LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Monday,
June 1, 1992
The House met at 8 p.m.
COMMITTEE
OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent
Sections)
NORTHERN
AFFAIRS
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please.
Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This evening, this section of the Committee
of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will be considering the Estimates of the
Department of Northern Affairs.
Does the honourable Minister of Northern
Affairs have an opening statement?
Hon. James Downey
(Minister of Northern Affairs): Yes, I do.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I apologize for
being a couple of minutes late. You know
the old saying in
I am pleased to introduce my Department of
Northern Affairs Estimates for the 1992‑93 fiscal year. I always look forward to the opportunity to
report to the committee on the progress my department has achieved since I
introduced the department's Estimates for last year.
*
(2005)
This fiscal year will prove to be an
exciting and rewarding period for northern Manitobans and for those in my
department who serve them. There are
several initiatives underway that will undoubtedly prove to be beneficial for
Manitobans who live and work in the northern region.
Before elaborating on these initiatives, I
would like to remind the members of this committee of my commitment to the
North. As the Minister of Northern and
Native Affairs, my primary responsibility remains clear. Let me make it very clear, that is to
represent the best interests of the northern communities and the people I
serve. I remain committed, along with
the staff in my department, to improving the quality of life and to provide
opportunities for the people of northern
I would like to take this opportunity to
recognize the staff of Northern and Native Affairs for the outstanding
contribution, support and participation they have shown in creating a positive
environment for growth and change that will benefit all Manitobans.
*
(2010)
Despite the current economic climate
The estimated expenditure of the
Department of Northern and Native Affairs for the 1992‑93 fiscal year is
$20,383,500.
There is a significant increase in the
Northern Development and Co‑ordination division. The largest portion of this increase is found
in the Northern Flood Program. This
money will be used toward implementing
I am also pleased to note that the
negotiators for the
This comprehensive agreement, when signed,
will fully and finally settle
I am pleased to add, this agreement
directly benefits
We have recently negotiated an eight‑year
settlement with the Norway House commercial fishermen which will provide
continuing support to this most important community activity.
We are also making progress on a number of
communities' trapline claims and look forward to settling these claims in the
very near future.
My department is also moving forward to
settle outstanding treaty land entitlements.
Our government has indicated to both the entitlement bands and the
federal government, we are committed to negotiating the resolution of these
outstanding entitlements without delay.
As members are aware, treaty land entitlement relates to unresolved land
matters dating back to the signing of the treaties.
I am pleased to inform the members that
negotiations are continuing with four bands in the
This department, like others within our
government, believes that Manitobans are this province's most valuable
resource. This is particularly true in
the North.
Expenditures in the Northern Development
and Co‑ordination division have increased to reflect the implementation
of the
The Northern Manitoba Economic Development
Commission has been established to ensure that the people of the North have the
opportunity to voice their concerns and views about the future economic
development of northern
I would like to draw the committee's
attention to some major initiatives the Northern Development and Co‑ordination
division has been diligently pursuing and will be coming to fruition in the
coming year.
The
*
(2015)
Since November of 1990,
Within the department's Local Government
Development division, members will note that there has been an increase in
expenditure for this fiscal year. The
largest single increase in this division is $249,000. These funds will go towards community
operations which is responsible for delivery support directly to 56 Northern
Affairs communities.
In 1990 this department, along with the
Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship and the Department of Education
and Training, unveiled the Recreation Director's Program. This two‑year pilot project has been
very well received. Nineteen
participants from both Northern Affairs communities and bands are looking
towards their graduation this August.
Because of the success of this program, I
am pleased to say that this program will itself graduate and become a full‑time
community‑based program. To
illustrate this program's success, allow me to point out that the nine
recreation directors from our northern communities have been able to provide
recreation programs in 25 communities.
About 54 percent of those participating in this program are younger than
19 years of age and have expressed much enthusiasm at the new recreation
opportunities.
This initiative supports a recommendation
of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry to promote crime prevention measures, coupled
with the participation of young people.
I am indeed encouraged with the success and the potential of this
program. By providing a constructive
outlet for our northern young people, we can assist in providing a valuable
development mechanism to enhance their ability to become contributing members
in their community when they reach adulthood.
I am allocating $180,000 of new money to
fund the Recreation Director's Program in our Northern Affairs communities.
While I am on the topic of recreation, I
would like to add that this division has been helping to co‑ordinate the
construction of several arenas in the communities of Jackhead, Pukatawagan,
This government has supported arenas with
a total value of some $3 million. These
arenas play an integral role in the communities ability to provide recreation
programs for their local residents.
I am pleased to report to this committee
that this department, along with the several communities and the Northern
Association of Community Councils, has been vigorously pursuing a process for
incorporation.
Their hard work has brought results. A detailed procedure has been finalized and
guidelines are being printed for distribution, copies of which I am prepared to
provide for the members of this committee.
When a community incorporates, the local
council will assume a variety of new administrative and management responsibilities.
These responsibilities include passing bylaws ranging from policing to
environmental control within the authority provided by legislation. They will also be involved in negotiating and
entering agreements with individuals, business, corporations, government and
agencies as well as purchase and then development of lands within the
communities' boundaries. In this way,
incorporation increases the authority and autonomy of northern communities,
thus placing greater local control in the hands of these communities.
Residents of these communities see this as
a significant step in the direction of self‑determination. To meet the objective of progressively
transferring authority, funds, resources and responsibility to local councils
of authority, the Local Government Development division provides block funding
to the northern communities.
Up to last year, we had seven communities
in block funding arrangements. So far an
additional six communities have shown an interest in entering a block funding
arrangement as an interim step toward greater autonomy.
Whenever possible, the department has
entered joint ventures with northern Indian bands. These ventures generally involve building new
infrastructure projects and sharing existing services for the benefit of native
communities.
The Local Government Development division
recently finalized several ventures and is pursuing several others with at
least 10 Indian bands. These initiatives
vary from water and sewer projects to waste disposal and fire protection.
We will continue to work co‑operatively
with residents of northern and native communities. The partnerships we build now will ensure the
success of future joint ventures.
With these initiatives and others, our
department is demonstrating its commitment to promote and enhance the quality
of life for people living in our northern communities.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, while I am on the
topic of Northern Affairs, I would like to draw the committee's attention to
the provincial audit of this department.
When I became responsible for Northern Affairs there was a long list of
outstanding concerns and issues raised by the Provincial Auditor's office. I value the comments and concerns raised by
the Provincial Auditor's office.
*
(2020)
Therefore, I have taken the initiative
with the deputy minister and staff to ensure that these concerns are addressed
and rectified as recommended by the Provincial Auditor's office. I complement
staff for their hard work. Staff have worked
hard at resolving these matters, and I wish to advise the committee today that
in the next report tabled by the Provincial Auditor's office you will note the
department has made some significant improvements in this area.
I have also the pleasure to serve as the
Minister responsible for Native Affairs.
In that role, I am committed to working with the aboriginal community to
create and maintain a climate of open communication and co‑operation. I would like to take this opportunity to
acknowledge the valuable insight and contributions of native people across
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, our government is
currently involved with several initiatives through the Native Affairs
Secretariat. These initiatives are in place to address many pressing and
complex issues that have been highlighted in our discussions with
The recognition of the inherent rights of
The Native Affairs Secretariat provides a
liaison with other provincial and territorial governments to discuss issues of
common concern and share information on aboriginal issues. Several meetings
have been held between provincial and territorial officials to further develop
a process for effective provincial territorial communication and co‑operation.
These meetings also set in motion the plan
to hold the first nation‑wide meeting of Ministers of Native Affairs on
March 2 and 3 of this year. I had the
pleasure of attending a meeting in
Our meeting in
The provincial ministers, officials and
national leaders agreed to an ongoing process to address the Canada‑wide
concerns of Indian, Inuit and Metis peoples.
These new relationships will facilitate open discussions to deal with
long‑standing issues of concern to the aboriginal peoples, including self‑government
and improved delivery of services to or by aboriginal peoples. We believe aboriginal Canadians are entitled
to the protection and rights embodied in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Aboriginal women in
Just recently I have made an announcement
with my colleague the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, the
Honourable Bonnie Mitchelson, to introduce the aboriginal women's policy. This
policy was created to address the concerns expressed by aboriginal women in our
province. This document represents
significant growth and development in the co‑operative effort
demonstrated by both this government and the aboriginal women, but its legacy
will be the concrete action that follows.
The Native Affairs Secretariat is also
involved in the Metis tripartite negotiations on self‑government. I am pleased to inform members that the
technical groups have made significant progress in the housing and education
sectors as well as economic development.
I would like to report that the housing technical group has developed a
property management initiative that was approved by the federal and
Perhaps no topic has attracted more
attention regarding native issues than the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. In January, Justice Minister James McCrae and
I released the
*
(2025)
Currently staff at the Native Affairs
Secretariat are advising on strategies for consultation and involvement of the
aboriginal communities in the implementation process. Our goal is to ensure that the aboriginal
people have a greater voice in the institutions that serve them.
Another example of successful co‑operation
between our government and
The Native Affairs Secretariat has also
been monitoring changes in federal‑provincial jurisdictional issues. The Secretariat closely monitors this area to
assess the implications of federal shifts in financing programs and
services. This enables provincial
departments to respond quickly and effectively to the specific federal
decisions that affect aboriginal peoples.
We are also looking for new opportunities
to enhance the quality of life and economic development of our northern and
native communities. Members of this committee
will recall, we recently signed the North Central Hydro Electrification
Agreement. The signing of this agreement
marked the culmination of extensive consultations between the federal and
provincial governments, Manitoba Hydro and residents of the nine communities
affected by this project. This agreement
will effectively bring an ample supply of electrical power to some 8,700
residents living in the First Nation communities of
The partnerships we have formed in the
development of this initiative will enable us to meet the challenges we have
set for ourselves to encourage growth and sustainable development in the next
century and beyond.
As members will appreciate, the north
central hydro line project itself will give an extra boost to this goal by
providing considerable employment to our province over the next four to six
years. Many of these jobs will be done
by northerners. In fact, as a result of
this agreement, Manitoba Hydro will contract with a community‑based
agency to ensure that the nine communities involved in the project are kept
informed of progress at each phase of the development to maximize their access
to employment opportunities.
Our department will continue to explore
every possible option to create new opportunities for growth and
diversification in our province's northern and native communities. In fact, we see great potential for growth
and job opportunities in the Conawapa project and Bipole III.
Our department is currently studying
options to help northern residents upgrade their existing skills. This in turn will enable them to take
advantage of jobs arising from Conawapa and future long‑term employment
opportunities. Our policy is to give
first preference to northern people followed by other Manitobans for job
training and employment opportunities.
Local businesses will also benefit from the Conawapa project. We are working to guarantee that Manitobans
receive the maximum benefit from this project from start to finish.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, members of this
committee, this concludes my opening remarks for this 1992‑93 expenditure
Estimates for the Department of Northern Affairs. I have just a few other thoughts I would like
to conclude with.
