LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Mr. Speaker: Good afternoon, everyone. Please be seated.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Mr. Speaker: Moving on to–
Applied Behaviour Analysis Services
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to a necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) The preschool waiting list for ABA services has reached its highest level ever with at least 56 children waiting for services. That number is expected to exceed 70 children by September 2013 despite commitments to reduce the waiting list and provide timely access to services.
(4) The provincial government policy of eliminating ABA services in schools by grade 5 has caused many children in Manitoba to age out of the window for this very effective ABA treatment because of a lack of access. Many more children are expected to age out because of a lack of available treatment spaces.
(5) Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or age out of eligibility for ABA services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Labour consider making funding available to address the current waiting list for ABA services.
And, Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by J. Lamont, J. Globerman, J. Litman and many other Manitobans.
Mr. Speaker: In keeping with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to have been received by the House.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, 'inclunely'–including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) School learning services has its first ever waiting list which–starting with two children. The waiting list is projected to keep growing and to be in excess of 20 children by September 2013. Therefore, these children will go through the biggest transition of their lives without receiving ABA services that has helped other children achieve huge gains.
(4) The provincial government has adopted a policy to eliminate ABA services in schools by grade 5 despite the fact that these children have been diagnosed with autism which still requires therapy. These children are being denied necessary ABA services that will allow them access to the same educational opportunities as any other Manitoba.
(5) Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or eliminated from eligibility for ABA services if their need still exists.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Education consider making funding available to eliminate the current waiting list for ABA school-age services and fund ABA services for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
Mr. Speaker, this is signed by L. Bergen, C. Van Doeselaar and S. Power and many other Manitobans.
Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
And these are the reasons for this petition:
The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.
Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.
An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will hurt Manitoba families.
Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum.
This petition's signed by B. Delbridge, G. Pankhurst and G. Melnic and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Provincial Road 520 Renewal
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
This is the background to this petition:
(1) The rural municipality of Lac du Bonnet and Alexander are experiencing record growth due especially to an increasing number of Manitobans retiring in cottage country.
(2) The population in the RM of Lac du Bonnet grows exponentially in the summer months due to increased cottage use.
(3) Due to population growth, Provincial Road 520 experiences heavy traffic, especially during the summer months.
(4) PR 520 connects cottage country to the Pinawa Hospital and as such is frequently used by emergency medical services to transport patients.
(5) PR 520 is in such poor condition that there are serious concerns about its safety.
We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:
To urge the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation to recognize the serious safety concerns of Provincial Road 520 and to address its poor condition by prioritizing its renewal.
This petition is signed by J. Kemp, K. Kemp, M. Smith and many, many more fine Manitobans, Mr. Speaker.
Applied Behaviour Analysis Services
Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
The preschool waiting list for ABA services has reached its highest level ever with at least 56 children waiting for services. That number is expected to exceed 70 children by September 2013 despite commitments to reduce the wait-list and provide timely access to services.
The provincial government policy of eliminating ABA services in schools by grade 5 has caused many children in Manitoba to age out of the window for this very effective ABA treatment because of a lack of access. Many more children are expected to age out because of a lack of available treatment spaces.
Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or age out of eligibility for ABA services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Labour consider making funding available to address the current wait-list for ABA services.
This petition is signed by D. De Sousa, D. Ross, G. Ollson and many more Manitobans.
Hydro Capital Development–NFAT Review
Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
These are the reasons for this petition:
Manitoba Hydro was mandated by the provincial government to commence a $21-billion capital development plan to service uncertain electricity export markets.
In the last five years, competition from alternative energy sources is decreasing the price and demand for Manitoba's hydroelectricity and causing the financial viability of this capital plan to be questioned.
The $21-billion capital plan requires Manitoba Hydro to increase domestic electricity rates by up to 4 per cent annually for the next 20 years and possibly more if export opportunities fail to materialize.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge that the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro create a complete and transparent needs-for-and-alternatives-to review of Manitoba Hydro's total capital development plan to ensure the financial viability of Manitoba Hydro.
And this petition is signed by T. Yeenendaal, A. Yeenendaal, G. Wildfaug and many more fine Manitobans.
* (13:40)
Applied Behaviour Analysis Services
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
The preschool waiting list for ABA services has reached its highest level ever with at least 56 children waiting for services. That number is expected to exceed 70 children by September 2013 despite commitments to reduce the waiting list and provide timely access to services.
The provincial government policy of eliminating ABA services in schools by grade 5 has caused many children in Manitoba to age out of the window for this very effective ABA treatment because of a lack of access. Many more children are expected to age out because of a lack of available treatment spaces.
Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or age out of eligibility for ABA services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Labour consider making funding available to address the current waiting list for ABA services.
And this is signed by A. Robinson, C. Petersen, J. Moses and many others, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
The preschool waiting list for ABA services has reached its highest level ever with at least 56 children waiting for services. That number is expected to exceed 70 children by September 2013 despite commitments to reduce the waiting list and provide timely access to services.
The provincial government policy of eliminating ABA services in schools by grade 5 has caused many children in Manitoba to age out of the window for this very effective ABA treatment because of a lack of access. Many more children are expected to age out because of a lack of available treatment spaces.
Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or age out of eligibility for ABA services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Labour consider making funding available to address the current waiting list for ABA services.
This petition is signed by M. de Guzman, X.V. Bhouani, V. Mercier and many other fine Manitobans.
Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum
Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition:
(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.
(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.
(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.
(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum.
This petition is submitted on behalf of S. Gray, S. McNaught, P. Anderson and many other fine Manitobans.
Applied Behaviour Analysis Services
Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
And these are the reasons for this petition:
(1) The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of 'autisic'–autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) School learning services has its first ever waiting list which started with two children. The waiting list is projected to keep growing and to be in excess of 20 children by September 2013. Therefore, these children will go through the biggest transition of their lives without receiving ABA services that has helped other children achieve huge gains.
(4) The provincial government has adopted a policy of–to eliminate ABA services in schools by grade 5 despite the fact that these children have been diagnosed with autism which still requires therapy. These children are being denied necessary ABA services that will allow them to access–allow them access to the same educational opportunities as any other Manitoban.
(5) Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or eliminated from eligibility of–for ABA services if they need–if their need still exists.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Education consider making funding available to eliminate the current waiting list for ABA school-age services and fund the ABA services for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
And, Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by J. Houle, E. Racette, A. Malcolm and many others.
Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
School learning services has its first ever waiting list which started with two children. The waiting list is projected to keep growing and to be in excess of 20 children by September 2013. Therefore, these children will go through the biggest transition of their lives without receiving ABA services that have–has helped other children achieve huge gains.
The provincial government has adopted a policy to eliminate ABA services in schools by grade 5 despite the fact that these children have been diagnosed with autism which still requires therapy. These children are being denied necessary ABA services that will allow them access to the same educational opportunities as any other Manitoban.
Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or eliminated from eligibility for ABA services if their needs still exist.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Education consider making funding available to eliminate the current waiting list for ABA school-age services and fund ABA services for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
This petition is signed by R. Hodgson, S. Siddigi, Z. Dzwonyk and many, many other fine Manitobans.
Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not allow–or did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) The preschool waiting list for ABA services has reached its highest level ever with at least 56 children waiting for services. That number is expected to exceed 70 children by September 2013 despite commitments to reduce the waiting list and provide timely access to services.
* (13:50)
(4) The provincial government policy of eliminating ABA services in schools by grade 5 has caused many children in Manitoba to age out of the window for this very effective ABA treatment because of a lack of access. Many more children are expected to age out because of a lack of available treatment spaces.
Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or age out of eligibility for ABA services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Labour consider making funding available to address the current waiting list for ABA services.
And this petition is signed by L. Tschetter, J. McCrea, H. Tabor and many, many other fine Manitobans.
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) The preschool waiting list for ABA services has reached its highest level ever with at least 56 children waiting for services. That number is expected to exceed 70 children by September 2013 despite commitments to reduce the waiting list and provide timely access to services.
(4) The provincial government policy of eliminating ABA services in schools by grade 5 has caused many children in Manitoba to age out of the window for this very effective ABA treatment because of a lack of access. Many more children are expected to age out because of a lack of available treatment spaces.
(5) Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or age out of eligibility for ABA services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Labour consider making funding available to address the current waiting list for ABA services.
Signed by T. Braker, G. Tresoor, M. Beheut and many other Manitobans.
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) School learning services has its first ever waiting list which started with two children. The waiting list is projected to keep growing and to be in excess of 20 children by September 2013. Therefore, these children will go through the biggest transition of their lives without receiving ABA services that has helped other children achieve huge gains.
(4) The provincial government has adopted a policy to eliminate ABA services in schools by grade 5 despite the fact that these children have been diagnosed with autism which still requires therapy. These children are being denied necessary ABA services that will allow them access to the same educational opportunities as any other Manitoban.
(5) Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or eliminated from eligibility for ABA services if their need still exists.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Education consider making funding available to eliminate the current waiting list for ABA school-age services and fund ABA services for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
This is signed by A. Todd, L. Todd, D. Todd and many, many other Manitobans.
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
The provincial government broke a commitment to support families of children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, including timely diagnosis and access to necessary treatment such as applied behavioural analysis, also known as ABA services.
(2) The provincial government did not follow its own policy statement on autism services which notes the importance of early intervention for children with autism.
(3) School learning services has its first ever waiting list which started with two children. The waiting list is projected to keep growing and to be in excess of 20 children by September 2013. Therefore, these children will go through the biggest transition of their lives without receiving ABA services that has helped other children achieve huge gains.
(4) The provincial government has adopted a policy to eliminate ABA services in schools by grade 5 despite the fact that these children have been diagnosed with autism which still requires therapy. These children are being denied necessary ABA services which will allow them access to the same educational opportunities as any other Manitoban.
(5) Waiting lists and denials of treatment are unacceptable. No child should be denied access to or eliminated from eligibility for ABA services if their need still exists.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Education consider making funding available to eliminate the current waiting list for ABA school-age services and fund ABA services for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
And this petition is signed by L. Delgloye, P. Grumbo, M. Dyck and many, many others.
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
And these are the reasons for this petition:
(1) Manitoba has a thriving and competitive retail environment in communities near its borders, including Bowsman, Swan River, 'Miniotas,' Benito, Roblin, Russell, Binscarth, St. 'Carth,' Birtle, Elkhorn, Virden, Melita, Waskada, Boissevain, Deloraine, Cartwright, Pilot Mound, Crystal City, Manitou, Morden, Winkler, Plum Coulee, Altona, Gretna, Emerson, Morris, Killarney, Sprague, Vita, Reston, Pierson, Miniota, McAuley, St. Malo, Tilston, Foxwarren and many others.
(2) Both the Saskatchewan PST rate and the North Dakota retail sales tax rate are 5 per cent, and the Minnesota retail tax–sales tax rate is 6 per cent.
(3) The retail sales tax is 40 per cent cheaper in North Dakota and Saskatchewan and 25 per cent cheaper in Minnesota as compared to Manitoba.
(4) The differential in tax rates creates a disincentive for Manitoba consumers to shop locally to purchase their goods and services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To acknowledge the increase in the PST will significantly encourage cross-border shopping and put additional strain on retail sector, especially for those businesses located close to the Manitoba provincial borders.
To urge the provincial government to reverse its PST increase to ensure Manitoba consumers can shop affordably in Manitoba and support local businesses.
And this petition has been signed by J. Pappel, M. McGee and L. Friesen and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Mr. Speaker: I have no guests to introduce this afternoon, so we'll proceed directly to–
Government Record
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, my thanks go out to Sir Paul McCartney for assisting in the preparation of this week's integrity quiz.
Despite his promise not to increase taxes, the Premier has done so, and we on this side believe it's time to get back to keeping promises. Taking $1,600 from each and every household by broadening and deepening the PST, the Premier is making Manitobans work harder, eight days a week, in fact, and there is something wrong with that.
* (14:00)
In doing so, he's ensured his place in Manitoba history, not just as a breaker of promises but as a record tax hiker. He's in first place.
He's broken the 25-year-old record of which Manitoba premier: (a) Ed Schreyer, (b) Howard Pawley or (c) the MLA for Thompson?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): I'm sure it was a hard day's night for the member opposite to prepare that question, Mr. Speaker, but you know what? They were the ones that promised $550 million of cuts to services in Manitoba. That's their solution to coming out of a recession: put people on the unemployment rolls, whether they're nurses or teachers or corrections workers. That's their solution: put more people on the unemployment rolls.
Our approach is to build the Manitoba economy, educate Manitobans, ensure that there are personal-care homes for the elderly that need it, to ensure there's daycare centres for people that want to work and to make sure that we build roads, and particular, Mr. Speaker, ensure that we have infrastructure to protect communities from floods.
Government Record
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, maybe I'm amazed that the Premier continues to twist and shout with his responses, Mr. Speaker. Putting false information repeatedly on the record does not make it true.
The NDP says that we have Canada's largest bureaucracy here in Manitoba, but in last year's budget they promised to come together and reduce the size of the civil service by 200 positions by imposing a hiring chill and giving government employees a ticket to ride, a kind of live-and-let-die strategy.
Did the Premier (a) reduce the size of the civil service since then, (b) just let it be, or (c) did he increase the size of the civil service by more than 400 positions?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): I was going to ask for some help for that question, but it was a little helter-skelter.
