are many areas throughout the province, throughout the city that could benefit tremendously by this particular program.

* (1540)

So my question for the Minister of Housing is in regard to the monies that have been allocated for RRAP. Does the minister feel that the only way in which the province would put in more money is if he had more money being matched at the federal level, or would the minister be prepared to even sit down with the city? He talked about the revitalization program, the $7-million offer. If they are not biting on the $7-million offer, well, maybe we can shuffle some of that money over into RRAP and get the city to agree to contribute to that, so I guess it is an open-minded question.

At the very least, if it at all possible within this particular budget, it is to do some form of a reassessment later in the year on these two particular programs or how the government might be able to top up the RRAP contribution that it has put into place today.

Mr. Reimer: The program that the member is referring to, the RRAP program, is a very popular program, and it has proven to be quite beneficial, as the member mentioned in addressing problems in various sectors of Manitoba, and, in particular, as he mentioned in the western area of Winnipeg. The program is a successful program, and I guess, as he says: why do we not build upon these successes?

I guess one of the things that can be made available through funding and through possibly the reallocation of funding is the fact that, with the devolution agreement that we just recently signed with the federal government where we now become the managers and the administrators of all public housing in Manitoba, whether it is federal or provincial, one of the key elements of taking on the total portfolio was the fact that the federal government has said that, if there is a savings realized by the one-desk administration and the management of this program, you can keep–when they say "you," they mean "the province"–can utilize any type of savings. It does not have to be turned back to the federal government, but it has to be reinvested back into public housing of sorts. Now, it was an open-ended situation where the funding can be reallocated back into public housing in a way that we feel is appropriate.

The RRAP program is, and has proven to be, quite successful in Manitoba. As mentioned, the actual participation rate is a 75-25 breakdown. The federal government has a 75 percent contribution; the province has a 25 percent contribution. Does it trigger more money by the feds if we add to our 25 percent? That is something we would have to talk to the federal government on a more serious basis, as to how we can lever the 75-cent dollars from the federal government. It is something we could possibly look at as we start to get into the evaluation of how housing can be better utilized and how the program can be–and the administration of it. But the administration of it is entirely by the federal government. They do the administration of it on the RRAP program, but it is something we can look at.

Our commitment, as I said before, is just over 600. In fact, it is $616,000, so that is something that can be looked at in a very possibly serious manner as to how we can get better utilization of it. It has been used an awful lot in the rural areas, as I mentioned. The rural housing component has addressed the monies through RRAP on that program. There has been a fair amount of utilization of it, but, in the same manner, there is a tremendous waiting list from what I understand as to the uptake.

From what I understand, some people have been on the list for two and three years waiting for an approval of their applications, so by that it gives a strong indication that there is a good pickup on the program. Maybe there is something that can be looked at in the future as to utilizing that program even more extensively.

Mr. Lamoureux: I am really pleased with the minister's remarks at the very tail end of his comments, where he said that maybe we could look at something else. I think that is a very important point.

If there are some sort of obligations, of matching or whatever, there might be in terms of agreements and so forth in place, and if it is a question of fulfilling those agreements to the t and the i, then there is nothing that prevents the government at the very least from going on its own or entering into another program of a similar nature.

At one time, and I do not know to the same extent, if we have the Emergency Repair Program today? [interjection] We do. Maybe it is a hybrid between that program and the RRAP program in which the province can, in essence, just start discussions right away between the province and the city.

I know Mayor Glen Murray has indicated that he wants to see something happen with residential housing. I would be surprised and quite disappointed if he was not prepared to participate in a program with the government providing some financial assistance that would see some form of a RRAP or a home Emergency Repair Program initiated. I would ask the Minister of Housing (Mr. Reimer) to keep on his agenda the need for the government being more proactive, and I say that because maybe the best way to put it would be to ask some questions.

I do not know if the minister will actually have the specific answers here, or he might even want to guesstimate. When we talk about the housing stock, you can put it in many different ways. I guess the simplest way of putting it is in terms of percentages and try to date our housing stock. So, for example, in the province of Manitoba, we might have–this is a pure guesstimate–750 homes, whether it is apartment blocks to single-family detached dwellings, urban and rural.