To best appreciate these expenditure
Estimates, they should be considered in the context of the
Last September, a prominent economic
landmark in northern
Another prospect for northern
The most promising resource in northern
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I appreciated that
opportunity for my opening comments, and look forward to the quick passage of
the Northern and Native Affairs Estimates so that we can get on with the work.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please.
We thank the honourable Minister of Northern Affairs for those
comments. Does the critic for the
official opposition party, the honourable member for The Pas, have any opening
comments?
*
(2030)
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The
Pas): I also welcome the opportunity to make
opening remarks at the start of the Estimates process in Northern Affairs. After listening to the Minister of Northern
Affairs speak‑‑
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Could I ask the honourable member to bring his
mike up just a little bit? We are not
picking up on his‑‑thank you.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am not like the
Minister of Northern Affairs. I would
sooner speak quietly and‑‑
An Honourable
Member: Carry a big stick.
Mr. Lathlin: ‑‑but I am not a crook.
I welcome the opportunity to be able to
give opening remarks at this start of our Estimates process on Northern
Affairs. As I was saying before, as I
listened to the Minister of Northern Affairs speak about his department and all
of these wonderful things that he is doing in the North through the Department
of Northern Affairs, all these initiatives that he talks about, I was just
reminded of my last tour of the North.
I visited people in Norway House,
Then, of course, I go over to
Of course I spent quite a bit of time in
the town of
So as I listened to the Minister of
Northern Affairs speak about these initiatives that he has launched and all of
these expected results that he hopes these policies will bring about, I do not
usually like to be negative, but I sometimes wish that the Minister of Northern
Affairs could go and visit the same places and talk to the same people that I
talk to. Then perhaps when it comes to
making speeches such as the one he has just made, maybe he would inject some
realism into his speeches and talk about what is really happening out there in
northern
For example, about three weeks ago
perhaps, the employment centre in The Pas put out labour market
information. I am sure the Minister of
Northern Affairs has received a copy of it.
I have a copy of it myself. Also,
in the paper it was reported that the unemployment rate just in the town of
As we sit here this evening, there are
about 300 workers from the woodlands division at Repap who have been laid off
for two or three months now, and who are not going to be returning to work
until August, if they return to work.
When I talk to people such as the ones I
speak about, and also when I read reports such as the CEC, labour market report
that came out about two or three weeks ago, I am wondering sometimes whether
the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) is really talking about the same
area that I am talking about, because the situation as I see it, is very much
different from the one that is being projected by the Minister of Northern
Affairs through his speeches and responses to questions in the House.
People are concerned. For example, just recently, the Women's
Directorate in The Pas has been deemed no longer necessary, no longer useful,
for the people of The Pas, and so therefore, has been closed down, or will be
closed down, and is being relocated to Thompson.
Well, needless to say, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, I have had a lot of inquiries from people who have asked me to try
and please find out why this government has decided, in the face of all of this
unemployment that I have just finished talking about, in the face of all this
unemployment uncertainty, Repap, government offices, programs, services being
eliminated or cut back. People are
asking me to please try to find out why this government would be so insensitive
so as to look the other way when people are being laid off, and continue
closing down offices, and thereby, displacing a lot of people from employment,
and therefore, forcing them onto Unemployment Insurance schemes and eventually
onto welfare situations.
Just two weeks ago, I was at my house, it
was a Sunday afternoon. I was just
getting ready to come back to
He was supposed to be moving out of his
apartment by the end of May because he could no longer afford to pay the
rent. He has a family‑‑his
partner and three children and one grandchild he told me.
*
(2040)
His request of me at the time that he was
visiting me was, because I spend a lot of time in
When I explained to him that I needed a
house, a home of my own whenever I am in The Pas, and that my daughter would be
living with me for the summer when she is out of school, that I could not
possibly, although I would have liked to, rent a house to him.
I had to refuse him, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, and I relate this story to you, Sir, because this is the reality
that is happening out there. Very much
different from what the minister talks about when he responds to questions in
the House, such as the themes and initiatives that he talks about in his
opening remarks.
As I said, I am not trying to be
negative. I would like to be positive,
but I would also like to be realistic. I
do not want to paint a picture that is not there. The picture that the minister is painting, I
am afraid, is not the reality that I see whenever I go into those
communities. I thought I would just
relate that one of many stories. I could
tell you others, but time will not permit me here.
The northern employment service office
again was closed in The Pas, displacing two very long‑term employees.
The nursery, the greenhouse at Clearwater
Lake‑‑in December I asked the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr.
Enns) whether the nursery would continue to exist, or I asked him what the
future was for the nursery in
In March, I asked the Minister of Northern
Affairs (Mr.
When you look at only four out of 12 crops‑‑I
believe they call them‑‑when they are only going to be doing four
out of 12, again when we were talking about the nursery in December, things were
starting to look a look a little bit, well, pretty grim then, not very
sure. The Minister of Natural Resources
could not give us a definitive answer.
When you look at how the minister
responded in December, and also the Minister of Northern Affairs response to my
questions in March in regard to the future of the greenhouse at The Pas, and
when you look at the reality that is out there today when four out of 40
employees have indeed been called back, when four out of 12 crops have been
planted‑‑four out of 12‑‑you begin to put two and two
together, you know from what happened in December and March and what is indeed
happening out there today, again you start looking at the reality and you begin
to ask yourself, what does that mean for the greenhouse in The Pas and all of
those 40‑odd employees who have been working there? Is this the beginning of the end of the
greenhouse, or what is it?
The reality that exists out there today is
that there are only four out of 40 persons working, four out of 12 crops are
underway. To me that indicates that
something more serious might happen in the near future, such as completely
closing it down and doing the seedlings somewhere else.
The health care system is an issue that
many northern people are continuing to talk about, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. I sometimes get the feeling that people who
have lived all their lives in the North and have never really‑‑for
example, such as myself and Elijah and others who have come from the North and
have come and lived in
I talked to the students who are currently
enrolled in the Northern Bachelor of Nursing Program. They tell me that if they were going to
university in
In any event, what they are relating to me
is that when they do research or papers or any, you know, in the course of
their study, whatever it is that they have to do, that they are very limited as
to what they can access. So those are
some of the examples that I think about or that I talk about with people as I
travel around the North.
I want to come back to the fact that as I
talk to people who have never really come down to
So when I listen to them I get frustrated
sometimes, because they come only so far, they can only talk about their
experience base, what they have in the North.
So I go on to tell them, look, if you are living in
For example, when people talk to me about
the user fee that has been imposed for those people who do not live in
*
(2050)
So people are asking those questions. For those people who have come from the
South, decided to move to the North and to work there, maybe temporarily, and
for one reason or another decided to live there permanently, those people are
asking me, why am I being penalized for having decided to come and live and
work in the North?
I do not have any answers for those people
other than to say that this government has a double standard for
That is a double standard. That is what exists out there, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson. That is why these people
are asking me, is it my fault that I was born and raised in Norway House, in
In
They also talk about the employment
situation in
We have Moose Lake Loggers whose future is
very uncertain right now. The
government, I do not think, really has a grip as to what is going to happen to
Moose Lake Loggers. They have done away
with the Moose Lake Loggers Crown corporation and have pretty well left it up
to the community of
Again, the road is a very popular topic of
discussion whenever I am in Cormorant.
Housing, employment and recreation programs are badly needed in
Cormorant.
In
Again, the employment situation in Norway
House and
In March we were assured by the Minister
of Environment not to worry, that everything is under control and we are doing
everything that we can to remedy that situation.
Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, two weeks
ago, I was in
Since then, two weeks ago, I have not
talked to the fishermen, but I could see with my own eyes what the water that
was let through the spillway from the forebay had done to those nets. They were not very optimistic about the
fishing season this summer.
Again I want to come back to Wanless, a
fellow by the name of Lee Theriault there, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. Perhaps when the Minister of Northern Affairs
is next in the area, maybe next election when he is out there and campaigning,
he can pay a visit to Mr. Lee Theriault, who is the chairperson of that
community. He has a whole list of legitimate and valid concerns and problems
that he wants to talk about. Certainly
he has talked to me about them.
I want to finally say a little bit about
the Northern Economic Development Commission.
The minister again talks at length about the Northern Economic
Development Commission. I have no
problem whatsoever with the people who have been appointed to sit on the
commission. I think they are fine people
with good credentials and so on. What I
do question, though, is the manner in which the commission was launched, was
initiated, and also the timing of the work that the commission is starting to
do, because you see, they are just barely getting started now. They are just getting started, and as I look
at the terms of reference and the mandate that this commission has, they have
anywhere from 18 to 24 months in which to complete their report and give their
recommendations to the government.
One cannot help but wonder whether this
will be another commission such as the AJI report, the Suche commission, the
Pedlar report and all of those very good reports, especially the AJI report,
that have been commissioned by the government.
A lot of money was spent on those reports. A lot of very good people have spent a lot of
time researching and then finally writing a report, recommendations to the
government.
*
(2100)
The government does not take any action,
Mr. Deputy Chairperson. It has been
almost a year. At the end of August, it
will be a full year when the AJI Report was released with all the
recommendations. It will be almost a
year. So far we have not seen anything
substantial that this government has done in responding to those
recommendations that were put forth by the two commissioners.
Now, when I look at the Northern Economic
Development Commission, I look at it this way.
It is going to take 18 months, maybe 24 months, and by that time we are
into an election and will be doing something else. I am not saying, I am not even thinking, it
does not matter who is in government then.
What I am saying though is, although the people who have been chosen to
sit on the commission are very fine people, but I have a sneaking suspicion
that this is just a show that is being put on by the Minister of Northern
Affairs (Mr. Downey) to tell people in the North, yes, we are doing
something. Look at this commission that
we have set up.
I was in The Pas when the commissioners
visited The Pas. There was hardly anybody in the hall when the commissioners
were there. I thought, well, very good
consultation, six or seven people in the hall.
I do not blame them for not coming to this commission because who wants
a commission? Who needs to be told that
in order to have economic development in the North, we need
infrastructure? We do not need a
commission to tell us that we need an infrastructure in the North in order for
economic development to take place. We
know all of that already. We do not need
a commission to tell us that we need this kind of activity happening in the
North.
I know you are telling me to close and I
am always very respectful to the Chair.
I will close now and thank you for giving me the opportunity. You see, I did not want the minister to beat
me on the time because he kept on and on and he was reading from a text. Thank you very much.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the honourable member for The Pas
(Mr. Lathlin) for those comments. Does
the critic for the second opposition party, the honourable member for St.
Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), have any opening comments?
Mr. Neil Gaudry (St.
Boniface): Yes, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, I will be extremely brief because I have seen we have taken an
hour of the time that is allotted for us in the Estimates and I think it is
very important that we get answers.
So we have listened to the minister with
his 90 pages of long‑winded information here where he has taken a lot of
initiative, but I do not know whether he has proceeded with all of his
initiatives that he wants to undertake.