And the reality is this, Mr. Speaker. If we follow the approach of the Leader of the Opposition, the sun will never come, and we want to see the sun come up in Manitoba every day where people have jobs, where people have opportunities, where seniors are looked after, where people get a chance to get skills training, where our students go to new schools where they can get an education. It's a dramatic difference.
When the member opposite was a senior member of the Filmon Cabinet in the '90s, what did he do? He fired teachers. He fired nurses. He stopped building schools. He stopped building personal-care homes. He stopped building roads. That's not a way to the future. That's a way to the past.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, with a final supplementary.
Manitoba Ranking
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, some people want to save the world with silly quizzes, Mr. Speaker, and what's wrong with that?
The NDP's been waving the unemployment rate ranking around to tell Manitobans how they can manage the economy, despite the fact, of course, that Canada's lowest unemployment rate was in existence in Manitoba before they arrived on the scene here in Manitoba. There's clearly something about the NDP approach that doesn't work.
StatsCan reports last month 3,400 fewer jobs just in July. So we're no longer the lowest unemployment rate; we're the third lowest in Canada.
The question's why. Why are there fewer Manitoba jobs? Is it because (a) ribbon cuttings don't create real jobs, (b) Stats Canada's fudging the numbers because they're a right-wing think tank, or (c) is it thanks to record tax increases? Some Manitobans actually need to get by with a little help from their friends.
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, it's very clear the Leader of the Opposition's theme song is I believe in yesterday. There's no doubt about it. [inaudible] He wants to go back to the '90s when his solution to every problem was to cut something or to lay somebody off, was to cancel a project.
Mr. Speaker, there's 9,100 more jobs in Manitoba during the last year, 14,000 jobs in the private sector. That's a enviable record of employment creation in Manitoba. Businesses are creating jobs. Non-profit corporations are creating jobs. Manitoba entrepreneurs are creating jobs, and we're working with them to do that by building roads and schools, making sure people get an education so they can have a trade and start a small business.
And what does the leader want to do to that? He wants to have across-the-board, indiscriminate cuts, $550 million of unemployment in Manitoba. That's yesterday's news.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
US Export Prices
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, the Premier's the one that makes the retro thing look very real while he takes Manitobans on his magical mystery tour, but the reality is he's not listening. He's not listening to Manitobans. He's not even listening to former senior NDP politicians like Tim Sale or Len Evans or even Ed Schreyer.
And as more and more Manitobans become aware of the NDP's plan to Americanize Manitoba Hydro, they're all saying the same thing to this Premier. Why don't you listen to what the men said? The Premier's been repeating old talking points. He keeps talking about selling to the US at premium prices, but his decade-old business plan is based on yesterday.
What is the difference between market prices now and the price when the spenDP drafted their misguided hydro plan? Is the current price for hydro exports to the US (a) higher, (b) the same or (c) much, much lower?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition can twist and shout as much as he wants, but there are $7 billion of newly signed contracts for exports of Manitoba hydro, $29 billion of export revenue over the next 30 years.
But there's a couple of things you have to do to realize those benefits, Mr. Speaker. You have to be willing to proceed to build new dams in the northern Manitoba, in partnership with First Nations. You have to be willing to put new transmission capacity in place, and when you do that, you will have the opportunity to increase our exports and maintain our exports, which will keep Manitoba Hydro's rates the lowest in North America.
So twist and shout as much as you want. We're going to build it; they're going to stop it. That's the way it's always been in Manitoba.
West Route Cost
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): The Premier fails to understand that the money he takes credit for spending isn't his. It belongs to Manitobans, Mr. Speaker.
And hydro prices are dropping significantly, hydro profits are down significantly, and this is even before the massive costs of the bipole west waste line, which, as Sir Paul describes it, is the long and winding road, which its costs will be high, high, high, Mr. Speaker.
Now, how much higher will those costs actually be? Will they be (a) more than the NDP committed to spend on infrastructure in the city of Winnipeg over the next half decade, (b) more than the cost of 25 new, fully equipped community recreation centres, or (c) more than the cost of reopening all of Manitoba's currently shutdown ERs or (d) all of the above combined?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition had his way, we'd be nowhere, man. That's where we'd be when it comes to the future of Manitoba. No hydro would get built, just like he wanted to stop building flood protection for the city of Winnipeg, just like he wants to halt building hydro, just like he wants to stop building schools and hospitals, just like he wants to lay off Manitobans.
We'd be nowhere, man, Mr. Speaker. That's not a future. That's yesterday's man.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, with a final supplementary.
Customer Service Ranking
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, the right answer was (d), Mr. Speaker, and again we've got to give the Premier a zero on his integrity quiz. It's too bad. It's too bad he refuses to take it seriously.
The NDP's refused to listen. They refuse to listen to us. They refuse to listen to Manitobans. They refuse to listen to a public referendum. They refuse to do proper consultation. It makes me feel like I'm back in the USSR.
Now, MPI just ranked 14 out of 15 in customer service. More than 10 per cent of customers rated the service as unacceptable. The government should be looking for help, but they're not looking.
Now, why is it they're not looking? Is it because (a) they like monopolies because competition's overrated, (b) they think customer service means the customer serves them, or (c) maybe they're hoping we'll move up from 14th to 13th with a little luck, or maybe it's (d) all of the above?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, it was only candidates running for the members of the opposition who wanted to privatize the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation. That's what they wanted to do.
It follows the same thing they did when the Leader of the Opposition was in office. He said he wouldn't privatize the telephone system and promptly went out and did it. What was the result, Mr. Speaker? The rates went from the third lowest in Canada to among the highest in Canada. And many communities cannot get access to the high-speed telephone and communication services that are enjoyed in other provinces where they own their telephone system.
That is not the future. That's nowhere man. That's yesterday's man. That is a recipe for taking Manitoba downhill, Mr. Speaker. When it comes to rubber soul, the members opposite are all about that.
We're about building the province. We're about educating Manitobans. We're about making sure roads are built. We're about sure–we're about making sure we move Manitoba forward for a bright future, Mr. Speaker. Here comes the sun, if we follow a policy of growth.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for St. Norbert–St. Paul.
* (14:10)
Sewer and Water Project Update
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Mr. Speaker, I wish to table documents for the Legislature. Today I table photocopies of photos taken, and they're for the minister for Kildonan's album of shame.
These photos show that sewer and water, Mr. Speaker, has been backing up in homes in the TCN First Nation. In fact, it's worse than that. Basically what's backing up is fecal content and urine into bathtubs and toilets of the TCN First Nation.
After 83 days and 45 questions, I'd like to ask the minister responsible: After $4 million, where is the sewer and water system for the TCN First Nation?
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Because of the misinformation put on the record by the member yesterday, we talked with the chief of TCN–just got off the phone a few minutes ago–and apparently the federal department which is responsible for sewer provided $7 million for a lagoon and piping just recently in the community, where there is sewer and water, Mr. Speaker. And provided that sewer and water is a responsibility of the federal government, they've just provided a $7‑million project that's been done–is continuing to be done at that community.
I regret, Mr. Speaker, that we have visions to develop the North and work with First Nations to do that. I regret the members opposite want to attack initiatives, whether by this federal government–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time has expired.
Mr. Schuler: I'd ask members opposite, members of the NDP, to take pause. I don't think this is a laughing matter. This is very serious and these are all Manitobans.
In the video released today that was taken in March–and it is symbolic of the kinds of things that are going on before that video was made and after–there is sewer, fecal content and urine backing up into bathtubs and bathrooms of the TCN First Nation. This isn't something that's in the abstract, it's reality, and the minister getting up and putting those kinds of misinformation on the record is wrong.
Manitoba Hydro funded the TCN First Nation to the tune of $4 million for a sewer and water system that does not exist and it puts at risk these families.
When will he stand up and–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The member's time has expired.
Mr. Chomiak: The member's categorically wrong. He's wrong.
Manitoba Hydro provided the Government of Canada and TCN with funding for potable water. That agreement settled the agreement. The agreement was signed off. It was for potable water; it was provided to the Government of Canada on behalf of the agreement between the Government of Canada and TCN. The agreement's in writing; it's settled. The money was provided. Manitoba Hydro has no responsibility for that.
I regret that members opposite want to cancel hydro projects. They want to cancel the fact that 10 years ago there were 300 people working at Manitoba Hydro of Aboriginal background, now there's close to a thousand. They want to stop that. They will do anything to stop development in the north, to stop the building of the North and to get First Nations people working, like all of us are.
Mr. Speaker: Okay. The honourable minister's time has expired.
Mr. Schuler: The minister is wrong. In fact, I quoted from documents earlier on, a couple of weeks ago, in which it was Manitoba Hydro that categorically stated that $4 million was to go to a sewer and water project. Manitoba Hydro's words, and I'll take their word over the minister's word any day and every day. The minister has it wrong.
Four million dollars went to a sewer and water system that was never built, and now fecal content and urine is backing up into bathtubs and bathrooms, and families are expected to live in this squalor. If you look at the video, you can't even walk into the bathroom. It's so unsafe. It smells so bad.
Why doesn't he go up and visit the TCN First Nation and then report back the kind of conditions they live in? Shame on this minister.
Why won't he be accountable for what he's done and start putting some accountability to these dollars?
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The member's time has expired.
Mr. Chomiak: I hope to be–I hope to have the chance to go up to TCN when they 'crou'–when the groundbreaking ceremony takes place to develop the Keeyask Centre on money that was provided to the TCN for TCN to do that.
I again reiterate Hydro signed off on sewer and water and potable water to 'manit'–to Government of Canada and TCN. It is totally their responsibility. The chief advised me just to–advised us on the phone just several minutes ago that $7 million has gone into sewer and water. There is sewer and water in the community. It's the responsibility of the chief and council and the Government of Canada.
The money was in return for an NFA agreement signed by the former, mean-spirited Filmon government. It was settled and signed and provided to the First Nation and the Government of Canada as an offset, and Hydro has no responsibility for that in law–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired.
Case Files
Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): In June 2005, Phoenix Sinclair was murdered by her mother and stepfather. Nine months later, her body was found at the dump in Fisher River. The NDP government reacted by announcing three reviews, one specific to Phoenix Sinclair's case, and a provincial inquiry.
Since 2006, we have been asking for clarity on what was being done to ensure Phoenix Sinclair's case file documents were being protected.
Mr. Speaker, what did this government–NDP government do to ensure critical case file information was available for the reviews, the court case and the inquiry?
Hon. Jennifer Howard (Minister of Family Services and Labour): I think, as the member mentioned in her question, there were several reviews done in the aftermath of the horrific murder of Phoenix Sinclair. All of those reviews were made available to the inquiry. I believe all of those reviews through the inquiry have been made available publicly.
The protocol that was in place, the standards that were in place governing how documents were to be kept were the same standards that were brought in place by the former government in 1999. Since then, we have strengthened those standards.
The Winnipeg Child and Family Services has a very strong policy in terms of how supervisor records are to be kept. That policy is in place today.
I expect we'll see even more recommendations on this issue come forward from the inquiry, and we're committed to ensuring those recommendations are put in place.
Mrs. Rowat: She failed to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, in March 2006, the member for Riel (Ms. Melnick) said, and I quote: By respecting these processes, we will get the real answers to the real facts and the real way in which we can make life better for the children of Manitoba.
Well, Mr. Speaker, seven years later, the real issue continues to be a lack of accountability and lack of clarity with regard to the case file protection. This enforces–or reinforces at best that the minister and her colleagues remain disinterested bystandards–bystanders on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, Manitobans want to know what happened with Phoenix Sinclair's case files. What did the government know, and what did they do to address the concern of missing and/or shredded case files?
Ms. Howard: The inquiry that has just concluded the testimony phase, is about to begin the report writing phase, had over 120 witnesses and over 90 days of testimony. And, Mr. Speaker, I believe that Commissioner Hughes and his commission counsel will do an excellent job of providing a full picture of what happened and recommendations for the future.
When it became apparent that there were records that were missing, there was an exhaustive search undertaken by the Winnipeg Child and Family Services. That work was done with the full knowledge of the inquiry, in co-operation with the inquiry. It is entirely regrettable that those files were not able to be found, but the standards that were in place under the previous government were the standards that were in place in the aftermath of Phoenix Sinclair's murder.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired.
Mrs. Rowat: Mr. Speaker, today Manitoba has over 10,000 children in care. Conflicting answers from this minister and her colleagues is a serious concern. The minister's assistant deputy minister says that the issue of shredded documents is broader in scope than just Phoenix Sinclair's file, that shredded documents were an issue beyond the one set of records.
When will the minister provide clarity on what has happened here? Mr. Speaker, how many other case files and cases on vulnerable children may have gone missing as a result of this minister's inability to protect those files? Where are the files? Why were they shredded? Who gave that directive?
Ms. Howard: Mr. Speaker, the member makes many assumptions, many wrong assumptions.
As I said yesterday, the sentence that they are relying from in the testimony was a sentence in minutes by managers in Winnipeg and Child and Family Services referring to the transfer of documents of intake documents. If you look at the next set of minutes, it says clearly that they came up with a protocol for the storage of those records, not for the destruction of those records. They've taken that one sentence and tried to make it into an elaborate conspiracy theory for which there is no basis in fact.
We will continue on the path that we're on to protect children. We've made tremendous investments in the system. We know there are more workers with better tools today doing their best for families, and that's who we will stand with.