Does the ministry in any fashion look at the overall housing stock and try to get an assessment? Specifically we might say, again, I would not want to be quoted on these numbers, because I am sure the numbers are out. Let us say 20 percent of our housing stock is 60 years and older. Out of that, does the staff have the ability to say out of that percentage that is 60-plus years of age, such and such percentage has, we can anticipate, gone past the point of any form of rehabilitation where it is only a question of time before we are going to have to start tearing down those homes? Is that sort of statistical information actually conducted through the Department of Urban Affairs?

* (1550)

Mr. Reimer: The member brings up a very interesting scenario. I guess you have to be a bit of a history buff of Winnipeg and the development of western migration through western Canada. Winnipeg is a very, very old city in comparison to western Canada. One of the first areas settled with the Red River Valley, with the early settlers, the expansion of the fur trading business and the capital of Manitoba at the Red and the Assiniboine rivers. Winnipeg at one time was thought that it would even rival Chicago in its world trading, its hub of activity, its rail transportation, its grain handling capabilities. Winnipeg became a very, very concentrated area for development of the transportation, the cereal grain industry. I guess, everything started to change really with the completion of the Panama Canal where there was a different route to get to Asia.

So Winnipeg actually has an awful lot of old buildings or old stock, if you want to call it, of buildings that were built at the turn of the century, some very old. We are blessed in Winnipeg with some very, very wonderful heritage buildings. Some buildings have a tremendous amount of character that is recognized now because, as we know, of the film industry. The film industry has captured Winnipeg and its essence of where they can make some very, very interesting movies and use the facilities here in Winnipeg, because of our heritage buildings and our old buildings, and the condition of them. A lot of the buildings, granted they are buildings that are boarded up and they may look derelict, but there is a tremendous amount of character in behind the façade and in the façade. A good example is the bank building on Main Street, the Imperial Bank of Commerce building that was just opened recently just for public inspection, not public inspection, just for public preview, if you want to call it. It had been closed for, I believe, almost 20 years. The character and the structure is something that rivals any building in North America.

So Winnipeg has an awful lot of old, not only heritage, buildings because of the stone and the tyndall that was laid and also residential homes. The residential homes, in comparison to other cities, there are statistics available. I have seen them at one time, and I was quite interested in them, because it showed that a lot of the homes that were built in the early '30s, '20s and '40s are still standing. There are a lot of homes that were built in those times. We identify certain areas that these old homes are in, like River Heights and the north end, the downtown area, the Wolseley area, the Broadway area. These are all areas that have character homes that go back, well, I should not say hundreds of years but almost a hundred years, some of them.

So the emphasis on old buildings here in Winnipeg is quite predominant, compared to, say, a new city, if you want to call it, like Calgary. Calgary is all new buildings, new homes. Your population is younger; your buildings are young; your industry is younger. Winnipeg has a core of older, more stable homes. Our population is older. Our seniors population is the second highest in Canada. In all likelihood, we will pass to become No. 1 in our portion of seniors compared to the other people in our population within the next few years, because Winnipeg and Manitoba, people seem to have stayed in Manitoba. They settle in Manitoba and they are aging in Manitoba. So we have a different not only demographics of peoples, but we also have the demographics, if you want to cal it, of construction.

There is a need for these types of renovation programs and upkeep and the maintenance of these programs because a lot of these buildings have come to a cycle in their life, if you want to call it, where sometimes major structural repairs have to be done or upgrades or roofing or plumbing and heating and things like that. Nowadays, whenever there is a building that has to be touched up or renovated, there are totally different types of codes that come into effect in the application of it.

We find that ourselves in our Manitoba Housing program. Even though a lot of the buildings that we now manage were built in the '70s and '80s under the former administration of the NDP, those buildings now are becoming–because of the condition of them and the codes that are applicable, whenever we go in to do some major renovations, we are faced with a different type of scenario, and naturally your costs are reflected in what has to be part of the decision making at that time. So these are some of the things that have to be brought into play when we look at other programs in doing the evaluation.

We are very concerned, naturally, about Winnipeg and the housing component of it. This is the reason why we entered into an agreement with the City of Winnipeg for a joint funding project for the study of a residential market analysis of the Winnipeg centre as to its liveability, its market ability, the condition of housing, the alternatives for housing, the availability of possibly conversions to loft units or condo units or housing units that are part of a parcel of retail outlets. I think that the City of Winnipeg has shown its willingness to look at possibly different types of variances in their housing codes and in their application of the codes so that they can try to accommodate this. I think the city is recognizing that sometimes the codes are too restrictive in trying to redevelop some of these buildings that are vacant or that can be utilized for housing, for various components, whether it is a condo conversion or just a building for residential use. So there is that type of emphasis that is available.