But we want to deal with the Estimates, I think, on a positive attitude,
and we want to work for the northern people.
I think we always have interest.
A lot of time I think they say that beyond the Perimeter that we do not
care, but I think we want to care for all of the northern people.
I listened to my colleague from The Pas
here who mentioned some of the northern people who would like to come and live
in
I think these are the things that we have
to address, and we have to work with the people from northern
No, I have 25 minutes to go, Mr. Minister,
and I will take them like you have done because after listening to these
comments here, I have concerns.
You talked about progress and initiatives
that you have done in the last five budgets and‑‑no, I would not
say nothing has been done, but there is a lot more to be done. I think we have to do that and we have to
work together, and with all the colleagues of the Legislature we have to look
positively for our northern people and there is work to be done and we will do
it together.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the honourable member for those brief
remarks.
Under
At this time, we invite the minister's
staff to join us at the table, and we ask the minister to introduce the staff
members present.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have Mr. David
Tomasson, who is the Deputy Minister and the head of the Native Affairs
Secretariat; Rene Gagnon, who is the Director of Administration; ADM, Mr.
Oliver Boulette; and Ms. Brenda Kustra, who is the ADM for agreements
management within the department.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I want to
compliment them on the work and effort that they have put forward on behalf of
the Department of Northern Affairs over the last four years that I have been
the minister.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: I thank the honourable minister. Item 1.(b) Executive Support: (1) Salaries $460,200. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in all of the
Estimates, we have always been asking about the decentralization program. How many staff have been decentralized in the
program over the last year?
(Mr. Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy
Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, there is
approximately 75 percent of this department that is decentralized. The majority of it works out of
Mr. Gaudry: Yes, but you initiated a program of
decentralization. How many have been
decentralized out of the staff of
Mr. Downey: Approximately five, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson.
Mr. Gaudry: The five or six that were decentralized, did
they all accept the move?
Mr. Downey: No.
Mr. Gaudry: How many did not accept? Were they transferred to other departments?
Mr. Downey: I will get that information for the member. Two, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Gaudry: Were they transferred to other departments, or
were they laid off or given a severance package?
Mr. Downey: One went to another department, and one is still
with the Department of Northern Affairs.
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the minister
indicated that there was a $3‑million increase in his overall
budget. Where did the money come from,
from what department was it cut?
Mr. Downey: It was a general increase, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson.
Mr. Gaudry: I know it was a general increase, but where
did the money come from?
Mr. Downey: From the taxpayers.
Mr. Gaudry: Since you did not have any tax increases for
the last five budgets like you claim, there must have been other revenues that
were used, or some other departments were cut back.
Mr. Downey: Reprioritization, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Lathlin: I would also like to follow that, Mr. Acting
Deputy Chairperson. The minister in his
opening statement said there is approximately a $3‑million increase. I think it is the responsibility of the
minister to tell the committee where the money came from, whether it came from
other departments, a reshuffling of money, or what are we doing here, because he
is telling us that he had a budget of $16 million last year, and now he has
increased it by $3 million.
*
(2110)
I think he owes it to the committee and to
the public to tell us exactly how this $3 million came to be in the Department
of Northern Affairs and which departments did it come from. Did it come from Highways and Transportation
or Natural Resources, or where did it come from?
Mr. Downey: It came from the general revenues of the
province as a reprioritization within the government. The request was put forward by the
departmental staff, and I went forward to Treasury Board and got approval‑‑as
I have indicated, some new initiatives, one of them particularly as it relates
to the northern Rec Director's Program.
Mr. Lathlin: Well, on the northern Recreation Director's
Program that the minister referred to, that program is coming to an end this
year?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, apparently the
member was not listening. What I told
him was, it has now been implemented into the department as an ongoing
program. It was a pilot project for two
years, and once we found out whether or not it was acceptable by the people,
did an estimate as to the success ratio, then we made the determination as to
whether or not it would be continued. It
is now being continued, and there is $180,000 put in Northern Affairs Estimates
for that program.
Mr. Lathlin: Perhaps I can ask the minister what that
$180,000 is going to be used for. The
reason I ask the minister is because I still get asked by constituents, people
who are in the program, wondering whether the program is going to continue or
not. Apparently, when they ask questions
from their superiors, they do not really know whether they are going to keep on
working. They are asking me if the
funding is going to continue, whether their salaries are going to be looked
after, or whether the department is going to contract with Indian bands,
community councils, and have them look after their salaries. These are the questions I am getting from the
constituents, and that is why I am asking the question.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the two‑year
training program will be evaluated this summer.
There is an ongoing program of the Department of Northern Affairs, of
which the graduates are graduating in August, I believe, who, it is my
understanding, will be getting employment under the northern Recreation Program‑‑nine
trainees.
Mr. Lathlin: Funded by the department and not contracts
entered into and being paid for by Indian band councils and community councils?
Mr. Downey: There will be nine trainees who will be employed
by the Department of Northern Affairs under the Recreation Director's Program.
Mr. Elijah Harper
(Rupertsland): Yes, I just wanted to
ask the minister‑‑I know that he has indicated that there has been
a $3‑million increase to the Department of Northern Affairs. What I notice here is an increase in certain
areas within the department, one in particular in the area of Northern Flood
Agreement. I think that accounts for
almost $2 million in the increase of the $3 million. If you put the Director's Program and also
the commission, that would make almost a $3‑million increase.
Now my question to the minister is that
the increase there is almost $2 million.
Has anything been increased in terms of new policy changes or new
initiatives in that program, because a lot of the agreements or the Northern
Flood Agreement are not usually added on to the budget because they cannot
really estimate the costs as the agreements occur.
I was just wondering what the increase of
that money is for, that $2 million or nearly $2 million.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): If I could just
interject, if I could get some consensus from the committee members here, it
seems that we are going all over on the Estimates here. I was just wondering whether there is a
direction, whether we should go line by line?
I notice that the Northern Flood Agreement is Item 3.(b).
If I could get the consensus from the
committee to go line by line?
Mr. Harper: Yes, I was just following the discussions of
what was going on here.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Excuse me, we started
off on an introduction of 1.(b) Executive Support (1) Salaries, and then we
started to go all over. I would like to
seek some guidance from the committee.
Mr. Downey: Let us do it line by line and then get to it.
Mr. Harper: Well, I would go with that, but there was a
general question that was posed in terms of the general increase in the
department, and I was trying to sort that out.
I was actually within the whole departmental budget, and I saw that
there was a substantial increase in the Northern Flood portion of the budget.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I will deal with
that, if it is okay with the member, when I get to the Northern Flood section
of the Estimates.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 1.(b) Executive
Support (1) Salaries $460,200‑‑pass; 1.(b)(2) Other Expenditures
$131,300. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Gaudry: Yes, in this section here, in the Activity
Identification, it says, implements and monitors affirmative action policies to
meet the departmental affirmative action goals and objectives.
Can the minister tell us what affirmative
action policies have been implemented in the last year?
Mr. Downey: The target within the government is 10 percent
aboriginal. This department, in 1992, we
are at 30 percent aboriginal. Within the
government target, we have 50 percent for women, and our department is 54
percent, well above the provincial targets in the department.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 1.(b)(2) Other
Expenditures $131,300‑‑pass.
1.(c)(1) Salaries $425,100‑‑pass;
1.(c)(2) Other Expenditures $72,600‑‑pass.
1.(d)(1) Salaries $122,300‑‑pass.
1.(d)(2) Other Expenditures $6,000.
Mr. Harper: Yes, I wanted to ask the minister in respect
to this area, I know that this might be the area in which the administration of
cottage area fees might be for discussion.
What I wanted to ask the minister was‑‑[interjection]
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Excuse me, if I could
get the member to pull his mike up at little closer? Thank you very much.
Mr. Harper: Maybe the minister can clarify whether this is
the right area to ask the question in terms of the area in a project that is
taking place in the Manigotagan area, a similar area in which the
There has been substantial opposition to
this by the communities in that area.
They have complained to me that there was a lack of consultation in this
area and also that the whole area‑‑I do not know whether this area
has been purchased by a private person or a group called the Northeast
Sustainable Development Association.
Maybe the minister can elaborate on
this. I do not know what the status of
that is right now, because there seems to be a lot of concern from the
residents in that area, the community residents in that area. Maybe the minister can elaborate on that.
*
(2120)
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not think
this is a specific area, but I will comment under this line just to help the
member. It is my understanding that
discussions had taken place previously with the communities as it relates to
the project which the member refers to.
Initially it was my understanding that there was not a lot of objection,
but as the member has raised this last while, there are some concerns being
brought forward.
What we are currently doing is having
departmental staff meet with those communities to see if we can deal with those
concerns that are being brought forward.
Mr. Harper: This proposal, has it been finalized, or is it
just in the process of being completed at this time?
Mr. Downey: It is in the process of being finalized, but as
I said, I am prepared to either meet with the communities or have staff bring
forward their concerns to see if they can be dealt with.
Mr. Harper: I would very much appreciate that, because
there have been a lot of concerns raised from Seymourville and also from the
surrounding communities in terms of that development. They want to have input,
so I appreciate if the minister would assure the community that they would have
access and input or consult the communities in that area.
Mr. Downey: Just for maybe the member, if not now, he could
make sure that I got the community issues.
If he has a list of them, maybe he could table them with me or give them
to me either right now or sometime after the committee to make sure that I have
the concerns as he sees them so that I am not missing any issues that he is
bringing forward.
Mr. Harper: The communities that I met with wanted to know
what was actually happening so they did not have the information at that
time. Unless the people who were involved
have provided the information recently, I have not got the most recent
information from either Seymourville or Manigotagan or Angaming. Maybe the Northern Affairs staff would like
to meet with the communities.
Mr. Downey: I am prepared to do that, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson.
Mr. Gaudry: It says here:
To provide financial assistance to start or expand small‑ and
medium‑sized businesses in
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): I was on item
1.(d)(2) Other Expenditures $6,000‑‑pass.
Item 1.(e) Communities Economic
Development Fund $1,850,000.
Mr. Harper: This item will I think be tabled as a report
in the Legislature. When do we expect
that?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we have just gone
through the Economic Development report about a month ago. We hope to have the next one, if it is ready,
before the Legislature rises. This
session we will table it; if not it will be tabled at the next session.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 1.(e)
Communities Economic Development Fund $1,850,000‑‑pass.
Mr. Gaudry: I had asked a question in regard to the
financial assistance to small‑ and medium‑sized businesses. How many were helped in the last year?
Mr. Downey: That information is available in the Communities
Economic Development report which we tabled.
I do not have that information with me.
If I can recall‑‑I usually keep track of this‑‑I
think there were 30 probably last year, but I stand corrected, but we did go
through that report about a month ago, I guess.
It went before committee with all that information, but this line is‑‑to
help the member‑‑losses that are incurred by the Communities
Economic Development Fund.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 1.(e)
Communities Economic Development Fund $1,850,000‑‑pass.