* (14:20)
Project Costs
Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, the Student Financial Aid Information System was tendered in 2009. Phase 1 was completed in December 2010. Phase 2 was promised for June 2011. The 2011 date was missed and a new date of November 2011 was stated. That date was also missed and the new date was June 2012, which was also missed. The next date set was June 2013, which appears to have also been missed.
Mr. Speaker, considering all the missed dates, would the minister tell the House what the student financial aid package has cost the taxpayers of Manitoba to this date?
Hon. Erin Selby (Minister of Advanced Education and Literacy): I thank the member for finally giving me a question.
I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, that, as the member said, we have an online system in place right now. Students do access our student financial services online. But like most information technology, much like a road or a bridge, you do have to renew these things, and so we have been looking at renewing the student aid financial system. As the member said, phase 1 of that system came in on time and on budget and is up and running and has been working with students.
We have been looking at replacing a current portion of the project. It is a very complex project and we know that in other jurisdictions they faced some difficulties. We have been looking at that and making sure that the system is up and running to the standards that we expect. We've gone through a high‑level review of it and are looking closely–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired.
Mr. Briese: I didn't hear any sign of an answer in that. I asked what the cost of that program was to this point.
Mr. Speaker, in May 2012 a technical review was ordered and supposedly completed.
Would the minister table the costs and results of the technical review, and would she indicate the expected completion date of phase 2?
Ms. Selby: As the member just said, yes, as I mentioned in the first answer, that we have been doing a review of the system. We're looking at it right now and looking at it closely to see which parts are functional and deciding what the next steps are to make sure that we're providing a full and relevant and strong system for our students.
But, you know, I would ask the member, if he's worried about students and making sure that they have access to things, he might want to ask the member of his party that–why it was, when students were under his authority when he was a member of Cabinet, they raised tuition 132 per cent while they were in office. Mr. Speaker, there were a lot more students who were looking for student loans under their government than have to under ours with our affordable tuition policies.
Mr. Briese: Mr. Speaker, I'm still not hearing any response to my question about costs.
Phase 2 is still not in place, and in Estimates the minister indicted that a review of the recommendations of the first review is being done. The minister is not only being disrespectful to taxpayers, she is also disrespecting students.
With the additional review of a review, would the minister please tell the House what the actual costs are for phase 2 implementation, or is she simply too embarrassed by the cost overruns to share this information?
Ms. Selby: As I said, we do have an online system in place. Students can go online and access student financial aid services. But I would also point out to the member that when students go online and take a look at student aid, under this government, they can apply for bursaries.
Mr. Speaker, when his leader was sitting around the Cabinet table, they decided to cut bursaries. So, when students applied for student loans for that 132 per cent increase in student fees that they were looking at in tuition over the 10 years that they were there, they not only had to pay more to go to school and to see their fees going up increasingly every year as enrolment dropped–no coincidence, I'm sure–but students were not allowed to apply for bursaries.
We have bursaries now. We have a 60 per cent tuition rebate, and because of that, we put $88 million back into the pockets of students who have graduated and put down roots in Manitoba.
Closure Notifications
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): Yesterday, the Minister of Health said that the RHA has to respond to notify a community if there isn't a doctor in ER.
Yet the Pine Falls ER was closed for 12 days in July, and there was no notice in the Clipper or other local notices in the community to tell that community when there wasn't a doctor in the ER.
The minister promises the community will be notified. The community is not notified. Why?
Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): As I explained to the member yesterday, I was very clear about the fact that the regional health authority posted an article in the paper concerning nurse‑managed care, explained carefully to members of the community that, indeed, when physician services were temporarily suspended that nurses would be providing that care. The article went on to speak about the fact that nurses provide excellent care. I've tried to reiterate this to members opposite who seem to disregard nurses at every turn.
And perhaps I'll take this opportunity to ask the member about how he thinks that his leader's privatization efforts–that he refused to acknowledge this morning–would assist in promoting good ER care.
Mr. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, the minister doesn't seem to get it that STARS plus EMS does not equal doctors on ward in ERs.
And the forecast calls for 31 degrees this Friday. I know that's a comfort to us all. That means Manitobans are going to the lake, many of them to cottage country, many of them to the Interlake where population swells and those ER rooms are needed.
Are the ERs going to be open, and how is the community supposed to get the message this weekend of where to go if they need emergency medical services?
Ms. Oswald: The member said that he doesn't believe that EMS and the STARS helicopter are important. This, I think, is probably going to be a central part of their health-care platform going forward.
But, really, what I can say to the member opposite is that RHAs will inform communities when there's going to be nurse-managed care. Indeed, when nurses are in rural ERs providing nurse‑managed care, it is excellent care. It is not care that you cast aside and ignore, as members opposite have said from time to time.
And lastly, Mr. Speaker, perhaps the member missed the news release this morning that said that we are now at a record number in Manitoba's history at 2,599 doctors in Manitoba.
Mr. Friesen: Yes, and speaking of records, a record number of closed ERs in Manitoba. This on‑again, off-again approach to ER services for rural communities doesn't give communities any level of comfort.
Mr. Speaker, how long does the minister think that this approach can continue until an actual incident occurs because of the ER closures that she's allowed to continue in these communities?
Ms. Oswald: Well, it's for this very reason that we have been explicitly clear that we are going to bring more doctors into the system, not less like was the case under members opposite. It's for this very reason that we promised that we would bring more nurses to the bedside, indeed, three and a half nurses for every one that they fired. And, indeed, I can say, Mr. Speaker, it's why we're going to continue to build and renovate our facilities in rural and northern Manitoba.
And we're not going to make the short-sighted decisions as were made by the Leader of the Opposition when he was in Cabinet to freeze health capital, to cut medical school spaces and to fire nurses. These are ill-conceived ideas that hurt going into the future.
We're building Manitoba and the health-care system.
Advocacy Role
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, there are so many problems and issues coming forward under this government that it's sure a good thing that Sir Paul gave us eight days a week.
This week at the Phoenix–at the Brian Sinclair inquiry, we learned that the Manitoba Public Trustee was responsible for Brian Sinclair for the last year of his life. The Public Trustee is, time to time, entrusted with the care of individuals like Mr. Sinclair who are incapable of living and managing independently and don't have a close friend or family who can look after them.
I ask the Premier: What are the expectations this government has of the Public Trustee in looking after a person in Mr. Sinclair's situation?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): The role of the Public Trustee is very important in Manitoba, particularly for any individual that does not have a family member or somebody in a position where they can provide care to them. The Public Trustee will step in. They will help them with basic financial matters. They will help them with legal matters. They will help them with other arrangements that are necessary in their lives.
* (14:30)
And the role of the Public Trustee is a role that we've provided legislative improvements to to strengthen their capacity to serve members of the public that have no other visible or noble support within the community.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, you know, the Public Trustee's website says, and I quote: The Public Trustee makes personal decisions on behalf of mentally incompetent adults or vulnerable adults.
In Manitoba it's vital, as the Premier should know, in order to get good health care, to have someone who is a strong advocate for the person, particularly a person who lacks the capacity to arrange and organize their own care needs.
I ask the Premier: Does he expect the Public Trustee to be an advocate for good health care for someone for whom the trustee is responsible who is not mentally competent?
Mr. Selinger: The short answer, Mr. Speaker, is the Public Trustee can play a role in advocating for health care for somebody that may not otherwise be able to access it. That is a role they can play.
And I can tell you that the role of the Public Trustee in this particular case will be reviewed as part of the inquest, and if there are any recommendations to strengthen that role, they will certainly be respected by this government.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, you know, we are looking at the moment for changes to The Public Trustee Act in this Legislature, and it's come to my attention that nowhere in the act does it say that the Public Trustee must take into account the best interests of the person the Public Trustee is responsible for.
I ask the pub–the Premier: Will he support the report stage amendment to Bill 36 which I tabled yesterday that includes a clause to say that the Public Trustee must act in the best interests of the vulnerable person who is under their authority?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): We will certainly take the recommendation of the Leader of the Liberal Party under consideration.
The Public Trustee, by its very nature, is there to serve the best interests of the people they're looking after. That's inherent in the role. That's why the very office was put in place in the first place, and everybody who plays that role in the Public Trustee's office, often people with legal training, obviously put the needs of their clients as the No. 1 priority. That's fundamental to their professional training, is that the client comes first and that their obligation as a lawyer, as a Public Trustee, is to put the needs of the client first. That's part of their code of ethics. That's part of their training. That's inherent in the nature of the Public Trustee's office.
If there's any misunderstanding of that, we'd be happy to discuss that with the Leader of the Opposition and look at what other communications or measures could be put in place to strengthen that role. But that's the inherent nature of the role, Mr. Speaker.
Government Announcement
Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, we know that Manitoba families want and deserve access to a doctor when they need one close to home. Manitoba history clearly shows us that the short‑sighted decision to cut health spending, physician training spaces and investments in hospitals, is bad for Manitoba families and has long‑lasting impacts on the health system.
I am proud that the number of doctors in our province continues to rise because our government knows health care is a top priority of Manitobans.
Could the Minister of Health please update the House on today's exciting news?
Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): What a great opportunity, Mr. Speaker.
I am delighted to inform the House, in case they couldn't hear over the din earlier, that the college of physicians and 'survens'–of surgeons indeed reports to Manitobans that in the last year Manitoba has had a gain of 61 net new doctors. [interjection] Thank you very much. That, indeed, is an increase. It means that we have 562 more doctors practising in Manitoba than in 1999.
I would take this opportunity to let the House know that from the years 1992 to 1998, Mr. Speaker, when members across the way had their hands on the wheels, we saw a net loss of 117 doctors.
Loss of 117, gain of 562. What do you choose?
Death Certificate Fee
Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): Well, Mr. Speaker, that really speaks to NDP mismanagement. She says they've got more doctors–most ERs we've ever had close in the province of Manitoba under her watch.
Mr. Speaker, we know the NDP have a huge appetite to spend. As a result, they've been trying to find new and innovative ways to get their hands on Manitobans' money. They've increased fees and taxes at an unprecedented rate. It appears the NDP will tax almost anything and everything.
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the government: Is there any truth to the reports the NDP will now be taxing Manitobans at the time of their death?
Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance): Well, Mr. Speaker, that was quite a way for the member from Spruce Woods to start his question, by accusing us of mismanaging in order to get more doctors–more doctors–they–I–members opposite have it backwards, I'm afraid.
Mr. Speaker, we have–we on this side of the House have been very up front in saying that we would increase by 1 cent on the dollar the PST and that that money would be very strictly dedicated to infrastructure in Manitoba, building roads, building bridges, building schools, building hospitals. We're going to do that in a accountable, upfront way. We're going to report back to the Legislature as Bill 20 indicates.
Mr. Speaker, we don't take lightly when we increase a tax like the PST–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired.
Mr. Cullen: Well, Mr. Speaker, let's talk about Bill 20. We had Humphry Davy appear before committee on June 27th. He talked about the highest income taxes west of Québec. He talked about increase in land transfer tax. He talked about the increases in alcohol, saying that I can't even drown your sorrows here in Manitoba. As the saying goes, there's nothing for sure except death and taxes.
The NDP have increased the certificate fee–death certificate fee by 25 per cent last year, Mr. Speaker. Now it appears they're proposing yet another tax on death.
Mr. Speaker, why is the NDP taxing us from the grave?
Mr. Struthers: Well, Mr. Speaker, it appears that there's–it appears there's nothing more certain than death, taxes and cuts by Tories.
Mr. Speaker, quite clearly we have put forward a plan to the people of Manitoba that includes revenue increases dedicated to building schools and hospitals and roads and bridges in this province.
And very clearly the member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Pallister) and his counterparts across the way have put forward a plan of cuts, $550 million indiscriminately across every department, including Health and including Education, Mr. Speaker.
I'll put our vision up against their vision any day, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for Spruce Woods, with a final supplementary.
Mr. Cullen: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure the minister's going to be out having his spin doctors try to bury this new tax.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP are taxing Manitobans to the brink. We are taxed on birth certificates, we are taxed on death certificates and now we're taxed at death.
When will the end of the road come for the NDP taxes, Mr. Speaker? When will the NDP listen to Paul McCartney's advice–take his advice, just let us live and let die?
Mr. Struthers: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm not willing, as a rural MLA, to sit back and let rural Manitoba die as the members opposite would with the kind of cuts and hacking and slashing that they would do as per the–not just the history of the member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Pallister), who was a member of the Filmon government who cut back on nurses and teachers, but, Mr. Speaker, as early as a couple months ago, the member for Fort Whyte repeated all those failed policies from the 1990s and he promised that he would bring them back and he would do it to the tune of $550 million in cuts, indiscriminate, across‑the‑board cuts, right across the board, every single department, including health care and Education. And right back to the 1990s, where for five years–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired.
Request to Reverse
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, 93 per cent of small-business owners are opposed to the PST hike, and their optimism is decreasing day by day. Competitiveness is down. Purchasing power is down. Input costs are up. Cross-border shopping is up. Optimism across the economy is down to its lowest level ever.
Mr. Speaker, when will this government reverse their illegal PST hike and restore a shred of optimism in this province?
Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance): Well, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite are content to badmouth the Manitoba economy, to say doom‑and‑gloom things about Manitoba itself. That's not our approach on this side of the House.
* (14:40)
Our approach on this side of the House is to invest in Manitoba's economy, to invest in Manitoba infrastructure, to invest in roads and bridges, to invest in schools, to invest in hospitals.
And, Mr. Speaker, we're not going to be backed off by anybody from that side of the House. We're going to continue on a positive agenda and not get dragged into the mud by members opposite.