Just recently, a couple of years ago, this government passed legislation giving the City of Winnipeg the ability to give tax credits to heritage buildings. That has proven to be very beneficial because what it has done, it has opened up the ability for some of these heritage buildings, instead of to sitting vacant, they can be upgraded; they can be modernized. They can be improved with modern facilities such as heating and lighting and air conditioning and things of that nature to make these heritage buildings now liveable and accessible for use, not only as a residence but possibly as a commercial endeavour. That is one of the things that this government brought in to help the City of Winnipeg, and it is something that I think is recognized as an emphasis for these heritage buildings to get back into utilitization.

I think what can revitalize the downtown area more that anything, and faster, is the fact of getting these buildings back into circulation and back into use. Once you have people living in the downtown area, you are going to have commerce; you are going to have activity; you are going to have growth; you are going to have participation. So those are some of the things with which I think we will be willing to work with the city and look at their proposals. I look forward to working with the city in trying to explore some of these wonderful alternatives.

* (1600)

Mr. Chairperson: The hour is four o'clock. Is it the will of the committee that this committee rise to deal with some House business and then we can come back at the will of the House? [agreed]

Committee rise. Call in the Speaker.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Chairperson): Madam Speaker, the Committee of Supply has been considering a motion regarding Concurrence in Supply, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again.

I move, seconded by the honourable member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer), that the report of the committee be received.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for Gimli have leave to give his committee report? [agreed]

Mr. Edward Helwer (Chairperson of the Committee on Industrial Relations): Madam Speaker, I beg to present (by leave) the Second Report of the Committee on Industrial Relations.

An Honourable Member: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense.

Mr. Helwer: I move, seconded by the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), that the report of the committee be received.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with leave of the honourable members, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer),

THAT the French titles of the following:

(No. 36) – The Registered Nurses Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmières

(No. 37) – The Licensed Practical Nurses Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmières auxiliaires

(No. 38) – The Registered Psychiatric Nurses Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmières psychiatriques

as they appeared in the Order Ppaper and subsequently when they received First Reading, Second Reading and were considered in Committee be altered to remove in each case the phrase "Loi modifant la" and that the First Reading, Second Reading and Committee Stages be now deemed to have been passed under the correct French title.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with leave, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 26, The Physiotherapists Act (Loi sur les physiothJ rapeutes), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable acting government House leader have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 36, The Registered Nurses Act (Loi modificant la Loi sur les infirmiP res), as reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 37, The Licensed Practical Nurses Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmiP res auxiliaires), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 38, The Registered Psychiatric Nurses Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmiP res psychiatriques), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 35, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (2) (Loi no 2 modifiant le Code de la route), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 39, The Medical Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi mJ dicale), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 41, The Professional Corporations (Various Acts Amendment) Act, 1999 (Loi de 1999 sur les corporations professionnelles (modification de diverses dispositions lJ gislatives), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be concurred in.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 42, The Community Protection and Liquor Control Amendment Act (Loi sur la protection des collectivités et modifiant la Loi sur la réglementation des alcools), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

* (1610)

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 43, The Highway Traffic Amendment and Summary Convictions Amendment Act (Loi modifiant le Code de la route et la Loi sur les poursuites sommaires), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 44, The Gaming Control Local Option (VLT) Act (Loi sur les options locales en matière de jeu (appareils de loterie vidéo)), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, and seconded by the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs and Housing (Mr. Reimer), I move, that Bill 35, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (2) (Loi no 2 modifiant le Code de la route), be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, can I have a quorum count please.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Madam Speaker, just to advise the honourable member for Inkster, we have two committees running concurrently with the House at this time. If he were to call a quorum, we would have to bring both committees back in the House for that quorum to actually take place, so I would ask the member to reconsider his question.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Norbert is exactly correct. To the best of my knowledge, and I can get confirmation from the table officers, there are two committees sitting concurrently with the Chamber. The honourable member for Inkster is withdrawing his request? [interjection] I thank the honourable member for Inkster.

Is the House ready for the question?