Item 2.(a)(1) Salaries $225,400‑‑pass;
2.(a)(2) Other Expenditures $74,700‑‑pass; 2.(a)(3) Community
Operations $4,458,800‑‑pass; 2.(a)(4) Emergency Response Program
$48,600.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am having
difficulty‑‑
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Pull up the mike.
Mr. Lathlin: I said, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am
having difficulty keeping up with the process here. It is just too fast for me this evening for
some reason or other. Perhaps I could
get the minister to‑‑because I am trying to follow both books here,
the description and the budget‑‑the Emergency Response Program,
give maybe just a brief explanation.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, this looks after
the equipment needs of the communities for fire and related protection for
their communities.
Mr. Lathlin: In the Northern Affairs communities, how many
communities would have a program such as an Emergency Response Program? What would they have in terms of people
working and money being spent? What kind
of activity do they have, do they engage themselves in?
Mr. Downey: All communities have equipment, training, and
the magnitude, or the sophistication of the equipment is dependent upon the
size of the community. For example, a
small community would have probably a trailer‑type system, with related
equipment for firefighting. You get to a
larger community, they would have a fire truck with all the equipment that goes
with that level of service, that is, the communities are categorized in size
and to the level of service that can accommodate those different
communities. So, basically, they all
have equipment. It is a matter of the
size of the equipment that they have to look after the different‑sized
communities.
Can I tell you as well that I am pretty
proud of the record of the Northern Affairs communities and the work that they
are doing in this whole area of safety and fire‑related activities? They
are becoming very good at the work that they do in this area.
Mr. Lathlin: This program would not be tied in with the
Natural Resources forest fire, nor does it tie in with the Constable program
through the Justice department?
Mr. Downey: No, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(a)(4)
Emergency Response Program $48,600‑‑pass; 2.(a)(5) Community
Training $46,000.
Mr. Gaudry: Is this a new program? I see there was nothing the previous year.
Mr. Downey: These are training dollars that are identified
separately within the department, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, and one could
consider it a new program.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(a)(5)
Community Training $46,000‑‑pass; 2.(a)(6) Regional Services
$692,300.
Mr. Gaudry: Can we have an explanation of the increase of
roughly $40,000?
*
(2130)
Mr. Downey: This increase, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, is
to take care of maintenance for buildings.
The recommendations came forward from the different regions of need for
maintenance increase, and that is what this relates to.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(a)(6)
Regional Services $692,300‑‑pass.
2.(a)(7) Grants $258,900.
Mr. Gaudry: Can the minister give us a brief explanation
of all the grants that are handed out and who gets these grants?
Mr. Downey: This is to support the Northern Association of
Community Councils‑‑core funding.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(a)(7) Grants
$258,900‑‑pass.
2.(a)(8) Recreation Director's Program
$180,600.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I had my hand up,
but I guess you did not see me. I was
going to go back to the Grants, if I‑‑for a minute?
The Acting Deputy Chairperson
(Mr. Reimer): Sure.
Mr. Lathlin: It would seem to me‑‑yes, I agree,
it is a worthwhile program. It supports
aboriginal self‑determination, development, training and so on, but if,
as we listen to the minister speaking in the House and in committee supporting
aboriginal self‑government, development and so on, I am just wondering,
maybe‑‑I am trying to remember if there was an increase last year
or an decrease.
It would seem to me that if this program
is as important as the minister claims it is, why do we see that portion of the
budget remaining the same? How is the
Grants money allocated? Is it done by formula, negotiation or‑‑[interjection] Yes, application? How is it done? Per capita?
Mr. Downey: This is core funding for the Northern Association
of Community Councils to operate their organization. The member is asking about the level of
funding. I believe that it was several
years when we got into the office that they had not received an increase under
the previous administration. When we
first came in, we gave them an increase.
I think it was 1990. Last year I
think there was a reduction of some $10,000 because we were all having to
reduce wherever we could, and this year we have retained it to the level of
last year.
But again, it is the realization of not
having the additional monies that it takes to increase these areas. As I said, if I checked the record, they had
gone for several years under the previous administration without any increase. We gave them an increase. Then there was a slight reduction last year,
and we have been able to maintain it at that level without any further
reduction.
It is difficult, but Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson, we all have to realize that we have to live with the monies that
we can get appropriated, and that is what we are doing.
We have worked very closely with the
communities as it relates to a program of incorporation. There have been some additional efforts put
in there on behalf of the communities, and hopefully, when we see some activity
take place in that regard, we can see some additional support, but that is a
matter of process in an ongoing way.
Mr. Lathlin: How do you allocate the Grants funding?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, each community
gets an allocation, I believe, of $800 per community. The communities are encouraged, if they wish,
to forward that to the Core organization to support them. On top of that, they get $20,000 support for
their newsletter, and their Core funding is $195,700.
So they get Core funding of $195,700
directly to the NACC, $20,000 support for their newsletter, and $800 per
community, which comes to $43,200 that goes to each community. They do not have to, but they are encouraged
to forward that to the association to look after their interests in a
collective way.
Mr. Lathlin: So there is no formula and no per capita, just
per community?
Mr. Downey: That is correct.
Mr. Lathlin: So if a community increases by 1,000 people, it
does not matter. That does not really
determine the amount of funding that it would get?
Mr. Downey: The same if it decreases, no change.
Mr. Lathlin: I am talking about increases, because an
increase in a community would require more funding. It would put a squeeze on the community in
terms of programs and services. They may
as well increase by 10,000, and they would not get a net percent extra
according to the minister's explanation.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, this kind of a
program is a political representation on behalf of the communities, so I think
it is fair, as was the policy under the previous administration, as is
currently being carried on by this government, that there is Core funding to
the organization.
Regardless of the size of the community,
there is $800 per community, regardless of whether the population goes up or
down. If he is saying a population goes down, what should they get reduced so
that another community could get an increase?
Is that what he is suggesting should take place?
I believe it is fairer approach that each
community would get $800 to forward to represent them in a collective way. This does not provide service to them in a
physical way. It provides a lobby
representation for them and an input for that community through NACC to
represent them. So, he says, if they get
more people, they should get more money.
Is he also saying, if the community reduces, they should get less money?
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am glad the
minister reminded me of that situation, because I am quite aware of federal
legislation called Bill C‑31. I
know for a fact that some communities, a lot of them have been reinstated. They have gone to their band council, signed
and have gotten all kinds of programs and services in education, housing,
social assistance.
I challenge the minister to table
documents where he says, for example, those Metis communities who have made
application to be reinstated, a large number of them‑‑I know in The
Pas, the population of treaty Indians in The Pas in '85 was some 1,200 persons‑‑that
is in '85, September. We are approaching
September‑‑seven years later‑‑and it is hovering just
around 3,000 persons.
*
(2140)
About 75 percent of that increase is due
as a result of Bill C‑31, people who would have belonged to community
councils, Metis associations and so on.
That is why I asked the minister if there was a formula or whatever,
because I know for a fact that if a community of say 600 people went down to
200 people, the minister would not give‑‑supposing the funding base
was $100,000, I know for a fact he would not continue to give them a base
funding of $100,000 if the population went down from 600 to 200 people. So who was he trying to kid?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the point is, the
Northern Association of Community Councils gets core funding to represent each
community collectively. It is a policy
that was carried on from the previous administration. What I am saying is each community gets an
allocation of $800 regardless of the size.
They do not have to forward it to the NACC
organization. They can in fact keep it for their own purposes. However, they are encouraged to forward it as
money to help represent them, and regardless of whether they have 200 or 500
people, the importance of that representation, we believe, is important.
(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Mr. Harper: Yes, this is the area I think I want to
question the minister on the lots, I believe.
I had a complaint from one of the residents dealing with a sewage tank that
was‑‑is this the area that it might be in? [interjection] Which area are we then on?
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We are now dealing with (8) Recreation
Director's Program.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, let me help the
member. It will be in the regional
services on the next page, so if we pass these, we can get right to them.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Recreation Director's Program $180,600. Shall
the item pass?
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this pilot project, how
was it funded up until now? I know he
says, the minister is going to fund through our department nine positions for
$180,000. So I take that to mean nine
positions, approximately $20,000 per position.
That is one question. Where was
it funded before? I know it is going to
be funded through Northern Affairs from now on, and I think it will be $20,000
per position.
The other question I had was‑‑I
know the minister is going to tell me I was not listening, but I clearly forgot
the total number of trainees there were, and I want to know how many were
trained over that two‑year period, and how many in fact are going to be
retained to become full‑time recreation directors for their communities?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, 26 entered the program,
18 are graduating and nine will be employed under the Northern Affairs
department, and nine, I understand, will be employed by the bands.
Mr. Lathlin: So indeed there will be nine of those graduates
being shoved on to Indian band councils?
Mr. Downey: I do not think the terminology is correct. There were nine that were offered job
opportunities by the bands.
Mr. Lathlin: Those nine positions will be paid for by the
bands themselves?
Mr. Downey: Correct.
Mr. Lathlin: I believe my other question was, how was it
funded up until now?
Mr. Downey: Lotteries.
Mr. Lathlin: Not New Careers?
Mr. Downey: Through New Careers, but the monies came from
Lotteries.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(a)(8) Recreation Director's Program
$180,600‑‑pass.
2.(b) Thompson Region: (1) Salaries $386,200‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $115,100‑‑pass.
2.(c) The Pas Region: (1) Salaries $218,200. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I guess I want to know
how many positions we are talking about for each region. What level they are at? Also, my more important question is: Why did The Pas Region go from 312 to
284? I believe that is a drop of‑‑[interjection] I know. I want to make a point here.
Mr. Downey: One vacant position was transferred to Northern
Flood.
Mr. Lathlin: One vacant position was transferred?
Mr. Downey: That is correct.
Mr. Lathlin: You mean one position was terminated in The Pas
and relocated?
Mr. Downey: The answer is no to that. There was one vacant position transferred to
Northern Flood.
Mr. Lathlin: Why was this one vacant position in The Pas not
filled?
Mr. Downey: Because it was the Administrative department's
decision not to fill it but to use it in Northern Flood.
Mr. Lathlin: May I ask the minister what position and types
of activities that position carried out in The Pas, that he decided not to fill
and move elsewhere?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it was a planning
position, and they were not filled in other regions either.
Mr. Lathlin: Thank you, very much.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(c) The Pas Region: (1) Salaries $218,200‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $66,000‑‑pass.
2.(d) Dauphin Region: (1) Salaries $336,100‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $79,500‑‑pass.
2.(e) Selkirk Region: (1) Salaries $441,000.
Mr. Lathlin: This is that area in which I raised the
question, Manigotagan area. I had a
complaint from one of the residents, Dorothy Meade, regarding lots for sale in
that area. A sewage tank had been put
in, I think, within about 200 feet of their lot, and they had complained to the
Department of Northern Affairs about this.