Mr. Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired.
It's time for–
Charleswood Centennial–Swedish Community in Charleswood
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, Charleswood has been excited to celebrate its 100th birthday in 2013, and there is another group within Charleswood that shares that same birthday. That group is Lodge Strindberg No. 259.
I was fortunate to join the Charleswood Legion, Charleswood Historical Society and the Swedish community at a centennial dinner and dance and attend a Swedish picnic the following day.
Neil Carlson brought greetings from the Swedish community in Winnipeg and the Swedish Embassy to Canada in Ottawa, as well as from the Swedish Council of America. He also provided us with information about the background of the Swedish influence in Charleswood and Canada.
It's been 100 years since the Swedes first began arriving in Canada. In 1913, they organized the Strindberg Lodge, a fraternal organization where Swedes could gather to reminisce about the homeland, talk about their new life in their new country and dream about the future for them and their children. Lodge Strindberg is the oldest Swedish lodge in Canada.
Winnipeg acted as the Swedish capital of Canada for the large wave of immigration starting in the late 1890s and ended with the onset of the First World War in 1914. At that time, Logan Avenue was known as Swedish-Canada's Snuff Boulevard with everything a Swede could wish for. You could speak Swedish wherever you went and could purchase Canada Posten or the Svenska Canada Tidningen.
The Swedish community banded together to purchase land in Charleswood and bought a building on the land where the Swedes could gather and celebrate their culture. As time passed, the building was expanded and they started a business catering the famous Swedish smorgasbord to citizens of Winnipeg. They also constructed the Swedish‑Canadian home for seniors on Roblin Boulevard. And today the Swedish community has further developed the property into a very successful 55-plus life lease complex.
Congratulations to Lodge Strindberg and to the Swedish community. They can be very, very proud of their 100-year success in Canada and in Manitoba and in Charleswood.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Universal Health Care
Ms. Erna Braun (Rossmere): Mr. Speaker, this morning there was a passionate debate about the future of our health-care system, whether to protect our universal medicare or to adopt American-style two-tier health care.
Manitobans have participated in experiments with two-tier health care and user fees in the 1990s, when the rich could pay $1,000 to buy their way to the front of the line for surgery in a private clinic. Those who promote two-tier medicine as a solution try to suggest that it will give the rest of us–those who can't afford to pay the user fees–better care too, but it doesn't. The reality with that experiment and the experiences in many other countries with parallel private systems means those who access care in the public system end up waiting longer and longer.
So, if it's not good for patients, why pursue it? Well, we're told by those two-tier advocates that it's good for the bottom line for taxpayers, but that doesn't hold any water either, Mr. Speaker. Manitoba was forced to pay over $2 million in federal penalties in the 1990s because of the government's experiment with two-tier health care.
Mr. Speaker, based on all this, it's hard to believe people would still peddle two-tier medicine as a solution, but they do. Most of all, this American‑style two-tier system hurts the very people who built this province, our seniors. They deserve to receive testing and treatment when they need it without bankrupting themselves or their families. Our seniors, too, need to know that they won't have to pay home-care user fees like the ones seniors started paying here in the 1990s.
Mr. Speaker, we won't put the health of Manitobans on the line. We're keeping health care universal.
Lakeside Lions
Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I'm honoured to stand today to recognize the generous contributions the Lakeside Lions have made to their community.
One of the most recent and inspiring projects the Lakeside Lions have taken on was to fundraise a new wheelchair for a resident in Winnipeg Beach, after their club member heard that she had expressed a wish for a wheelchair that would allow her better mobility. Electric wheelchairs can cost up to $3,000, and, as such, this was a significant fundraising initiative for the Lions Club to take on.
To raise funds for this project, the Lions Club reached out and built partnerships with the Lions Foundation of Manitoba and Northwestern Ontario, the medical assistance program and Access Mobility. They also fundraised through a variety of community events.
Their hard work paid off, and through the efforts, they were able to purchase the wheelchair for a Winnipeg Beach resident who was in great need.
On July the 17th they presented the new electric wheelchair to a Winnipeg Beach resident at Bethel home with many community members in attendance.
For years the Lakeside Lions have been a tremendous asset to the community of Winnipeg Beach and area. The Lakeside Lions are committed to answering the needs that challenge their community through fundraising at various events throughout the year. They use funds to help others in their community in meaningful ways.
The president, Jeff Wharton, said they were the first few Lions Club–chapter who has women members, which is now–has many other co-ed clubs, is a testament to the club's committed–commitment to ensuring that anyone who is interested to join them in their work.
Mr. Speaker, I'd ask all members in this House to join me in congratulating the Lakeside Lions for their selflessly dedicating their time and efforts to helping a member of their community in need. They are an excellent example of volunteerism in the community of Lakeside and for Manitoba and Winnipeg Beach area.
Assiniboia Community Appreciation Night
Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Healthy Living, Seniors and Consumer Affairs): Mr. Speaker, Assiniboia is a community that thrives on a tradition of volunteerism and service. On April 24th we continued the long-standing tradition of celebrating our dedicated volunteers at the 12th annual Assiniboia Community Appreciation Night.
It is important to recognize and thank the people who dedicate their time and energy to volunteering with the many organizations in Assiniboia and west Winnipeg. This year, over 80 guests, the Premier (Mr. Selinger) and myself celebrated at Canad Inns Polo Park. Volunteers received a gift to honour their work.
The many volunteers recognized have spent countless hours, even years, contributing their time and talents. Organizations such as the Kiwanis Club, CARP, Optimists, ANAF, alongside numerous schools, service clubs, sports organizations, hospitals and many others have been enriched by the hard work and dedication of these volunteers.
The wide variety of organizations means that everyone has a talent that they can contribute to make Assiniboia, the province and the world a better place. This year the Premier presented the Queen's Diamond Jubilee medals to community leaders Clarence and Barbara Nepinak and Colin Johnson.
Taking the time to thank everyone involved is–in the appreciation night and they have numerous volunteers is very important A big thank you to the business and community members for continuing to sponsor the evening and making it very special. Most of all, I'd like to say thank you to the volunteers themselves. Your work has made life better for the thousands of people in your community and across the province. Margaret Mead told us: Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world.
Through their efforts, of volunteers like you, the world changes a bit for the better every day. I thank all the people involved in these organizations, all the volunteers across the province who make Manitoba a great place to live.
And, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask for leave to include all the people's, all the volunteers' names and organizations that serve with, included in the Hansard. Do I have the leave?
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to include the names mentioned in the honourable member's statement in the Hansard proceedings of today's sitting? [Agreed]
Kim Tereck, Lakewood School; Misty Kowbel, Lakewood School; Stephanie Robinson, Voyageur School; Lindsey Fehr, Voyageur School; Claire Soroka, Heritage School; Colleen Sampson, Heritage School; Donna Wadin, Heritage School; Lil Atamanchuk, Buchanan School; Tracy Broughton, Buchanan School; Justin Steeves, John Taylor Collegiate; Gavin McLachlan, John Taylor Collegiate; Bonnie Leslie, Ness Middle School; Wendy Templeman, Golden West Centennial Lodge; Wilma Wiebe, Golden West Centennial Lodge; Dawn Sawchuk, Assiniboia West Recreation Assoc. Inc.; Paul Fedorowich, Assiniboia West Recreation Assoc. Inc.; Roy Penman, Assiniboia West Recreation Assoc. Inc.; Ginny Penman, Assiniboia West Recreation Assoc. Inc.; Greg Messer, Kirkfield Westwood Community Centre; Rosey Olivive, Kirkfield Westwood Community Centre; Sharon Larouche, Heritage Victoria Community Centre; Lynda McCausland, Heritage Victoria Community Centre; Glynis Zubec, Heritage Victoria Community Centre; Sharon Groombridge, Heritage Victoria Community Centre; Mary Berch, St. James Assiniboia 55+ Centre; Louise Kennedy, St. James Assiniboia 55+ Centre; Ken Liwiski, St. James Assiniboia 55+ Centre; Linda Hamilton, St. James Assiniboia 55+ Centre; Caroll Dalke, Kiwanis–Assiniboia; Harvey Dalke, Kiwanis–Assiniboia; Murdock Jardine, CAVUNP; Hayden Kent, Army Navy and Air Force Veterans No. 283; Donna Kent, Army Navy and Air Force Veterans No. 283; Ken Cade, Army Navy and Air Force Veterans No. 283; Shirley Lyon; Army Navy and Air Force Veterans No. 283; Lorna Wildeman, Assiniboine Memorial Curling Club; George Wildeman, Assiniboine Memorial Curling Club; Paul Batchelor, Assiniboine Memorial Curling Club; Loyd Olson, Assiniboine Memorial Curling Club; Annette Kohut, Oakview Place; Linda Edgell, Oakview Place; Mabel Boehmer, Lions Estates; Jim McMillan, St. James Rods Football Club; Isabelle Lafreniere, Winnipeg Military Family Resource; Debbie Faucher, Winnipeg Military Family Resource; Melanie Lyrette, Winnipeg Military Family Resource; Cheryl Sampson-Siemens, ALS Society; Gord Siemens, ALS Society; Terry Brownlee, Gold Wings–Winnipeg Airport; Art Lopuck, Gold Wings–Winnipeg Airport; Betty Zarney, Royal Canadian Legion No. 4; Maryanne McGibney, Royal Canadian Legion No. 4; Ian McCausland, 1st Crestview Scout Group; Phil Reimer, 1st Crestview Scout Group; Doug Darr, First Kirkfield Scout Group; Jo-Anne Darr, First Kirkfield Scout Group; Betty Walker, Metropolitan Kiwanis Centre; Donna Thompson, Metropolitan Kiwanis Centre; Rick McLellan, Manitoba Genealogical Society; Pat McBeth, Sturgeon District Girl Guides; Carolyn Titterton, Sturgeon District Girl Guides; Shirley Johnston, CARP; Helen MacDougall, CARP; Emily Williamson, CARP; Anne-Marie Howe, CARP; Dave McNeil, St. Charles Sharks; Warren Klassen, St. Charles Sharks; Lynn Hall, Grace Hospital; Helen Adamik, Grace Hospital; Myra Logan, Grace Hospital; Jo-Ann Mackidd, Grace Hospital; Richard Barbour, Elderobics; Ann McKeown, Elderobics; Alice Spencler, YMCA/YWCA–West Winnipeg; Heather Collins, YMCA/YWCA–West Winnipeg; Kelley Sparks, Heritage Lodge; Olga Bonnefoy, Heritage Lodge; Dillon Darr, First Kirkfield Ventures; Mark Kolynchuk, First Kirkfield Ventures; Doug Mackie, Mensheds; David Friesen, Mensheds; Alan Wolfe, Mensheds; Mike Brucki, Mensheds; Debbie Clarke, Salvation Army Heritage Park Temple; Wally Clarke, Salvation Army Heritage Park Temple; Wilma Braun, 55+ Fit and Flex; Al Seredynski, 55+ Fit and Flex; John Almdal, Prairie Dog Central.
Tataskweyak Cree Nation–Sewer and Water System
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Today I had the opportunity to table more documents for the member of Kildonan's photo album of shame, the minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro. The documents are a disgraceful record of what's taking place at the TCN First Nation where sewage is overflowing into bathtubs and into bathrooms.
And yet this NDP government, the NDP member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), in fact, all members on that side of the House sit and do nothing. In fact, $4 million, Mr. Speaker, $4 million was forwarded to the TCN First Nation, and what came of it for the sewer and water system? Nothing.
We have tabled document after document which clearly states that this was money that was given from Manitoba Hydro to the TCN First Nation, and it was meant to go for sewer and water systems. And what we've got out of answers out of the minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro, the member for Kildonan, was absolutely a disgrace, and it shows that there is no accountability on the NDP side. They will run out and cut any and every ribbon possible. They'll take credit for anything and everything. But, when it comes to take responsibility, when it comes to stand up for constituents, when it comes up to stand up for Manitobans, they are not to be seen.
They go into the blame game and attack absolutely everybody else, and yet who suffers? The women and the families and the children who would like to have a bathroom where they could bathe, where they could get themselves clean. Those are not available to them because the sewer and water system was never built, although the NDP, the member for Kildonan, the NDP government forwarded over $4 million, and they received nothing.
* (14:50)
And I hope today that the minister responsible, the NDP for Kildonan–the NDP member for Kildonan will take some responsibility, show some accountability, have a look at those disgraceful photos and actually do something for the people of the TCN First Nation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Grievances. Seeing no grievances, we'll move on with–
(Continued)
Hon. Jennifer Howard (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, and I'm just going to ask the indulgence of the House to say hi to my mom who's been sitting in the gallery through the question period. I think she's here to ascertain that I really am working–that I really am here. [interjection] Ah, that's my mom.
House Business
Ms. Howard: On House business, Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce that the Standing Committee on Private Bills will meet on Monday, August 19th, 2013, at 6 p.m., to consider the following: Bill 204, The Manitoba Human Trafficking Awareness Day Act; Bill 209, The Special Olympics Awareness Week Act; Bill 300, The Brandon Area Foundation Incorporation Amendment Act; Bill 301, The Jewish Foundation of Manitoba Amendment Act; and Bill 302, Les Franciscaines Missionaires de Marie Incorporation Amendment Act.