An Honourable Member: Question.

Madam Speaker: The question before the House is third reading of Bill 35. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

An Honourable Member: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), and with the leave of the House, I move that Bill 39, The Medical Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi médicale), be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I will be somewhat brief. I just wanted to comment coming out of committee, as I did in second reading, that I was going to be listening as to what was happening in the committee stage on this particular bill.

If one was to express some disappointment, the disappointment would have been in terms of the manner in which Bill 39 came before us. It is a bill of some significant impact in terms of the future health care professions. For a number of years, whether it is the current Minister of Health (Mr. Stefanson) or the past Minister of Health, where we talked about the potential role for a nurse practitioner, things of that nature, I think a number of people from within the public would like to see some form of an expanded role, myself included. I think that there is great potential in terms of getting our nurses even more recognized and involved in certain components of the delivery of health care. The concern, of course, comes in terms of, from what I understand, the element of surprise, that many from within the health care field were not aware of some of the changes that were being proposed in this particular amendment. In regard to the corporations aspect or the tax benefits, hopefully what we will see is at least in part, assist doctors who choose to practise medicine, and in particular in rural Manitoba.

With those few words, we are prepared to see the bill pass. Thank you.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading, Bill 39. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

An Honourable Member: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed. Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with leave, I move, seconded by the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 41, The Professional Corporations (Various Acts Amendment) Act, 1999 (Loi de 1999 sur les corporations professionnelles (modification de diverses dispositions législatives), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with leave, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 42, The Community Protection and Liquor Control Amendment Act (Loi sur la protection des collectivités et modifiant la Loi sur la réglementation des alcools), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with leave, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 43, The Highway Traffic Amendment and Summary Convictions Amendment Act (Loi modifiant le Code de la route et la Loi sur les poursuites sommaires), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Madam Speaker: Just one moment, please. The honourable member for Inkster first, and I will re-put the question.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I just wanted to put on the record that we did get the opportunity to listen in on committee stage with respect to Bill 43 and do not have any problem in terms of its passage.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading, Bill 43. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

* (1620)

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, with leave, seconded by the honourable Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 26, The Physiotherapists Act (Loi sur les physiothérapeutes), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I did want to put a few words on the record with respect to Bill 26. The committee stage I found to be most interesting where we had a number of physios and others that came to pay special attention to this particular bill. I think it is this or possibly the welfare reform bill that has probably had the most presentations on the legislation that we have before us. Bill 26 is a very positive bill, a bill that is long overdue. I think that it addresses many of the issues that our physios were wanting to see addressed.

A lot of it, like when I make reference to malpractice and public accountability, is in essence virtually in place today, in particular in the private sector area, but the scopes of responsibilities in the sense of professionalism that I saw first-hand in terms of the numbers of presentations and the content of those presentations pleased me greatly and I found most interesting in terms of some of the discussions regarding spinal manipulations. There is no doubt in my mind that our physiotherapists will do a fine job in terms of representing the public's best interests in this area of health care service. With those few words, Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to see this bill pass to third reading.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

Madam Speaker: The question before the House is third reading Bill 26, The Physiotherapists Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 36, The Registered Nurses Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmières), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the Minister of Urban Affairs and Housing (Mr. Reimer), that Bill 37, The Licensed Practical Nurses Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmières), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable Minister have leave? [agreed]

Hon. James McCrae (Acting Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 38, The Registered Psychiatric Nurses Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les infirmières psychiatriques), be now read a third time and passed.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave? [agreed]

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, this, like other bills, is a bill that is quite necessary and which I believe there is all-round support for. We understand the need for changes because of the nursing practice environment, and it ensures the issue of more public accountability to the change in name to a college. As I say, it better defines scope and so forth, and with pleasure, we would like to see it pass through third reading. Thank you.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading Bill 38, The Registered Psychiatric Nurses Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, with the leave of the House, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and–

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Gimli, with committee changes.

Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources for the Tuesday, July 13, 10 a.m., sitting be amended as follows: the member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan) for the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck); the member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger) for the member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Faurschou); the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey) for the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine); the member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Vodrey) for the member for Emerson (Mr. Penner); and the member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer) for the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, if everybody is now finished everything they wanted to do and with the leave of the House, I would move, seconded by the Attorney General of Manitoba (Mr. Toews), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty the Queen.