They were not satisfied with the response and figured that they should
have been probably more appropriately dealt with.
Can the minister provide the answer as to
what went on and why they were not really properly consulted? Maybe the minister can elaborate on that?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will take that
question as notice and get the specific information for him.
Mr. Lathlin: I did not hear the response.
Mr. Downey: I understand the complaint was from a person by
the name of Dorothy Meade in what community?
Mr. Lathlin: Manigotagan.
Mr. Downey: Manigotagan.
I will take that question under advisement and get the information to
the member as to the current status of that situation.
Mr. Gaudry: In regard to another complaint from
Manigotagan in regard to the waste disposal plant construction, can the
minister give us the details on that?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. I will get that for the honourable member of the
Liberal Party as well.
*
(2150)
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(e) Selkirk Region: (1) Salaries $441,000. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Harper: Yes, I wanted to question the minister in
regard to the Seymourville, a question in terms of a project that is going on
in the area in regards to the Green Plan.
There is a water‑line project that is taking place there, and what
kind of involvement is the community involved in that project?
Mr. Downey: Would you repeat the question, please?
Mr. Harper: I had a complaint from Seymourville in regards
to a water‑line project, I believe under the Green Plan. I think that is the federal project that is
taking place there.
They were complaining that no one was
being employed in that project, and I am
asking whether there has actually been any communication to anyone in that
project, any co‑operation between the communities or anything being done
by the Department of Northern Affairs to ensure that local people are being
hired.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think he referred to
this as being possibly a federal program, and I am not‑‑[interjection]
Mr. Harper: I said the Green Plan. There is a federal program called the Green
Plan for the water‑line project.
In that area, there is a water‑line project taking place, and the
community had complained that the local people from that area should be
employed regardless‑‑I know it may be taking place on the Hollow
Water reserve.
People are complaining that they should
also have access to employment in that area.
I was wondering what the department was doing in that regard.
Mr. Downey: I appreciate the concern of the member. We, when operating as a provincial government
in those communities, try to employ as much as possible the local people. I am prepared to speak to the chief and see
what there might be done to hire more people locally.
I know that, knowing the chief relatively
well, he is usually pretty concerned about that local employment, and I am sure
that there may be some difficulty that has been developed with the federal
system, but I will check into it as well.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(e) Selkirk Region: (1) Salaries $441,000‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $126,000‑‑pass.
2.(f) Technical Services: (1) Salaries $383,700‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $72,100‑‑pass.
2.(g) Audit Services: (1) Salaries $142,900. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Harper: Yes, my colleague wanted to ask a question on,
maybe it was the next item coming up, but he went to the washroom. I wonder if we can revert back when he gets
back?
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The honourable member for The Pas, you have
stalled it long enough. Now we have it
in Hansard anyway.
We are dealing with 2.(g) Audit Services
(1) Salaries $142,900, on page 135.
Mr. Lathlin: No, we are okay there, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Shall the item pass?‑‑pass.
Item 2.(g) Audit Services: (2) Other Expenditures $20,000‑‑pass.
Item 2.(h) Inter‑Regional
Services: (1) Salaries $299,200‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $70,900‑‑pass.
Resolution 110: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $8,742,200 for Northern Affairs, Local Government
Development, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
We will now go to page 136.
Item 3. Northern Development and Co‑ordination
(a) Northern Development: (1) Salaries
$312,200‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $90,900‑‑pass.
Item 3.(b) Northern Flood Agreement: (1) Salaries $175,900. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, salaries run from
$128,000 to $175,000. Maybe I could ask
the minister, what people does the department have in the Northern Flood
Agreement office?
Mr. Downey: There are four, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. There is one manager, two professional
technicians and one administrative support.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(1) Salaries $175,900‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $25,000‑‑pass; (3) Northern Flood Program
$1,990,900.
Mr. Harper: Yes, I believe the minister wanted to
elaborate on this part.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the increase is for
identified settlements that have been made in areas of the four communities
that have not decided to go for global settlement. Of course, he is aware that
the Split Lake Cree vote has taken place today, and they have been requesting a
global settlement. These monies are to deal with the
Mr. Harper: Yes, you are saying that this was part of the
budget that has already been concluded?
Mr. Downey: No, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this is to carry out
ongoing settlements for the commercial fishing, domestic fishing in both Nelson
House and Norway House, and also to hire key communicators on behalf of the
communities.
Mr. Harper: Yes, and it is a program that is ongoing. Would there be a time when this portion will
be settled at some point, or would it be ongoing? Is it a yearly program, or is it something
that requires settlement in the future that will require maybe millions of
dollars?
Mr. Downey: The communicators are annual. Some of the other programs that I have
referred to are of an ongoing basis to the fisherman. However, if there is a decision by any of
those bands to do a global settlement, then this would be absorbed into that
global settlement, but under the Northern Flood Agreement, this meets the terms
of the Northern Flood Agreement and this has a longer term commitment to it on
an ongoing basis.
Mr. Harper: Is this part of
Mr. Downey: No, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there is nothing to
do with Split Lake Cree in this agreement.
The
Mr. Harper: So they are not part of the Key Communicators
Program at all?
Mr. Downey: No.
Mr. Gaudry: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in the Activity
Identification it says: Supports the
Wildlife Advisory and Planning Board; Community Liaison Committee. Can I have a brief explanation of this
activity identification?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is an ongoing
commitment and arrangement under the Northern Flood Agreement to liaise with
government and with the communities to assist in directing concerns as it
relates to loss of activities in the hunting area and the fishing area. It is a direct communicating link to assist
some of those communities, and one of the areas that have been identified by
the Northern Flood communities in discussions I have had with the
communications people was their full and strong support for the rec director's
program as an alternative initiative in program development to assist their
communities. So it is really a communicating linkage between the government and
the communities that were impacted by the northern flooding.
*
(2200)
Mr. Gaudry: Are there special reports that are provided to
the government from these committees, and are they available to the members of
the Legislature?
Mr. Downey: No, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Gaudry: Why would there not be reports made available
in regard to these committees?
Mr. Downey: It is done by verbal communication through
meetings and through different exercises.
I suppose there is some correspondence, but a report per se is not done.
Mr. Gaudry: Because to me it would appear that certain
reports as to wildlife, for example, would be interesting and I think effective
to the members of the Legislature.
Mr. Downey: I will speak to the community because it is
community controlled, and if they feel it is important that the legislative
members get that information, then I will encourage them to do so.
Mr. Harper: Yes, I wanted to question the minister in
respect to the
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we have seen over the
past several years a desire by those communities to see some conclusion to
those agreements that have been out there, and the difficulties the communities
have been facing.
As far as the province is concerned, this
will basically extinguish any future responsibilities as it relates to what is
known as the Northern Flood Agreement.
As he knows, the vote is taking place today in
Answering the question, it will relieve
the province of future responsibilities as it relates to the Northern Flood
Agreement.
Mr. Harper: Of course, you are referring to the
Mr. Downey: Correct.
Mr. Harper: If the
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not want to mislead
the member or the committee. This is for
the predetermined level of water that is currently the regime with which Hydro
is operating.
If there were a new development which were
to impact on the
There are still some obligations that
Hydro has under this current agreement that is being signed as it relates to
the project causing some difficulties as it relates to this, but it is spelled
out in the agreement. The province is no
longer held responsible or the federal government under the current operating
regime of Hydro, but if that regime were to change, a new development to take
place, then there would be a responsibility by the parties to go back to the
Split Lake Cree and negotiate with them.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please.
The hour being ten o'clock, what is the will of the committee?
An Honourable
Member: Continue.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Carry on?
Okay, we will carry on then.
Mr. Harper: Yes, can the minister indicate as to what the
status of the other communities is in respect to these ongoing negotiations in
terms of the Hydro settlement?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I can tell the
member that he knows that the other four communities were a part of the global
settlement until some two years ago when they withdrew and did not want to
proceed.
However, I have had recent communication
from one community that they want to see‑‑no, from more than that‑‑they
would like to see a speed‑up of resolve of the Northern Flood Agreement.
As far as global settlements are
concerned, I cannot indicate at this point where those communities stand, but
they are all‑‑and I do not blame them‑‑somewhat
impatient as to the length of time it has taken to resolve some of the
settlements. That is why we have tried
to advance to some degree the settlements that we are referring to in tonight's
Estimates.
As far as globally settling, I cannot
speak on behalf of the bands at this particular time. However, we will see what happens with the
Mr. Harper: There has been discussion in regard to the
Conawapa Dam. Does that have any impact
with respect to the
Mr. Downey: Conawapa does not, I believe, have any impact on
the water regime as it relates to the Split Lake Cree. However, I know that Hydro and Split Lake
Cree have talked about passage of a Hydro line, a transmission line, through
their community; that is one thing that has happened.
I do not believe there is any direct
impact that Conawapa would have on
There is a concern that has been brought
forward as well by the Fox Lake Band people, by Robert Wavey. Both Hydro and I have jointly met with Chief
Wavey. We will be discussing further
with them their concerns as they relate to Hydro development, community
services, compensation, the whole business, but that is just at a very
preliminary stage.
Mr. Harper: I wanted to get into that area. I know the
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member has to be
aware of the fact that Sundance is, of course, needed for future development as
it relates to Hydro and Hydro projects, following proper environmental
approvals.
As far as I am concerned, we have had
discussions with the
Mr. Harper: In regard to Sundance, I have had further
inquiries. I guess, he being also the
Minister responsible for Hydro and also Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), would
have an idea whether Conawapa will be built, but at the present time, there has
not been anything announced.
Many of the people are looking for some
sort of assistance. I had one person call me‑‑I do not know the
name right now‑‑in terms of assistance, in terms of relocating some
of their trailers. I am sure that he has
had inquiries in regard to that. I was
wondering: Has there been any assistance
accorded to the people or anything been planned in that regard?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am not aware of any
assistance being provided from Hydro.
There has not been any from our Northern Affairs department. I can check with Hydro to see if in fact
there has been any assistance.
I think there is a difficult situation
here that the member is referring to.
The people at
*
(2210)
I am not clear as to what the member is
referring to‑‑as if he wants to make sure Sundance is maintained
and kept operating for the building of Conawapa? Is he saying he wants to see that
happen? Maybe he could help me. Is he supportive of Conawapa or is he
not? Does he want to see Sundance closed
down or does he not? Maybe he could help
me a little bit in this regard.
Mr. Harper: Yes, I had an inquiry from one of the
residents that is living in Sundance in regards to I guess everything being
closed down, and he did not see Conawapa coming on for some time, and he wanted
to move his trailer maybe down to
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there is not any under
Northern Affairs. I would have to check
with Hydro, but I do not believe there is.
I guess the question is, is the member for Rupertsland wanting to move
aggressively to see the start‑up of Conawapa? That is I guess the other side of the
coin. Sundance has a purpose and that
is, of course, for supporting the construction crews of Hydro. We have to go through an environmental
process which I think is essential, that we have to get a permit to carry out
the work. That takes time. I guess the member could be helpful if he
were to come forward with his position and let us know where he is at as it
relates to Conawapa.