Mr. Speaker: It has been announced that the Standing Committee on Private Bills will meet on Monday, August the 19th, 2013, at 6 p.m., to consider the following: Bill 204, The Manitoba Human Trafficking Awareness Day Act; Bill 209, The Special Olympics Awareness Week Act; Bill 300, The Brandon Area Foundation Incorporation Amendment Act; Bill 301, The Jewish Foundation of Manitoba Amendment Act; and Bill 302, Les Franciscaines Missionaires de Marie Incorporation Amendment Act.
Ms. Howard: Mr. Speaker, would we–can we proceed with report stage on Bill 20, please.
Mr. Speaker: We'll now proceed with report stage of Bill 20, The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act (Various Acts Amended).
Bill 20–The
Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act
(Various Acts Amended).
Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson),
THAT Bill 20 be amended by adding the following after Clause 2(2):
2(2.1) The following is added after section 1.2 and before the centred heading that follows it:
Study of impact of increased sales tax on seniors
1.3(1) Within one year after this section is enacted, the minister must cause an independent study to be conducted for the purpose of determining the impact of the increase in the general sales tax rate on the standard of living of Manitoba seniors.
Tabling of study–
Tabling study in Assembly
1.3(2) The minister must table a copy of the study in the Assembly within 15 days after receiving it if the Assembly is sitting, or, if it is not, within 15 days after the next sitting begins.
Publishing study on government website
1.3(3) The minister must publish the study on a government website.
Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable member for Spruce Woods, seconded by the honourable member for Tuxedo,
THAT Bill 20 be amended by adding the following after Clause 2(2):
2(2.1) The following is added after section 1.2 and before the centred heading that follows it:
Study of impact of increased sales tax on seniors
1.3(1) Within one year after this section is enacted, the minister must cause an independent study to be conducted for the purpose of determining the impact of the increase in the general sales tax rate on the standard of living of Manitoba seniors.
Tabling of study–
Tabling study in Assembly
1.3(2) The minister must table a copy of the study in the Assembly within 15 days after receiving it if the Assembly is sitting, or, if not, within 15 days after the next sitting begins.
Publishing study on government website
1.3(3) The minister must publish the study on the government website.
The amendment is in order.
Mr. Cullen: Mr. Speaker, and clearly we, on this side of the House, think that we should be standing up for the seniors across our great province.
Mr. Speaker, we had proposed an amendment to Bill 20 yesterday, and the–I would say–NDP decided not to see it our way. We clearly think there is going to be an impact, particularly around some of the neighbouring–the communities that border along some of the–our neighbours either to the west or to the south, and we think there's a pretty substantial impact to those communities.
I know the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers), certainly his–a number of his communities will be impacted by the provincial sales tax increase. And we're certainly disappointed that the minister chose not to stand up for his communities and his riding, Mr. Speaker.
But, anyway, we thought this–this is another important aspect of Manitoba's population and Manitoba seniors. Clearly, a lot of seniors are now on fixed incomes and any time there's a new fee or a new tax imposed, they see that they have less disposable income to spend, Mr. Speaker. And, clearly, the increase in the provincial sales tax will have a detrimental impact on their bottom line.
And we know the great work that Manitoba seniors have put into this province over the last number of generations, Mr. Speaker, and we appreciate their hard work and we think they should be appreciated and treated with respect. Clearly the NDP, the Broadway bullies, are going to proceed with Bill 20 whether Manitobans get a chance to vote on the increase in the provincial sales tax or not. They're going to–it appears that they're certainly going to ram this legislation through the Chamber, and obviously we think Manitoba seniors will be impacted.
So what we are proposing to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) is a simple amendment to Bill 20, which would, hopefully, recognize the impact this increase in sales tax will have on Manitoba seniors across our great province, Mr. Speaker. In essence, this amendment is similar to yesterday's amendment, where we are clearly looking for a study to be done to determine what the impact will be on Manitoba seniors. And, as you know, Manitoba seniors are an ever-increasing growing percentage of our population here in Manitoba, so it will impact, certainly, thousands of Manitobans across the province. And we just want to see what this increase in the sales tax will actually have on seniors' bottom line.
Clearly, seniors on limited spending, limited income, will have to make choices because the provincial sales tax will have serious implications for their bottom line in terms of their ability, what they will have remaining to spend. And we're clearly just asking for the government to–to recognize what those implications would be and if, once the study is done, to make the report available to the public at large. So, certainly, the intent of the amendment is very similar to the amendment that was proposed here in the Chamber yesterday. We certainly hope the Minister of Finance will take a hard look at this particular amendment, Mr. Speaker.
I do want to say, further to some of our discussion this morning, actually, in the Chamber, Mr. Speaker, some of the important roles that–that members–the senior members of our society play, and this morning we talked about community foundations. I know for a fact a lot of seniors play a very important role in volunteering their time to community foundations, and community foundations are certainly important to the various communities around our province, and the foundations are very important to a lot of individuals, to organizations, and certainly to a lot of people that are trying to get things done within their community.
And not only are seniors an important part in terms of volunteering their time to assist in their community and the foundation, but a lot of seniors actually contribute to community foundations as well. They contribute financially as well as through their hours of service, Mr. Speaker. So any time that we as legislators pass fees or pass increases in taxes, that will impact the disposable income of those seniors. We firmly believe the more money that we can leave in Manitobans' hands, in this case, talking about Manitoba seniors, the broader the benefit will be to the society at large, and to me this is just one example where seniors, who would like to donate to, whether it be foundations or other charitable organizations within their community, will find themselves having less money available at the end of the month to provide to those charitable organizations. And, clearly, that's–that's a definition of the NDP mentality versus what we believe on this side of the House. Now we believe in allowing Manitobans to exercise their right in how they deal to spend their own money, where the NDP take the other approach where they believe that they know better how Manitobans should spend their money.
* (15:00)
And this amendment really brings home the point that Manitoba seniors will be impacted by the provincial sales tax increase.
Mr. Tom Nevakshonoff, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
Now we know the current PST which was brought in effective July 1st, since that time has been taking about $5 million per week out of the pockets of hard-working Manitobans and also seniors across our great province. So certainly seniors will be impacted each and every day by the increase in the provincial sales tax.
And I think we have to keep things in perspective in terms of where the NDP are coming from here because their solution to every issue in Manitoba is to spend more money. They don't necessarily care about getting value for their money so when we question the government and the NDP about issues that arise they simply say, don't worry we are spending money on it. Well, money isn't always the solution to everything. We believe that, as a government, they should be getting value for the money they're spending on various projects and various issues around the province. And I think we deserve that as taxpayers as well, that our government is doing the best that they can to manage the resources that we as taxpayers have afforded them, and, clearly, that's important.
The other thing that we–I think we have to have a big picture of it is in terms of the provincial debt. The provincial debt is part of the reason that we got ourselves into this bit of a jackpot here in terms of the increase in the provincial sales tax. We know at the end of this fiscal year the provincial debt is slated to be in the excess of $30 billion and that's up from a figure of $13 billion back in 1999. So we know, as a result of that, over $1.2 billion is used in interest charges on that debt and clearly, that's debt-servicing costs so that $1.2 billion can't be used for anything else such as infrastructure, education and health care. And that's very important for us: $1.2 billion that's taken out of our budget that can't be used for anything else. And, as a result, the NDP have to find another way to try to fund their various spending habits. And that's where we're at, you know, they were certainly–were creative a year ago in their budget when they brought in the services and the goods that were applicable to the provincial sales tax, and that certainly impacted Manitobans across the country and it certainly impacted a lot of Manitoba seniors. And, clearly, with this, again, the increase in the provincial sales tax will obviously impact Manitoba seniors.
Now we know the NDP have made promises to Manitoba seniors prior to the last election. One of the–the granddaddy promise was that they weren't going to raise provincial sales tax at all. And they fooled all Manitobans and they fooled the seniors here in the province of Manitoba by that broken promise. You know, and they also promised Manitoba seniors that they were going to give them some assistance with their property taxes. Well, we haven't seen that come to fruition yet either. There's another broken promise that the NDP have laid on Manitoba seniors across the province. Now you just wonder how many times you can break your word to people around Manitoba. I think Manitobans, and in particular Manitoba seniors, are certainly aware of the record of the NDP in terms of their broken promises. And the list goes on and on in terms of broken promises.
We certainly look forward to what the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) has to say about this particular amendment, and we certainly hope that he, along with his fellow colleagues on the NDP side, will stand up for Manitobans and Manitoba seniors all across this great province and, hopefully, look favourably towards this particular amendment to Bill 20. Thank you.
Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance): And I welcome the opportunity to stand and talk about the seniors who have built our province in–over the years here in Manitoba. Anyone who knows me knows that I am very quick to stand and brag and express my pride in my grandfather who was the son of homesteaders in the Swan River Valley, a man who was raised on a farm and worked hard on the farm, built the farm along with his parents and his 13 brothers and sisters; a man who went from the farm to leading threshing gangs throughout the Swan River Valley back in the 1920s and into the '30s; a man who went from there to operating a Bombardier hauling fish across Lake Winnipegosis from Dawson Bay over to Grand Rapids. He did that for a number of years.
He went from there to working almost 40 years with the Rural Municipality of Swan River. He had a three-ton International truck which he spent a lot of time fixing up and keeping road-worthy. He had–that three-ton International truck with the D2 Cat on the back and usually a couple of culverts strapped on to the side and a couple of guys that work with him. And they would build bridges and they would put–install culverts for farmers to connect farmers to each other and connect farmers to communities and, very importantly, connect the farm community in Swan River to the outside market so that they could sell their wheat, they could sell their barley, they could sell their oil seeds, they could sell their livestock.
And those were the hands that built our province, and it was my grandfather along with a lot of other people in his generation–the generation that Tom Brokaw referred to as the greatest generation ever; the generation that survived the 1930s, the Depression; the generation that survived the Second World War; and, importantly, I would add, the generation that then passed on those values, those hard–values of hard work, the values of community, onto the next generation, my mom and dad's generation who are seniors in Manitoba today, who have also worked very hard to build our province. So this side of the government understands that we need to treat seniors with dignity, that seniors deserve this dignity and that they deserve the services that they can count on. They need to have a government that they can count on to provide the services that are so important to seniors, because, as I've stated, these are the folks who built our province into what it is today.
That's why in Budget 2013 our government reaffirmed our commitment to eliminating school taxes paid by senior homeowners. That's a real benefit for seniors in Manitoba, something that members opposite voted against. This year, in 2013, the seniors' education property tax credit increases to a maximum of $1,100. This provides an average benefit of over $150 and above the regular $700 education property tax credit to more than 31,000 senior households with family incomes of less than $40,000.
Additionally, we have the Building and Renewal Plan that makes investments in the priorities of seniors, something that's before the House here today, and this includes personal care home beds and hospitals. Seniors know and seniors understand that this government, the NDP government, is committed to building personal care homes. We're 'conbuilded'–committing to building hospitals, which is in stark contrast to what the member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Pallister) and the Gary Filmon government did back in the 1990s, which was to try to privatize home care, which was to put a chill on building personal care home beds. And maybe worst of all–maybe worst of all–was when they put a halt to the construction of hospitals in this province back in the 1990s. That was that government's–this Fort Whyte–the member for Fort Whyte and Gary Filmon–that was their approach to times of economic uncertainty. And, yes, we are living in times of economic uncertainty today, but our approach to that economic uncertainty is absolutely different than what we saw come forward with Gary Filmon and the member for Fort Whyte. We're not going to cut and hack and slash, and put our economy at risk and put seniors at risk and Manitoba households at risk.
* (15:10)
This side of the House will continue to invest–will continue to invest–in services that seniors require and that desire the most.
I do not believe that the Gary Filmon government was the finest government that Manitoba was ever blessed with. That is the view of the member for Fort Whyte, and I know that's the view of all members across the way. But that government cut benefits for seniors, plain and simple. This side of the House refuses to do that.
This side of the House takes seriously our responsibilities and our commitments to treat seniors with dignity, to treat seniors fairly and to recognize that seniors did, in fact, build this province. They did, in fact, put in place many of the services that members opposite now want to hack and slash. They worked hard; they sacrificed so that those services could be in place for themselves and for future generations of seniors. This side of the government takes that very seriously.
This side of the government understands the impact. Members opposite want to talk about the impact on seniors. What do you suppose the impact of freezing hospital construction was on seniors in the '90s? What do you suppose the impact on seniors was when members opposite–trying to privatize home care?
We don't need any lessons from members opposite on the impact of anything on the–on this–on seniors.
We're going to raise by 1 cent on the dollar the PST so that that revenue can be used to enhance the lives of seniors, to build our schools and hospitals, to build our roads and bridges and make sure that seniors live in the most affordable province in our country. And that programs that benefit seniors are there for seniors when they need it.
So I hate to disappoint the member for Spruce Woods (Mr. Cullen), but I must inform him that we will not be supporting the amendment that he has out forward here today.
Thank you very much.
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I'm pleased to have an opportunity to stand and make a few comments on the record about the amendment that has been brought forward by my colleague.
And it's always interesting following the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) to hear the rhetoric that he puts forward and the spin that he puts forward and then to actually see how much he believes himself in what he's saying. It really, really is becoming very interesting and very much a pattern coming from this government where they've got their lines, their spinners have given them their lines, their staff have given them their lines and no matter whether they're true or not they go forward and they keep mentioning it.
The Minister of Finance talks about treating our seniors with dignity and ensuring that services are there. Where have they been for the last decade?