Mr. Harper: Well, I guess I do not know what the plans of
the government are. I am sure there are
a lot of issues that arise from the construction of Conawapa and environmental
concerns and other issues relating to the people living in that area that have
outstanding issues to resolve. So I am
awaiting the plans of the government to see where they intend to go.
One thing I wanted to ask in regards to‑‑still
on the northern flood issue‑‑whether the agreements that have been
reached are in a sense regarded as more than the treaties, because under the
Constitution any agreement that is reached with the aboriginal people can be
considered more than the treaties and be constitutionally protected. I am just wondering if the minister can give‑‑I
do not know whether he can give legal response or not‑‑what the
position of the government is in regards to these treaties that are being
settled.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the
Mr. Harper: I think the minister misunderstood my
question. My question is that any land
claim agreements or any modern‑day agreements that are reached between
aboriginal groups can be considered under the Constitution as being
protected. I was just wondering what
status do these agreements have in regards to the Canadian Constitution,
whether they would be constitutionally protected or not?
Mr. Downey: I am not clear on the question. Is he referring to the Split Lake Cree
agreement that is being proposed at this particular time?
Mr. Harper: Well, if it is Split Lake Cree, what status
does it have?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, my understanding is, the
Split
Mr. Harper: So they are regarded as modern‑day
treaties then?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is considered an
agreement between Hydro, Split Lake Cree, the Government of
Mr. Harper: Okay.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(b)(3) Northern Flood Program
$1,990,900.
Mr. Lathlin: Just a couple more items, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson. Just to follow on the line in question that the member for
Rupertsland (Mr. Harper) was on, I believe that is why the Department of
Northern Affairs, the Minister of Northern Affairs, who is responsible for
Hydro, and Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), and this government were so adamant
in negotiating for global agreements.
Global agreements suggest to me and to others that if an agreement is
reached by all the parties, that is it.
I mean, it is gone; you cannot come back to the agreement and reopen it
for negotiation.
So I wish the Minister of Northern Affairs
would give straightforward answers and say, no.
That is why Norway House and the other bands are opposed to this
approach. Those other bands see the
validity of having an agreement such as the Northern Flood Agreement be
regarded as a modern‑day treaty, because a treaty is a binding agreement.
You can come back to it if problems arise
in the future. That is why First Nations across
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to help the
member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) out, so he does not embarrass himself too
badly.
It was the five northern flood committees
that came forward and requested global settlement, not the province going to
the bands. The bands came forward and
asked for, requested, global settlement of their agreement. We believed that was the right thing to do
and have proceeded to do so, but it was not initiated by the province with any
grand scheme. It came forward from the
five bands.
Mr. Lathlin: Maybe I misworded my question, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson. I guess what I was getting
at was‑‑
An Honourable
Member: Make it perfectly clear.
Mr. Lathlin: Yes, I wish the minister would make it perfectly
clear. I did not erase the tapes.
In my experience negotiating with this
minister and other ministers of this government‑‑and other
governments as well, federal and provincial‑‑it is has always been
my experience when you are negotiating on items such as the Northern Flood
issue, the provincial government, including the federal government, would just
like to do away with it completely and never have to come back to it.
That is what I was getting at, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson. I believe it was this
government's approach that‑‑I know it was the same way with
forebay, when negotiations were going on, because I was involved in some of
those negotiations.
I am quite aware of the fact that we will
negotiate and conclude this agreement‑‑and I do not want to see
your face, tomorrow or any time thereafter, to come back for more
compensation: that has been the attitude
of this government. That is why there would be no point for them to try to
protect agreements such as this in the Constitution.
So I just thought I would clear that up
for the minister because he seems to be having a lot of problems in saying it
directly or very clearly‑‑perfectly clear.
*
(2220)
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not want to get
into a political harangue on this, but he is sitting with an opposition party
that for some 20 years ignored the requests of the band that he is from, he was
chief of, the Easterville band, the Moose
I am a little disappointed in him. I have to be honest with him. I am honest with him at all times, and I am
being more than honest with him tonight.
I would hope he would be fair in bringing forward his statements as to
where it was when the previous administration was in government in Manitoba‑‑totally
ignored any obligation, kept saying there was no legal obligation for Hydro
and/or the government of the day to settle any damages. I am a little disappointed; I am being honest
with him.
This government under the direction of
this Premier (Mr. Filmon) directed Hydro to do a review as to whether or not there
was a responsibility. Hydro did a review
and came back and said, yes, investigation showed there was a moral
responsibility to pay some compensation.
Compensation has been paid, and I can tell you, I am darn proud that
this government did it, that I did not sit with an NDP government that had no
respect for the people who were impacted by the forebay, and I am disappointed
in his approach.
Mr. Harper: Yes, in regard to the Northern Flood bands, I
know they have a large area of land that they have access to as a result of
Northern Flood Agreement for development, and as they conclude each agreement,
I know they have certain areas that they are assigned to, at least in regard to
land and resources.
I wanted to ask the minister in regard to
the area that has been allocated by the‑‑what is the name of the
company that has the timber?‑‑Repap areas. It is affecting the Northern Flood areas,
hold areas.
Has there been any discussion in regard to
Northern Flood communities that have access to those hold areas? What kind of security, what guarantees or
assurances do they have in regard to those hold areas that these Northern Flood
communities have access to? Have there
been any actual negotiations between the communities and Repap at all?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, I want to remind
the member who sat as a member of government in cabinet where Manfor cut in
those hold areas, no different than what Repap had proposed to do. What is currently taking place, as I
understand it, is that there is a local community member cutting wood for Repap
in the
Under the new proposed agreement basis for
settlement under the Split Lake Cree, there is a direct exchange of land for
every acre that Manitoba Hydro has used for Hydro projects, because the band
has agreed to make it contiguous to their reserve or basically contiguous to
the reserve with one exception. They
will get approximately a 17‑to‑one ratio of land that will become
reserve land.
In addition to that, they will get an
agreement to co‑manage. There is a
co‑management agreement which will be applied to the resource area of the
Split Lake Cree, and in return for that, the resource, the hold area is
unfrozen, so the hold area will come under a joint management agreement between
the government and the Split Lake Cree.
It will accommodate jointly the harvesting
of resources and the land use in those regions, and it is not frozen forever
and not allowed to be developed for economic reasons and job opportunities for
their communities.
Mr. Harper: Yes, I know the minister has indicated that
this whole area in terms of the forestry activity has been ongoing for many,
many years. I know that Manfor had been
active during our time in government, but what I was getting at is the new
arrangement that has been taken over by Manfor and also the involvement of the
provincial government in that regard.
I wanted to question the minister as to
what was taking place as a Minister of Northern Affairs responsible for
northern residents. I was just asking
him: What guarantees or assurances is he
giving to the northerners plus the obligations that they have under the
Northern Flood. That was what I was
getting at.
I know that there are other areas that
they can go into, trapping, trap lines that are being diminished as a result of
the forestry activity. I was just
wondering what is happening in that regard.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(b)(3) Northern Flood Program
$1,990,900.
Mr. Gaudry: Can the minister tell us what is happening‑‑
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Could you bring the mike up? Hansard is not going to quite pick you up.
Mr. Gaudry: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. Can the minister tell us where he sits with
the legal charges in the Northern Flood Agreement?
Mr. Downey: Yes, they are being reviewed by the arbitrator.
Mr. Gaudry: There will be a report made to the Legislature
in regards to these charges, at one point?
Mr. Downey: The normal process is not to report to the
Legislature, but they would be dealt with by the arbitrator in the normal
fashion.
Mr. Lathlin: I believe, in the description of activity, it
talks about treaty land entitlements and so on.
I would like to ask the minister where things are at in terms of
negotiating or any progress that might have been made in relation to treaty
sand entitlements with, I believe, some 22, 23, 24 Indian bands, 23.
Mr. Downey: I made reference to that in my opening comments
that we have considerable progress being made in the areas of
We hope to have an agreement in principle
come later this year with those communities that I have identified in the
speaking notes that I referred to earlier.
Mr. Lathlin: One more question on that, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson. The Island Lake Bands, three‑‑did you say Island Lake
Bands, all three of them? [interjection]
Four communities and
Mr. Downey: What we are doing is, we are dealing with them
as aggressively as possible. In fact, as
they come forward, we have dealt with them.
I will re‑emphasize or reread the communities that I talked about,
and I will just read the paragraph to them.
I said I was pleased to inform the members
that negotiations are continuing with four bands in the
*
(2230)
As far as the other communities are
concerned, we are quite prepared to continue to open negotiations and dialogue
with them as it relates to treaty land entitlement. There is a disagreement with the member for
Rupertsland (Mr. Harper) who last year kept pushing the point that he wanted to
make sure that the 23 bands all got settled at the same time. That is not the desire of the bands. The bands have come forward individually and
said they want to settle as individuals or as a group such as I have referred
to. I notice I got his attention, but it
is not meaning to in any way challenge him.
What I am trying to display is that there is a desire by some bands to
probably move, and we have entertained those.
Apparently the entitlement chiefs are
talking and will be coming to the province with their position sometime this
summer. We would like to see the treaty land entitlement issue resolved sooner
rather than later.
Mr. Harper: Yes, I know the minister's reference to my
involvement. I think as this issue
becomes more clear, he will understand where I am coming from, and also that
the final disposition of treaty land entitlement would have to be made by the
federal government.
I know that there has been a lot of
discussion in regard to settlement of treaty land entitlement. I did ask the minister last year in regard to
what he was doing, whether he was looking at the settlement that was being
proposed in
I know that the province is involved to a
certain extent here, but like I said, I do not know what involvement the
federal government has had in this issue.
I would just ask the minister whether there has been any funding involved
in this from the province or from the federal government?
Could the minister respond to that? I know that they are going to be briefing me
on this in the future as to the issue, and, of course, I will have input in the
process.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I guess what we would
like to see, as I have said earlier, is a resolve to it. It has been outstanding for far too
long. I have identified those
communities that are most advanced as it relates to treaty land entitlement
settlements. I have said we will be
meeting with the other representatives of the treaty land entitlement chiefs
this summer, who are anticipating a meeting before too long, to see how they
are positioned and how we are positioned to resolve it.
As far as the federal government is
concerned, and I was going to do it at the conclusion of my comments but I will
do it now, we believe that hopefully there is a person in Brenda Kustra who
will be taking on the job of director general, whom I want to thank for her
many years of work with the Northern Affairs department.
She has indicated to me and to the
department that she will be joining the federal government as Director General
of Indian Affairs, and will bring the
Mr. Harper: I, of course, would like to wish her
well. Of course, when I was the Minister
of Northern Affairs she worked under the Department of Northern Affairs which I
very much appreciate, and also the work that she has done. I look forward to working with her in the
federal Department of Indian Affairs.