We have seen a number of attacks on seniors in various areas of this province. They've increased the deductible–the Pharmacare deductible–every year except for one year when there was an election. They are probably a thousand beds behind in building personal care homes.
We've got 90-year-old people that are being shuffled around this province because they can't find a personal care home bed. A lot of seniors are travelling all over rural Manitoba because there are no personal care home beds for them. And they're elderly, they are very elderly and they're getting very confused because they have been forced to be put in various environments that could be a hundred kilometres from their family.
So, for this minister to stand up here and talk about, you know, preserving the dignity of seniors–it really is quite insulting when we see a lot of the things that are actually happening out there.
So they're saying one thing and they're saying it very well, but it's spin and it's not even close to being what is a fact out there.
So they can continue on with their spin, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but we can certainly see that they are not doing things in the interest of seniors in this province. If they were they would have listened to a lot of the seniors that came to speak at Bill 20. There were many seniors that spoke there. And in fact, the majority that came to speak to Bill 20 were against this PST hike.
So the minister can run around all he wants and talk about how we're listening to people. They're not listening to people. They're saying one thing and they're quite doing another one.
I know there was one man that came to speak at Bill 20, his name was Glen Urbanski. And he got very, very emotional about what the NDP has robbed him and his wife of, and he said that this government has robbed them of their dreams for retirement. They had all of these plans. They spent a lot of time working, sitting down together and having dreams, and they said that what this government is doing to them with this PST hike–not to mention the fact we pay the highest income tax west of Québec–that this NDP government has robbed them of their dreams for retirement.
That's happening to a lot of people, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This government is doing that. A lot of our seniors, in fact, most of them, are on fixed income. This has a huge impact on their disposable income. They are going to be having to make various choices. We've heard people over the years when it came to trying to manage a Pharmacare deductible increase, seniors that came before this government and talked about how hard it was going to be for them to afford different things, and their discussion was about affording milk or medicine–what do they give up?
This is just going to further impact what seniors are already being challenged with. We heard if this government would have ever paid attention to retired teachers–this started a long time ago when this government actually basically eviscerated the COLA for retired teachers, and it certainly dramatically affected the income of those retired teachers, seniors, the majority of them who are women, a lot of them who did not teach full-time because they stayed home to raise their kids. So they didn't have a lot of income, you know, in their lives the way some of their male counterparts did, and then this government attacks the COLA and starts to eviscerate it, and so we've got a lot of senior, retired women teachers that are already having to struggle with the income that they do have.
So you take this PST increase, you add it to the increase in hydro rates–an 8 per cent increase–with no end in sight to hydro rate increases if the NDP don't drive Hydro into bankruptcy, and then how much are seniors going to have to pay for hydro rates in this province?
We've seen this government with their legislation put taxes on home insurance, and then today we hear about this government adding a tax to people when they're dead. It just doesn't stop. And, in fact, you know, the tax-and-spend NDP are certainly back and in full force. I have to say that I do doubt whether a lot of this would be happening if Gary Doer was still here. He was much more pragmatic than this bunch over there right now, but certainly there is no pragmatism in what they're doing and, in fact, there's no fairness or there's no respect. This government doesn't want to hear from people.
I imagine they're not going to accept this amendment asking for an impact study to be done to see how the PST is going to impact seniors after a year. They don't want to know because if they know, then they're going to have to be accountable, and they don't want to be accountable. They haven't been accountable over many, many years now. The NDP candidates in the last election, all of them went to every single door in this province and they all promised to not raise the PST. And then what did they do? This NDP government lied to Manitobans.
They don't want to hear from Manitobans. They don't want–they didn't call a referendum because they didn't want to know the answer. And they know full well Manitobans won't support this. Manitobans are already being taxed to death, and literally now that seems to be what is going to be happening. So this government is not interested in listening.
They're not interested in an impact study, as we asked for an amendment yesterday, you know, to do an impact study on what cross-border shopping is going to do to people and to businesses. This government doesn't want to hear from people.
* (15:20)
They have forgotten why they're in power and now it's all about them, it's all about politics and they no longer care about Manitobans who put them there. They no longer care about the little guy, and a lot of the seniors are the little guy. And those little guys and gals don't have as much disposable income in their wallets and in their purses anymore under this NDP government. That is why people have risen against this government right now and are enraged because what of this government is doing. Thousands, thousands, thousands of people are now speaking up against what this NDP government is trying to do. But does this government care? No, they'll just use their usual spin out here and their usual rhetoric–well, we're listening–and I'm guessing they're hoping people are going to buy that.
Well, people aren't buying it anymore, and seniors aren't going to buy it. Seniors are the ones that are going to be significantly affected by this. Senior and poor people are the ones that are being affected most by what this PST hike is going to do. But this government has lost their way. They have forgotten why they're here. They have forgotten that they're supposed to represent the public, and they just feign interest. They pretend to care. They don't care. They're showing it every day, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and had they been listening to people, they wouldn't be doing what they're doing today and hiking up the PST against the wishes of the majority of people in Manitoba.
So I would urge the government to have a closer look at this amendment and pass it.
Thank you.
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): I am pleased to rise to speak by the amendment to Bill 20, presented–moved by the MLA for Spruce Woods and indeed was surprised that no one else from the government side got up to speak to it, and I'm disappointed, I must say, in the Finance Minister's remarks that he could not support this amendment. Not surprised, though I am disappointed, but not surprised because obviously the amendment talks about measuring the effect of the government's actions here, the government's increase on the PST, measuring that impact on seniors, and, obviously, this government doesn't want to measure its actions. They would much rather talk about misinformation that they put on the record about other governments' actions. Let's distract people all the time and we don't really want–this government doesn't want people paying attention to what they do, and they certainly wouldn't want to measure it, we see now from the Finance Minister's reaction to this amendment because then, you know, they might have to be responsible for their actions. And, you know, in my short time here, Mr. Deputy Speaker, they have not been responsible for their actions.
I was out knocking on doors, as many other candidates during the last election, and heard from the NDP candidates all across the province, certainly the ones in Brandon East and Brandon West, that no, no, no the NDP would not raise taxes. They would not raise taxes. The NDP would not raise the PST at all, and certainly they said there would be no restraint and they would balance–when was it–when–let me think now–what was the five-year plan when they were going to balance the budget? Well, it's just a moving target anyway, and subsequently we found out–what did we find out? We found out that every NDP candidate that was out there knocking on doors lied to Manitobans. The government lied to Manitobans about tax increases.
So we had the government lying to Manitobans about tax increases, and we also have the government pretending that they don't make cuts. Well, I have been travelling down No. 10 Highway for years. I have been hauling fertilizer down to our plants there, travelling backwards–travelling back up on the No. 10 to Brandon, pick up another load and, you know, generally No. 10 has been acceptable in terms of the–how the highway was operating. It was resurfaced several times under various governments, but I have to say the last dozen years that highway has deteriorated way beyond anything I've ever seen in the previous years that I've travelled up and down it, and that's what happens with this government ignoring infrastructure, with this government ignoring health care.
Those are the cuts that this government is making. It's cuts that we run into on highways when they have holes, when they have cracks, when they're damaged, when we have to–indeed, we can't travel the speed limit because it's dangerous. Those are the cuts that this government brings in, and those are also the cuts that we experience in emergency rooms that are closed, most under this government of any other government. Those are the cuts that we experience, and every Manitoban and every senior experiences when they go into an emergency room and they wait for hours on end. Those are the cuts that we experience. Those are the cuts–the experience when people are told to travel down the highway to Saskatchewan to have your child, to have your baby delivered. How disgusting that this government sends–we don't have–they don't have any cuts, but Manitobans experience them all the time.
So, again, we have the government lying about tax increases–biggest tax increase last year in recent memory, and then an even bigger one this year, and that on top of a deficit. They can't even hit a target with the huge tax increases that they brought in.
So not a surprise that they wouldn't want to measure their actions, because they wouldn't want anyone to pay attention to their actions. They'd much rather distract with distractions and lies about other governments. And, when it doesn't fit their narrative, then they just make up the facts and repeat them endlessly, endlessly, endlessly, and hope that people will pay attention to what they're misleading people on.
So, again, they've failed to consult with Manitobans about the tax increase. I do distinctly remember the Finance Minister being out in Brandon for a proposed consultation, and people were talking about tax increases. and it's Manitobans. Taxes aren't just the things that this minister talks about. Taxes are also fees, because the fee increases in this government have been substantial and over, way over, what should've been done as well. So, when somebody said, you know, I'm a little worried about tax increases, but I'm also concerned that there might be fee increases, what would–does the minister have to say about that? And the Finance Minister said: You know what, that's a really good idea, as if he'd never thought of it before, and this was a revelation that someone had just come up with.
But, again, we knew that it was going to happen, but I guess it's–you know, the–as we heard today, now we're going to be taxed even after death. I wonder–in this regard with this death tax–if you have to apply to die ahead of time. So, you know, you have to plan things a little differently. It's part of your estate planning, I guess, and that, indeed, the government is in the estate planning business, in competition with the private sector. Is that something they're rolling out there as well? It's another ticked box at the end of that and they're–that's where you apply to die under this government and then pay your–I think it's a $45 fee. You're not allowed to die until you pay that fee. Ah, yes, pretty sad–pretty sad.
So not a surprise that they don't want to see themselves measured. We have lots of measurements that we look at across the board that this government does poorly at. And then they try to spin them and say, well, you know, really don't look at all that measurement. Just look at a little piece of it, and we'll make things look a little better for you in their rose-coloured glasses.
So I really do believe that Manitoba has some of the greatest opportunities of any western Canadian province, but they're being ignored by this government and they–just not happening. And we see people looking elsewhere. We see what's happening in the northern states and we see the impact of the oil there. We see what's happening in Saskatchewan. We see what's happening in Alberta and BC and other provinces, and we start to wonder, gee, you know, if the government made more of an effort here and paid attention to Manitoba, as opposed to just getting re-elected and lying to Manitobans, what could Manitoba be? What would the potential be? Potential is, I think, just unbelievable how much we could benefit Manitobans. And, you know, the thing is when Manitobans are doing well–strange thing–the government does well as well.
But, in this regard, we see the government putting punitive taxes on speakers–especially seniors, because seniors are working usually on a fixed income, and they're working in an environment where returns are not very good right now. They are looking at an environment where interest rates are low, which is great for a developing economy, not so great for someone working on a fixed income, because when they look at their returns, boy, they're probably not able to keep up with the tax increases that this government has imposed on them. And they really aren't. So we know that they broke the–they broke their word. They promised no tax increases and they broke that, so the government lied to Manitobans.
* (15:30)
But the other thing that Manitobans, and seniors in particular, when I find when I talk to them, believe was–they believed that balanced budget legislation protected them from excesses, from government excesses. They really believed no government would increase the PST because they knew that the government had to come back to the public with a referendum. They had to ask the public: Will you allow the government to increase the PST? They knew they were protected because they knew no government would have the audacity to raise the PST without asking the public, and, indeed, with lying to them during election. But that's what we see here. Not only a government that lied to Manitobans about increasing the PST, but also a government that has broken the law with respect to a referendum and now wants to ignore Manitobans' right to vote on the PST increase.
Very sad to watch. I do encourage the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) to look at some of these referendums and, indeed, to support this particular one so he can find and look at some measurements of his effect on Manitobans, and seniors in particular.
Thank you.
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): It's indeed an honour and a privilege to rise and speak to this very important amendment to Bill 20, brought forward by my colleague, the member for Spruce–rids–Woods, and I was very pleased and honoured to second this amendment, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I think it's very important that members opposite–I don't see why they wouldn't support this amendment. I think they have nothing to fear by this amendment. It's simply just calling on a review of what kind of an impact that this PST increase will have on seniors in Manitoba. So I don't see why members opposite are not embracing this as a very positive amendment that could enhance this piece of legislation, and have a very positive impact for the information that we're able to gather going forward, with respect to seniors, and the kind of impact that this will have, and this may have, this PST hike, on seniors in Manitoba.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
But, Mr. Speaker, I think it goes to the fact that the NDP is afraid of what kind of results they may find as a result of this kind of an impact study on the standard of living of seniors in Manitoba as a result of this PST hike. I think they're–what they're afraid to see is that this will have a negative impact on seniors in Manitoba. We all know that many seniors in Manitoba–they rely–they're on fixed incomes in our province, and every single fee increase that this government brings forward, every single tax increase that they bring forward, has an negative impact on seniors and their ability to have the disposable income that they need in order to live on a day‑to‑day basis in this province.
And so I know that if members opposite–we know that the NDP, of course, failed to consult with Manitobans on the PST increase. We know that when they went door to door in the last election, that they didn't ask people at the doors whether or not they would be in favour of or opposed to a PST increase, Mr. Speaker. We know that they didn't ask Manitobans going door to door. We know that going door to door they also ran into some seniors, and I would ask them, did they ask those seniors, at the doors, are you in favour of a PST increase? What kind of an impact–did they bother to ask seniors what kind of an impact that would have on their day‑to-day livelihood.
Well, the answer is no that they didn't, because as we recall, Mr. Speaker, it was very clear, right out of the Premier's (Mr. Selinger) mouth himself, he promised no new taxes, no tax increases. And we know that right after the election they–at their first available opportunity in the last budget–the previous budget from 2012, they, of course, expanded the PST, expanded the taxes in Manitoba that had a negative impact on seniors in Manitoba.
They also decreased the dividend tax credit, Mr. Speaker, which had a very negative impact on seniors. We know, again, that seniors are–many of them are on fixed incomes in this province. And every little thing that this government does to increase the fees, to decrease the dividend tax credits, to increase the PST, to increase the PST on products and services that are used by seniors, we know that that has a negative impact on the disposable income that those seniors have at their disposal to be able to spend on the things that they need.
And many, many seniors, of course, are, you know–they live on this fixed income, and I think that certainly they would have wanted to have been consulted by this government on whether or not this PST–whether or not they felt that the PST was to be–was–would be a–the PST increase would be a positive thing or not, because I suspect that what would have happened if the members opposite, the NDP government and the Finance Minister, had properly consulted people in the first place, that perhaps we wouldn't be here today debating this in the Manitoba Legislature.
But–and certainly we know that the NDP is, in fact, breaking the law by raising the PST without calling the required referendum. And I know I've spoken to many seniors. Many seniors put a lot of value and credence in their right to vote in this province and, indeed, across this country. It's one of our fundamental rights and freedoms in this country. Many seniors are veterans. Many of those seniors have fought for our democratic way of life, and I think it's very important that members opposite understand that, that seniors are very upset about not only the PST increase itself, Mr. Speaker, but also the NDP taking away their right to vote in the province of Manitoba.
And I think that that's a very serious issue, and I know that, and I've spoken with many seniors in our seniors homes. I had the opportunity to visit many–or all of them over the course of the last while, and I know, in particular, I was speaking to some people at the Shaftesbury retirement residence, and people were very disturbed and upset in particular about this NDP government taking away their right to vote. They couldn't believe that a government would actually implement that kind of a law in this province that would take away their right to vote, something that they have fought for, for so many years in our country.
And so, again, I know that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers), I know that he went around the province and he had these consultation meetings, these so‑called consultation meetings. I know that I've asked questions of the Finance Minister with regard to where in the presentation that he gave at these so‑called consultation meetings, I asked where that PST increase slide was in that presentation. And, you know, it wasn't a shock, Mr. Speaker, but the Minister of Finance couldn't point that out where that was because it was not, in fact, in there.
Now we know that this is the fundamental change in this budget. It is going to have a negative impact on all Manitobans but, in particular, those most vulnerable in our society. And I know that it's going to have a very negative impact on the working poor in our province. It's going to have a very negative impact on, in particular as well, seniors who, again, are on those fixed incomes, Mr. Speaker.
And so I think it's very important that when the Minister of Finance goes around with his consultation meetings in the future, that if he is planning to do this kind of an increase, if he's planning to break another promise that he has made to Manitobans, that I would strongly suggest that he make sure that those changes are part of a presentation that he gives before Manitobans, that he makes sure that they're aware of it so that they know what they're up against, what they're going to be facing, Mr. Speaker. But, unfortunately, those Manitobans were not able to have that opportunity because the Finance Minister neglected to put that into his presentation at his, quote, unquote, consultation meetings.
I think it's unfortunate that we know–in particular, seniors again who are on fixed incomes–they've already been hit with a number of tax and fee increases that have been implemented by this NDP government, and that many of these seniors on fixed income, they can't afford this kind of tax and fee increase. And, of course, this PST hike could have significantly negative financial implications for the future of seniors in the province, Mr. Speaker, and I think that, going back to this particular amendment to this legislation, I think it's very important.
* (15:40)
I want to thank the member for Spruce Woods (Mr. Cullen) for bringing forward this very important amendment–and I hope that members opposite will get up out of their seats today, will have a good, serious, honest debate about this very important issue, because I would like to hear from members opposite why they would be opposed to an impact study on how–what kind of an impact this would have on seniors and the future of seniors in our province, Mr. Speaker.
Why would they be opposed to that? Why are they so opposed to seniors in our province, Mr. Speaker?
And I would suggest that if they look–if they start to consult their own constituents, if they go back and consult seniors in their own communities, Mr. Speaker, I think that they'll see that they're upset about this 1 per cent increase; they know it's going to have a negative impact on their livelihood. And I think that that's why this NDP government is probably opposing this because they're afraid to find out what kind of a negative impact this will really have on seniors in our province.
So, again, I would encourage members opposite to go back to their communities, to ask seniors what they think about this. And I would encourage them today, Mr. Speaker, to get up to debate this very important amendment and to see that it passes so that we can know what the true impact will be on seniors in our province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I want to speak briefly on this amendment.
This is an eminently reasonable amendment to have an impact study on seniors. In fact, it's needed. We should know when there's major financial changes what those impacts are for seniors so that there can be an assessment, there can be–where necessary–some mitigation on the impact on seniors.
And, indeed, you know, one of the problems in this government is that so far they have been not concerned about doing impact studies. To our astonishment, they didn't even do an impact study before increasing the PST from 7 per cent to 8 per cent. And, you know, who would make that kind of a major decision on the finances of the government without actually looking at the impact that it's going to have?
And, obviously, the answer to that is that the NDP didn't care obviously about what the impact was. They just sailed ahead, making the change without knowing exactly what the ramifications are.
And, certainly, you know, we should know after the fact what the ramifications are because they will not only let us know what's happened in the case of seniors, but they would inform then good policy decisions moving forward to help seniors.
I think it's important to point out–as others have before–many seniors are on fixed incomes; they're not in a situation that their income is expanding, and therefore they're under circumstances where they are one of the most affected by this sort of a tax increase.
This indeed was a point that was made in a forum that I held on May the 11th, looking at the impact of the increase–NDP's increase in the provincial sales tax in Manitoba from 7 to 8 per cent on seniors.
And what we heard from seniors, like Muriel Koscielny, is that those on low incomes and fixed incomes are more impacted than others, that the–where we have increased hydro costs and increased recycling costs the PST will be charged on the surcharge, so it's a tax on tax.
We heard during the presentations on Bill 20 that for many businesses they are going to be having to pay increased provincial sales tax on many of their inputs. And the result is that, when they increase their prices, they will have to adjust–not just for the increase in the sales tax on the final product but they will have to put in an increase in cost due to the increase of their input costs and so that the result of this sort of a tax change is compounded.
It's not just a simple 13 per cent as it were increased from–or 14 per cent, from 7 to 8 per cent, on the sales tax, but it is a significant compounded increase and it may well have a very significant impact on many seniors.
Now the government may argue that some of the changes that they're proposing, increasing–decreasing property tax on seniors, but when and if that happens, it still will not make a difference for many seniors who are not property owners or–and so that this study needs to be done to know where all seniors are, particularly those who are on low income and the kind of impact that this will have.
I think it was interesting to have at the–our forum, Professor Sid Frankel talking about the work that he has done and the fact that many of the efforts that the measures that the NDP have made have not helped people who are on low income, and he made the point that the PST is, in fact, a regressive tax because proportionately its impact is larger on those who are on low incomes.
So what–I support this amendment. I think it is a good one to move forward on, and I hope we can pass it speedily.
Mr. Speaker: Is there further debate on the amendment?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: Question.
Do you wish to have the amendment read back?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment will please signify by saying aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the amendment will please signify by saying nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: Opinion of the Chair, the Nays have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: On division.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: We'll move on with the next amendment.
Mr. Cullen: I move, seconded by the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen),
THAT Bill 20 be amended by replacing the heading for Part 2 with "ELIMINATION OF TAXPAYER PROTECTION".
Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable member for Spruce Woods, seconded by the honourable member for Steinbach,
THAT Bill 20 be amended by replacing the heading for Part 2 with the "ELIMINATION OF TAXPAYER PROTECTION".
The honourable member–the amendment is in order.
Mr. Cullen: Yes, I am still here, and I very much appreciate the opportunity to have debate on Bill 20. And I know our colleagues on this side of the House will cherish the opportunity to continue debate on Bill 20, and we're eagerly awaiting that side of the House to debate Bill 20 as well.
And we're going to give them ample opportunity to debate Bill 20 because we have several amendments that we're proposing. You know, clearly, it's a very bad piece of legislation. We've done everything we can to ask the government to have a sober second look and actually just retract this bill altogether. We provide them countless opportunities to do that, and we think it's incumbent upon us as opposition to listen to taxpayers around the province and respond to what taxpayers around the province are telling us. And that's why we've asked the NDP to get rid of this particular piece of legislation altogether. To this point and time, they've refused to do that, but we are going to continue this fight on behalf of Manitobans all across our great province to stop the increase in the provincial sales tax.
And the other key component in this legislation, in Bill 20, of course, is to actually take away rights from Manitobans and taking away their fundamental right to democracy and to vote on substantial changes such as the provincial sales tax increase. And, really, this is what really has Manitobans really upset, I think.
You know, it's one thing–they're used to the NDP government increasing fees and increasing taxes. They're very creative, too; I will give them that. They are very creative at finding ways to increase taxes and to increase fees, any way they can dream up to get their hands on Manitobans' money, and they got their hands in the pockets of Manitobans. You know, we–in question period today, we talked a bit about the fees that are going up: birth certificate fees have gone up; death certificate fees are going up. The NDP are taxing us from cradle to grave.
* (15:50)
Now we've learned of a new tax. It looks like a $45 surcharge if you–once you pass away, that funeral directors will be forced to pay to the government of Manitoba. And, you know, they're even taxing us when we're in the grave, and that's something I find quite alarming. And I think Manitobans, once they get wind of this new tax, will be pretty alarmed too. And maybe this is the motive. You–here we are, almost the middle of August, and we've got this new $45 tax we've heard being implemented sometime in the near future. They're sneaking it in there in the middle of summer so that Manitobans won't be aware of it. Well, Manitobans may not be aware of it, because it's going to be tax after they're dead, but obviously somebody's going to have to pay that $45 tax. And, clearly, that's going to go into the hands of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers).
Minister–you know, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance, even though he's raising the provincial sales tax by 14 per cent–he's going to collect another $200 million out of the pockets of Manitobans this fiscal year alone. He still is $500 million short on his budget this year, so he has to be creative in trying to fill that $500-million gap. And I–assuming that extra $45 new tax at death is one way that he's trying to backfill that $500-million deficit. Now, we were kind of curious what other taxes and fees he might be coming up with over the course of the summer and try to sneak them in there on the backs of Manitobans when they're out at the lake or doing other things during the summer.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to take you back to the original, The Balanced Budget, Debt Repayment and Taxpayer Protection and Consequential Amendments Act; that's what it was back at the time this legislation was introduced. And, clearly, the taxpayer protection part was to protect Manitoba taxpayers. And it was to protect Manitoba taxpayers from exactly what is happening this session in the Manitoba Legislature. This NDP government is proposing to increase a provincial sales tax. And the original legislation was intended to bring forward a referendum if the health and post-secondary education tax levy was increased, The Income Tax Act was increased, The Retail Sales Tax Act was increased, and the revenue–a portion of The Revenue Act was increased. If it was going to be major components of taxation increases there, what it dud–what it did do, proposed to do, was to signal a referendum if any of those conditions were met or proposed by the government.
This NDP government has chosen to ignore the law, and they are moving forward with this increase, the increase as of July 1st. Now, we don't think it's right. We think it's illegal. It's certainly immoral, because the NDP campaigned on the fact that they were not going to increase provincial sales tax in the province of Manitoba prior to the last election. But here they have the first budget after the campaign. They brought in the goods and services part and applied the provincial sales tax to many more goods and services. And, in a year later, they've increased the provincial sales tax, and they're forcing Manitobans to pay it and forcing retailers to pick up the tab as of July 1st.
And, Mr. Speaker, I think it's worth repeating: that's $5 million a week that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) is taking out of the pockets of ordinary Manitobans, each and every week, $5 million. Now, we're–clearly, through this amendment, we want to be open and honest and transparent with Manitobans. I know it's something the NDP seem to shy away from. But we, with this amendment, just want to signal to taxpayers that they might as well face reality: there's no such thing as the taxpayer protection act anymore. This act, if–once passed and if it survives the challenge, if it survives a court challenge, too–I'm sure somebody will take them to task on this once the legislation is passed, and, if the challenge does succeed, and we are forced to pay the extra tax and we're forced to pay the extra tax without a referendum, well, clearly, that's the way it will be, and that's what I think Manitobans should be aware of, that that is what the NDP have essentially done by passing Bill 20–they have effectively tore up the taxpayer protection act as people would know it. And, clearly, this is what the NDP have decided to do. They have no respect; they have completely lost respect for the taxpayers in Manitoba by going this route. I look forward to any possible court challenge that may come out of this particular piece of legislation.
Now, we will have other amendments that the government will have a look at, but I think this is one that's–I think at least the government could signal to taxpayers that, boy, yes, we recognize now that, you know, you're right. We actually did tear up effectively the taxpayer protection act. If they would accept our amendment on this, I think that would go one way, at least a part way to recognizing what they're doing here to Manitobans. So that's why we're asking the Minister of Finance and his colleagues to have a look at our amendment and, hopefully, view it favourably.
I really–we know what the Broadway bullies are up to, Mr. Speaker. They're going to do anything in their means to tax Manitobans. They are clearly a tax-and-spend government, and I talked earlier about getting value for the money, and I think that's a fundamental issue that we should be addressing as legislators. And I'm sure when taxpayers are paying their bills at the till each and every day, that they want to make sure our government gets–provides value for the money that they're providing to Manitobans and to the government.