As you know, we presently have an
emergency situation taking place in
I do not know whether I need to make any
further comments here on the treaty land entitlement.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(b)(3) Northern Flood Program
$1,990,900‑‑pass.
3.(c) Economic Development: (1) Salaries $386,000. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Gaudry: I guess we have a reduction in staff of one
member. Could the minister tell us if a position is vacant?
Mr. Downey: The answer is yes; it was a vacant position.
Mr. Gaudry: Why was it not filled?
Mr. Downey: Because it was vacant.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I guess it was one
of those decisions that had to be made when we were going through our
budget. We showed an increase in an area
of Northern Economic Development Commission, which required considerable
salaries, and it was a matter of selecting that position to be given up to
allow us to fund the Northern Development Commission and the positions for that
job.
Mr. Gaudry: What happened to the employee? Was he terminated, or was he transferred to
another department?
Mr. Downey: We normally do not keep people in vacant
positions.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(c) Economic Development: (1) Salaries $386,000.
Mr. Harper: I had asked the minister a question in regard
to the treaty land entitlements, whether there has been any monies that have
been provided by the provincial government at all, or the federal
government. Only the federal government
has provided the money through the treaty land entitlements process in the
Mr. Downey: Only the federal government, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson.
Mr. Gaudry: As to that same question, the position was not
vacant. You had nine employees; now you
have eight. Either he was terminated, or
he was transferred to another department.
Mr. Downey: It was a position which was vacant that was
terminated. There was no person in the
position. The position was terminated.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(c) Economic Development: (1) Salaries $386,000‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $109,400‑‑pass.
3.(c)(3) Corporate Projects $250,000.
Mr. Gaudry: Yes, in your Activity Identification, you say:
assist local residents in securing funds for capital infrastructure.
How many communities were involved and
have been helped in securing capital funds for their infrastructure?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, to varying degrees,
there are 56 communities that would be helped, some more than others, as
dependent on the level of service which they had.
Mr. Gaudry: Probably the minister has not got the
information here, but can he supply us with the information in regard to the
infrastructure for these communities that have been helped?
Mr. Downey: Yes.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(c)(3) Corporate Projects $250,000‑‑pass.
3.(d)
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wanted to ask the
minister some questions on the Northern Economic Development Commission. First of all, I guess, I would like to know
if there are any vacant positions that are not being filled, and if all those
vacant positions are indeed filled, how many are there?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there is one position,
and it is filled.
Mr. Lathlin: What about these positions? I believe there is one out of Thompson. I was talking to Mr. Henley, I believe from
*
(2240)
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, yes, there is only one
government position which is reported here.
The Northern Development Commission have hired two contract people to work
with them, but they are not provincial employees; they are employees of the
Northern Development Commission by contract. There are other employees, but not
directly under government position hiring.
Mr. Lathlin: Could I ask the minister then how Mr. Henley was
hired, through what process?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the Northern Development
commissioners‑‑and Mr. Tom Henley is not from
Mr. Lathlin: Well, perhaps I can ask the minister how many
commissioners in total are there now in this commission?
Mr. Downey: Six.
Mr. Lathlin: Could I ask the minister then, this‑‑what
is it‑‑$46,000 Salaries, it says, and $606,000 for Other Expenditures,
what will that $606,000 be spent on? He
says, per diem, and what else?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in setting up the
commission we funded the commissioners and that will pay the commissioners'
salaries or per diems. It will pay
transportation; it will pay communication.
It will cover operating supplies, materials, office supplies, repairs
and maintenance, rentals, professional services, furniture and furnishings,
equipment, computer related charges, and general support of the commission.
It was felt that if they were given their
budget and the terms of reference, they would be more independent than being
directly answerable to government. They
have prepared a budget; they are carrying out their activities, and I am
satisfied the work they are doing is going to be of excellent quality and will
provide the job for the people of
I guess the member made comments earlier
about lack of attendance at The Pas. I
do not think one would expect great volumes of people, but I think it is the
quality of presentations that are made.
It is a working commission. What
they are doing is at certain times sitting as a total commission and then they
are now breaking down into groups of two to go out to the different
communities.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I hope the member
is not too critical. I think he did make
a reference to his support for the individuals.
He said they were excellent individuals.
I believe they are, and I just wish them well in their endeavours. The $600,000 is basically to support the
commissioners' per diems, the transportation and the work of the
commission. There is some major research
work that has to be carried out and they have to report to government through
the administrative exercises that are normally available, but it is anticipated
that within the 12 to 18 months they will have the job done within the budget
that has been struck for them.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to also ask
the minister, he mentions there is a great amount of research that has to be
carried out and, also, there are these hearings that have to be conducted and
people bring forth their ideas as to what they see might work, I guess, in
terms of devising some sort of strategy which I believe the minister is looking
for.
I am also aware of invitations to
consulting groups. Maybe I can ask the
minister what that activity entails. I
know one firm, I believe, or a group of firms received a contract from the
commission to do what work I do not know‑‑perhaps specific economic
development proposals and projects?
Perhaps the minister could clarify that for us?
Mr. Downey: The commission requested a proposal. It was publicly advertised for research
contractors, and I guess they had some 58 firms or organizations
responding. The successful contract was
awarded to M.O. Harvey and Associates of The Pas because of the lowest proposal
that was put forward. Basically what the
work is, it is a substantive document that they are looking for. They call it a bench‑mark document,
which will give the Northern Development Commission today's picture as to what
the northern community's strengths are, what the employment or unemployment
situation is, what are the current restrictions. It is a basic, overall blueprint of current
northern
I think that is an essential piece of work
that has to be done so that we can assess what has happened under, for example,
previous agreements, previous activities and go forward from here. It is a large amount of money but, again, the
commissioners, whom I have put our faith in as a government, their work should
be independent of the politics of government to carry out work that the
commissioners felt had to be done. That
is what it is all about.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that money that is to be
spent on that consulting group, does that money come from the $606,000?
Mr. Downey: Yes.
Mr. Lathlin: Perhaps then I could ask the minister‑‑he
says there were some 58 applicants. I am
aware that M.O. Harvey from The Pas got the contract, but I am wondering what
other group or groups went in with M.O. Harvey and company and, if so, if there
was more than M.O. Harvey and company, where were those firms from? Were they from northern
Mr. Downey: I do not have the detail of that, but I am quite
prepared to get it from the head commissioner for the member for The Pas. My understanding is that the commission
called for the proposal, accepted what they considered was, I believe, the best
proposal to do the work. I cannot
honestly say who M.O. Harvey and Associates has working with them, but I am
prepared to get that information for the member.
Mr. Lathlin: Could the minister also indicate if he can now,
or he could provide information later on, as to how many northern consulting
groups were part of the 58 applicants and if there were, indeed, northern
consulting groups, because I am aware of some of them who came to me and
expressed disappointment that they were not awarded the contracts. How many northern consulting groups were
there? Secondly, out of those northern
consulting groups, how many were aboriginal organizations seeking to get a
contract from the commission? I am also
aware of some aboriginal organizations, economic development corporations,
groups who also were seeking a contract from the commission again were
disappointed that, in their perception, southern consulting groups were given
preference over northern groups.
*
(2250)
Mr. Downey: I will get that information. I would just like to further elaborate a
little bit. I do not consider M.O.
Harvey and Associates to be exactly a southern consulting firm.
The commission is made up of six people
from northern
I guess I have had some calls, too, and my
response is it was not handled by me as a politician, it was handled by an
independent commission who are nonpolitical.
If the member has criticisms then I think we should direct them to the
commissioners and see why they proceeded to do it as they did. I understand they got the best organization for
the best amount of money they had available to them. What I will do is get information for the
member for The Pas and make sure his criticisms go through to the commission.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, could I perhaps be
allowed to put on record very clearly the purpose of that line of questioning
to the minister. I want to repeat for
the record and to this committee, to the minister, that I was not in any way,
shape or form trying to criticize the decision that was made by the
commissioners.
I am here as a representative of a
riding. There are a lot of people in
that riding who come to me every now and then with their concerns such as, I am
sure, the minister receives from his constituents when he is in his riding‑‑or
people phone him, write him letters.
Sometimes those concerns are legitimate and sometimes they are not;
nevertheless, you would not be doing your job if you did not follow through to
seek information for those constituents.
That is exactly what I am doing here.
In my opening remarks I made it very clear
to the minister that I thought those people‑‑[interjection] or else he is going to erase the tapes. I wish the Clerk would not allow him to do
that.
I made it very clear to the minister in my
opening remarks that I have absolutely no issue with the credentials of the
commissioners. The remark, as a matter
of fact, that was given to me‑‑and, yes, I did say, you know, you
should get a hold of Chief Pascal Bighetty, at least the commissioners that I
am familiar with, that I know who they are and where they are from, and so
on. I said to the group who approached
me, I said my advice to them was to contact personally or in writing or have a
meeting with the commissioners individually or as a group and talk to them and
get that information that way. Their
contention was that southern consulting groups were using northern groups to
get at the contracts.
That is the perception that is there. I must say that I do not blame them for
having that perception. I know M.O. Harvey
myself, I know him personally, an individual who has a good, long, strong
record of community involvement in The Pas.
He is owner of the Opasquia Times in The Pas, and he does a lot of
community work. He belongs to the Air
Cadet program, so I have no issue with M.O. Harvey.
All I am simply doing here is relaying to
the minister some of those questions and concerns that I was getting from
constituents. The perception that is
there is, oh yes, southern consulting groups will get together with anybody
from the North just to get at these government contracts. That is what the group was saying to me.
Mr. Downey: Fair comment, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. I will get the information that the member
requires.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(d)(2) Other Expenditures, $606,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 111: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $3,992,300 for Northern Affairs, Northern Development and
Co‑ordination for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March,
1993. Shall the resolution pass?
Mr. Harper: I just wanted to make a comment on this before
this area is passed, that as a result of the loss of the cost arrangement in
the Northern Development Agreement, that the whole North has been put in
jeopardy in terms of services, because we have lost I do not know how many
millions of dollars as a result of the loss of the Northern Development
Agreement.
I am sure the minister is aware of the
tremendous opportunity that we had, if he had pursued the federal government to
continue the Northern Development Agreement, and as a result of that, we have
lost jobs, we have lost‑‑as a result of that lack of action with
regard to infrastructure, the airports, the roads and many other things we
could have done in the North. I would
just like to put on record that we are‑‑at least constituents that
I have talked to‑‑very disappointed in that area.
The other area, you look at the Special
ARDA, in which many of the primary producing activities took place and which
trappers and fishermen were assisted.
This minister did not take the case before his federal cousins in
I would just like to put that on record
and maybe the minister has a response to that.
I would just like to put that on record.
Mr. Downey: Not to prolong the Estimates process, but I am
disappointed in the member for Rupertsland, the member who represented the
northeast communities for I do not know how many years as a cabinet minister,
and he is criticizing us for not having a Northern Development Agreement.