So we really think there's certainly broken promises here in terms of this particular legislation going forward. They campaign on not raising, increasing the provincial sales tax. They broke that promise to Manitobans, and I think they've broken the integrity of the existing legislation by bringing forward Bill 20, Mr. Speaker, and clearly it's signalling a tearing up of the taxpayer protection act as we know it.
And they're obviously going to forge ahead with this particular tax whether Manitobans like it or not. You know, we sat through committee for a couple of weeks, and Manitobans across our province came and they said, told the NDP government exactly what they thought about this new tax. And for the most part Manitobans were not happy with this particular tax, Mr. Speaker.
And Manitobans are being taxed to death, Mr. Speaker. We're certainly one of the highest taxed provinces across our country, certainly everything west of Québec. We are in the top category as far as taxation, and it just keeps going on and on and on, and we're seeing increases in fees and even new, creative ways for the government to raise taxes on the backs of Manitobans.
So we just wanted to propose this amendment to the government to hopefully be a little more up front and accountable to Manitobans, and, with that, I look forward to comments from the other side of the House, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): A pleasure to speak for a few minutes on this particular motion that's an amendment that was brought forward by the honourable member. I think it's well reasoned. It's a very well-reasoned amendment, Mr. Speaker, because ultimately he wants to ensure that what is being said in the bill is actually accurate, and it is accurate to say that the replacement of the heading truly should be the elimination of the taxpayer protection act.
Now we don't bring that–this amendment forward with any sort of glee or any sort of happiness because we are disappointed that the taxpayer protection act is being eliminated, Mr. Speaker. We think that, when it was brought forward in 1995 by the former Filmon government, it was supported by Manitobans, was applauded by Manitobans. We know that there are many Manitobans who lobbied. In fact, there were other parts of Canada who looked at it as being something that was very significant and brought forward a new way of assuring that taxpayers would not only be engaged in a process in terms of increases of taxes that were significant. It included not only the PST but also personal income taxes and corporation taxes, but it ensured that there was protection and an ability for taxpayers to have input.
Now that's been taken away by this Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers), his Premier (Mr. Selinger) and this government, by the NDP government, Mr. Speaker. They've decided to run roughshod over the democratic right of individuals. They've decided to flaunt the law, not only disrespect the law but flaunt the law by saying that they were going to put in a PST tax increase without having the referendum. And there's been plenty of debate and there'll be plenty more in this House in the days and weeks ahead regarding what this government has done on Bill 20, and certainly it's still a matter of public debate.
And my colleague was right. There are members, of course, and Manitobans who every day see the increase of the PST on their tax receipts, on their–sorry, on their sales receipts when they go into a store when they are doing shopping, whether that's getting ready for back to school, and they're paying the price. They're paying more in provincial sales tax because this government broke a promise, because this government promised them something during the last election and then didn't adhere to that promise.
* (16:00)
And now, even in the context of this bill, they are not being forthcoming. They are not being completely honest, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to what the bill is intended to do and the portions of the bill. So it's appropriate to change the name of the heading to the elimination of the taxpayer protection act, because that is truly what this portion of the bill does. It eliminates the taxpayer protection act–this portion. It takes away something that Manitobans very much supported in 1995 and continue to support.
And it's interesting because I suspect that there are many Manitobans who weren't even completely aware that this portion existed in the bill, that they had the right for a referendum, until the government took that right away. And those Manitobans who then were alerted to it, I think, were very disappointed. And I've heard as many people who've come to me to express disappointment about the tax increase as disappointment about the referendum being taken away, how this has happened. Certainly, the majority of people don't support the tax increase in and of itself, but many, many others say, you know, even if the government was going to increase it, is how they did it that really makes me upset, because they realize that it's not right, it's not democratic, it's not fair, it's not proper for the government to do something that they themselves aren't able to do. They aren't able to, if they get a speeding ticket or get any other kind of administrative ticket, just decide that they're not going to–change the law and not have to adhere to it. And they don't think it's fair or right that the government can do that sort of a thing. And I think that that certainly is an appropriate level of concern.
And so this amendment doesn't change the substance of the bill, Mr. Speaker. It doesn't change what the bill actually does in terms of increasing the PST. So it's really an act of transparency. It's an act of transparency for the government. We're simply asking the government to be transparent in this particular issue and to be clear in what they're doing. They are eliminating the taxpayer protection act, and the heading should reflect it. The bill and the portions that do that should reflect that. It's just about being transparent.
Now, it's not a government that likes transparency. We know, Mr. Speaker, that when they were advertising the budget, as the government often does and tries to tell Manitobans the positives and the pith and the substance of the budget document–that when they were advertising, they completely left off the key ingredient of the budget, which was that the PST was going up. They didn't mention that at all. They spent whatever hundreds of thousands of dollars they spent advertising a budget which–whose main component was an increase in the PST, and yet the ads didn't mention at all the PST tax increase. Well, that's shocking, I think, for most Manitobans.
But here again we have an example where the government is trying to not be forthcoming with Manitobans, even within the headings and the context of the legislation. I remember reading an article by the member for Dawson Trail (Mr. Lemieux) about the highlights of the budget–didn't mention at all the PST tax increase. It was completely missing, Mr. Speaker–was no mention at all about the PST tax increase in the article on the budget highlights from the member for Dawson Trail, so he wasn't being transparent either. He was taking a page out of the government's book about not being forthcoming, not wanting to actually tell people what's going on, certainly not wanting to highlight the fact that the government was increasing taxes.
All we're asking for in the context of this legislation and through this amendment is that the government be honest and be truthful in terms of what sections of the bill are actually doing, Mr. Speaker. That's all we're asking for, so I don't–it's not a–the kind of amendment that is going to completely change the bill. It's just simply about ensuring that there is transparency when it comes to this particular piece of legislation, so the government has no reason to be concerned. The government has no reason to worry. We just simply want them to be transparent, to be open, to be honest, and to have the bill reflected in its title in terms of what the bill actually does.
So we look forward to this amendment passing and perhaps other amendments that are subsequent to this one, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today and put a few words on the record, and I commend and applaud the–our honourable member from Spruce Woods for bringing forward this amendment. We're looking at Bill 20 and the title, The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act, and we're looking at basically changing–and, hopefully, the government on that side will see fit to pass the amendment and make the change to the title, which is basically changing the title of Bill 20 to the extermination, basically, of the taxpayers' protection act.
It's a little disheartening as well that when the amendment was brought forward and the–it's showing great leadership on the government side of the disrespect to Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Basically, the amendment comes forward, the–our member from Spruce Woods brought it forward, spoke to the amendment, and no one else from the government side had anything to say, positive or indifferent, to anything. They're just more content on just sitting there and listening to what we have to say. So it does give a little bit of encouragement thinking that, possibly, maybe they are going to pass this amendment and let it go forward.
Mr. Speaker, I already started speaking and talking about the fact of the disrespect that the government is showing towards hard-working Manitobans. And this goes all the way back to the election of 2011. I know that in September 2011, many of the members–absolutely all 57 members of the spenDP party–went door to door knocking and knocking and knocking and assuring Manitobans that they were not going to raise taxes; that they were actually going to be able to balance the books–balance the budget by 2014, 2015, without raising taxes. A matter of fact, the Premier (Mr. Selinger) himself said, you know, that's absolute nonsense; there's no way we're going to be raising taxes.
So what ended up happening a short six, seven months after that, Mr. Speaker, we went to Budget 2012. And I know that the Minister for Agriculture, I know he went door to door as well in–but in the election September 2011, and I'm sure he didn't say, oh, but, by the way, we're going to be increasing taxes and fees on various things. And–wait for it, wait for it–hard-working Manitoban, we're actually, in 2013, we're going to raise the PST by one point–basically by 14 per cent. And we're also not going to be giving any of you any raises to that magnitude to equate that raise in taxes.
But, of course, the Minister for Agriculture–you got me off topic there a little bit–but where I was going was that in Budget 2012 they did, they brought forward $184 million in hidden fees and extended taxes. And so if we take that and we add it to the Budget 2013, and we take a look at what the PST being up by one point, Mr. Speaker, from 7 to 8 per cent–which is an actual 14 per cent increase of taxes–they're going to be bringing in 237 million more dollars.
So when you add in the 184 million from 2012, you add it to the 237 for 2013, we're roughly–the–this spenDP government, Mr. Speaker, is pulling in roughly a half a billion dollars more a year in revenue.
So, basic math for my students and pupils on the other side of the House–we're looking at a half a billion dollars, Mr. Speaker. We divide that by the 1.2 million people in this fantastic province of ours, and that's equating to $400 per member–per hard‑working Manitoban, and that's per person. Not necessarily–they don't necessarily have to be working. That's your kids. That's your grandkids. That's absolutely everybody. Four hundred dollars more; $1,600 a family of four.
So, what are some of the things that these people are going to be–are not going to be able to do, Mr. Speaker? We're not talking some of the people who, you know–I knew earlier on today that some of the members from the government side were bragging that they were going across the line to Bismarck and sitting in the hot tub and–but at the same time talking about how hard done by they were.
And when we start talking about $1,600, I know to some of those members across the way that are so hard done by–I know that $1,600 isn't a lot for them. But even myself, Mr. Speaker, we looked at–my wife Tracey and myself–we looked over our last year's budget. Hockey–I mean, we had both boys in hockey. We're looking at roughly just a shade over $5,000 we spent in hockey last year. Well, $1,600 is going–it would have gone a long way, but that's $1,600 less we're going to have for use.
* (16:10)
And, you know what? It's really nice. I'm listening to the members across the way on the government side, and they're trying to heckle a little bit. But, you know what? There's tons of time–there's tons of time. We're going to give them the opportunity to stand up and put some words on the record, so that they can talk for this amendment–speak for this amendment. They'll get a chance to actually vote for the amendment as well, Mr. Speaker, right away.
Now, we go back to that election again and we talk about all those members across the way, the 57 of them, going door to door and knocking, and promising things, and, you know, people answering. And I know that the member from St. Norbert, he went door to door. [interjection]
And it seems like I'm striking a nerve here. Because, I guess, the way I look at it, Mr. Speaker, the louder the people are–the louder people are, that just tells you that they're losing the argument.
And the nice thing is, is when I hear the member from St. Norbert crowing from his seat, Mr. Speaker, I know that I'm touching a nerve.
And, basically, the nice thing is, is they did go door to door, each and every one of them, and made promises that they could not fulfill.
Case in point, Mr. Speaker. I know the last amendment that the member from Spruce Woods brought forward, which was the promises to seniors–the promise to seniors. Well, what was the promise to seniors? I know that every member across the way, they promised to eliminate the education tax off property tax for seniors.
An Honourable Member: Did they?
Mr. Ewasko: No. Did they do that? No, they didn't. Did they up the exemption a little bit? Yes, they did. Does that equate to the $36 million a year that they should be–should have–that they promised initially, Mr. Speaker, in the election of 2011? No, it did not.
What are some of the common threads here, Mr. Speaker, that we're seeing from this side of the House as well? Some of the common threads, we're hearing, is a fact that we've got broken promises, we've got no reason to consult. Nobody from the government's side has actually polled some of those hard-working Manitobans–any hard-working Manitobans. There's a few issues.
We talk about the taxpayer protection act, with raising the PST by 14 per cent. I don't think anybody–any hard-working Manitoban had received a raise of 14 per cent. Now I do know, Mr. Speaker, that some of the wages, as far as MLAs, are frozen. But you look across the way on the other side of the government's side there, and I think there's only two members, from what I saw, that don't get any extra wage. And I think one is St. Norbert, and maybe that's why he's so vocal.
You know, another–I know that I've got just close to about a minute left, Mr. Speaker, and I really do appreciate talking on this–speaking to this amendment.
But another thing that I'd like to talk about is amalgamation, Mr. Speaker, and I'd hate to leave out the Minister for Local Government when we're talking about ministers unwilling to go out and actually speak with people who they're making decisions on. This–[interjection] Consult–thank you.
An Honourable Member: Consultation.
Mr. Ewasko: Without consultations–so no consultations to the PST hike. So they're going to rip up the taxpayer protection act without the required referendum, as far as the PST goes. And, as far as forced amalgamations, I know that the member from Thompson as well wants to get up and maybe put a few words on the record.
But, you know, Mr. Speaker, the problem is–the common threads are they're failing to consult; they don't really care about those hard-working Manitobans. They're going deep into hard-working Manitobans' pockets, and they're taking it right out of their pockets.
So I thank you for allowing me to say a few words.
Mr. Speaker: Is there any further debate on the amendment?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
The question is for the amendment of Bill 20.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment will please signify by saying aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the amendment please signify by saying nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: Opinion of the Chair, the Nays have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, could you summon the members for a recorded vote.
Mr. Speaker: Recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.
* (17:00)
Order, please. The question before the House is the amendment to Bill 20.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Briese, Cullen, Driedger, Eichler, Ewasko, Gerrard, Goertzen, Graydon, Helwer, Maguire, Mitchelson, Pedersen, Rowat, Schuler, Stefanson, Wishart.
Nays
Allan, Allum, Altemeyer, Ashton, Bjornson, Blady, Braun, Caldwell, Chief, Chomiak, Dewar, Gaudreau, Howard, Jha, Kostyshyn, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Pettersen, Rondeau, Saran, Selby, Selinger, Struthers, Swan, Whitehead, Wiebe, Wight.
Deputy Clerk (Mr. Rick Yarish): Yeas 16, Nays 31.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the amendment accordingly defeated.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: The hour being past 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.