I would hope he would be a fair‑minded
person. I thought he was. We have just signed an agreement for $117
million with the federal government that has a very specific program and
objective, to provide long‑term hydroelectric power off the northern
system for his communities, which will create job opportunities for upgrading
of wiring, which will create employment opportunities for people wanting to put
in new electrical appliances, to create employment opportunities for the
building of land lines in the interconnects within their communities.
He talks about some agreement that he had
for $200‑some million and the unemployment rates were still running at
some 90 percent. I can point out some
specific program objectives and agreements that I believe will surpass in a
real way‑‑not hiring a lot of government employees‑‑but
in a real way assist those communities.
I hope he takes a little fairer approach to this when he is criticizing
us for not having an agreement.
*
(2300)
What I believe will happen‑‑and
I can talk about the Recreation Director's Program, which was not in place‑‑we
had to put in place. I do not know how
many arenas I mentioned here a few minutes ago, probably seven arenas that have
been built in the northern communities.
The work that CEDF have been doing, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, to encourage
the owner‑operators, the work in the
An Honourable
Member: Table your letters.
Mr. Downey: I would be more than pleased to table them. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, the member, I
think, is a little quick to criticize when he does so without thinking of the
actual programming that is in place. I
hope that the Northern Economic Development Commission work will give us the
basis to go to the federal government and say, here are the guidelines that the
grassroots people have brought forward.
Here are the programs that will assist, whether it is in transportation,
this will give us the basis to work from to ask for federal government money to
build a new opportunities in the North.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, with respect, I
would just hope he would acknowledge some of the work that has been done
without always being on the negative side like his Leader, who is the prince of
darkness.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please.
I should caution honourable members that when we refer to any member,
they are referred to as honourable members.
Mr. Harper: I, of course, would want to respond to the
minister.
One of the things that happened to us when
we were in government was the lack of co‑operation with the federal
government. He knows that we had
announced this electrification, I think it was 1986, and his federal cousin,
the Conservative government in
Also, I will point out to the minister
too, that in dealing with the treaty land entitlement, the minister knows that
I as the Minister of Northern Affairs took to our cabinet the treaty land
entitlement, and the federal Minister of Indian Affairs did not take it
seriously, although he had a cabinet Order‑in‑Council that was
passed by the provincial government here.
A lot of the things that he talks about
that he feels we did not accomplish, it is not because we did not have the will
to do it; it was the lack of co‑operation with the federal government. I
would like to put that on record so that he knows where I am coming from.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Shall the resolution pass? Pass.
We will now move on to item 4. Native
Affairs Secretariat (a) Salaries $485,500‑‑pass.
4.(b) Other Expenditures $133,100.
Mr. Harper: Did you want to continue till 12, or‑‑
Mr. Downey: I want to finish.
Mr. Lathlin: We did not establish, or at least I was not
clear in my mind, whether Northern Affairs and Native Affairs were going to be
together, because in the papers that I have been looking at, Northern Affairs
and Native Affairs are separate for Estimates hours.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The government House leader today rose in the
House and brought to the attention of the House that the two would be raised
and brought up as one issue this evening.
A motion was passed in the House.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as well we have staff in
from Thompson. It would be appropriate
to deal with it while they have come down from Thompson, so it would be nice to
finish it this evening if we could.
Mr. Lathlin: I do not see us finishing tonight because we
wanted to go into Native Affairs, not rush through it, because I think there
are some substantive issues that we have to deal with in the Native Affairs
area. I know the member for Rupertsland
(Mr. Harper) is the lead critic in Native Affairs, and I think we should spend
a little more time in Native Affairs tomorrow.
Mr. Downey: It would be my advice that we proceed and, if we
are unable to finish, that is fine, but let us try and work until twelve
o'clock and see if we can deal with as much as possible tonight.
Mr. Lathlin: We can go perhaps until 12, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, and then deal with Native Affairs tomorrow afternoon.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: At twelve o'clock I will canvass the committee
and see what the will of the committee is at that time.
Is it the will of the committee to take a
five‑minute break right now? Is it
the will of the committee to just take five minutes? Five minutes.
* * *
The
committee took recess at 11:06 p.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 11:18 p.m.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We are now dealing with item 4.(a) Salaries
$485,500‑‑pass; 4.(b) Other Expenditures $133,100‑‑pass.
Item 4.(c) Aboriginal Development Programs
$1,338,000.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I believe the question I
had there had to do with the increase in the Salaries and yet Aboriginal
Development Programs were cut back by some $100,000.
Mr. Downey: Yes.
Mr. Lathlin: I did not hear that response.
Mr. Downey: I said yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Lathlin: I wanted the minister to make it perfectly clear
to us the reason for the increase in Salaries and yet cutting down on the
Aboriginal Development Programs.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the reduction was a
reduction of $100,000 in the Urban Native Strategy, and the increase in
Salaries was for general salary increments.
Mr. Lathlin: Perhaps I can ask the minister where his urban
strategy is at now. I have been here
almost two years now and I have been asking the question over and over again,
where is it at? Are we there yet? Can we have a document that would show us
that progress is being made and, if progress is being made, what is it? When does the minister expect to have this
strategy completed?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will just take a
couple of minutes. With the greatest of
respect, I think the member has to appreciate, all members have to appreciate
the magnitude of the work that has to be done as it relates to the urban native
issues. I think he probably touched on
something earlier on in his comments that maybe he was not aware of that we would
get to it at this stage, and his reference to the fact that the good life is in
*
(2320)
That is what part of the problem has been
and the reasons for people coming to our cities, of course, have been lack of
opportunities in some of our northern communities. I would hope that part of the work and effort
of this committee and this government and the members of the opposition‑‑and
I take most of the opposition members' comments as positive‑‑that
we try to work towards enhancing the job opportunities in the communities of which
people want to live.
Where we are at with the Urban Native
Strategy, I guess, I am not satisfied with the current situation. We probably should have had more things in
place, but to establish for example a committee, to establish a board, to establish
a structure which was initially proposed, I did not feel was serving the
individual to the way in which we should be with government programming. I believe there are some initiatives between
the federal and provincial governments, of which we are talking about as it
relates to an agreement, which are focused directly on the urban native
community.
I look to the urban native community
leaders. I have to say I admire the work
and effort of those individuals who have worked closely with the Department of
Native Affairs to try and come to grips with some of the needed programming
activities that should be put in place.
For example, I believe it is important that the business community and
the educational community and the aboriginal leadership of the communities and
our department come together to identify the types of meaningful programs that
will equip people when they come to the urban setting to get a meaningful job,
to find themselves reasonable housing, to make sure that they have the kind of
supports that are essential to a good quality of life.
I do not have the immediate answers. We have worked over time. We have spent considerable amounts of
money. We have had ongoing conferences,
meetings. It is not easy to
resolve. It is an issue which I look for
a positive input from the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin). As I say, he can be critical and I accept his
criticism. Where is it at today? We are still working with the aboriginal
leadership. We are still working with
the city. We are still working with the federal government to try to identify
resources that can assist us, but I guess the most meaningful Urban Native
Strategy would be one of creating opportunities for the aboriginal communities
in their homes where they have traditionally been born and raised.
Let me say, that is why I am so encouraged
by the
I do not blame a lot of the community
people who have lived under the conditions that have been less than acceptable
as far as hydro services are concerned.
I do not blame them for wanting to move to where they have the modern
conveniences of the city of
Those are the kinds of programs that we
have put in place that, hopefully, will at least stop the flow of people from
wanting to move out of their communities, but they need economic
opportunities. They need lifestyle. They need quality of life which, quite
frankly, they are finding, as the member for The Pas said, the good life in
Winnipeg‑‑which I do not agree with necessarily, but that is what is
happening. It is not an easy
answer. There is not an easy
answer. I believe the answers will come
from the aboriginal leadership working with government. We have tried to structure ourselves so we
can get those kinds of programs in place, but to date we have not had as much
progress as I would like to see.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I agree with the
minister. When I was talking about the things that my constituents tell me in
terms of the disparity that is there in programs and services and a whole lot
of other things when it comes to north and south, I also do not agree that the
good life is in
I do not want to create that impression
for one minute here. It is just that as the minister has just acknowledged,
yes, people are looking for opportunities, and when the opportunities are not
there, they are not going to stay.
We all know, the minister knows full well,
that the traditional livelihood is practically gone in the North. We have the mining industry that
The infrastructure is not there. If the people from the North wanted to get
into some economic development schemes or business development, transportation
costs are prohibitive. The marketing is
just not there. Again, if somebody wants
to go to university or go on and get a better opportunity in life, it is just
not there in the North.
That is what I was alluding to when I was
saying that people are saying, is it our fault for having been born in the
North and having decided to stay and live in the North. We are citizens of
If this aboriginal development program,
this urban strategy is so important, then why was the program cut by
$100,000? If there are problems that are
seemingly overwhelming, what are they?
Are there plans to eventually complete the strategy? If there are problems, what are they? If the program is so important, why is it
being cut by $100,000?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I guess I should have
elaborated a little more. I am not
trying to leave the impression that we have not done a lot of work. I guess in all fairness to the department,
with the work that has been going on with constitutional discussions, we have
had the whole AJI report and the response that has been developed, and
hopefully we can move on some of those activities that were related to that.
So I believe in total numbers of dollars,
there will probably be more spent, but it will not be put under the quotation
of Urban Native Strategy, but we still have a substantial amount of money
there. We did not spend the complete
amount last year. I guess the
determination was made to say we could maybe deal with a little bit less until
we get a federal‑city‑Manitoba agreement.
It is not that work has not been
done. I mean work has been done with the
Family Services department of government in a major way. Work has been done with the Department of
Education in a major way. We have done a
considerable amount of work on the AJI, although, again, maybe at this point we
have not laid out a lot of the options, but we are working to do that with the
different departments and in co‑operation with the aboriginal community.
*
(2330)
So I think when you look at a combination
of the areas that we are working on, that you just cannot say here is a
specific Urban Native Strategy that deals with certain singular issues. There
are a multiple of issues out there that are being dealt with on an ongoing
basis from many departments. I guess,
again, the trap that I was a little bit concerned about was to establish what
might have been perceived to be a super structure or super body of people. When all the monies that we were putting out
would be used by those individuals for sitting on a board of some kind at the
end of the day, the individuals who needed the support individually may not
have been able to get it.
I would accept comments from the members
as to how they see it going from here.
We certainly have not quit working on it. We are continuing to work on
it. We have limited employees within the
department and, as I have said, they have been working very hard on the
AJI. They have been working very hard on
the constitutional discussions that are taking place, and it is a matter of
saying, at this point, what are our priority areas?
I guess, priority areas this last while
have been AJI and constitutional issues, and to some degree, some work has been
done within the Urban Native Strategy.
As well, we have been working very hard with the aboriginal women's organization,
the Indigenous Women's organization, staff have been, and I think there have
been some major advancements made in discussions there. We have the aboriginal women's policy now
that has been introduced, and I think is very, very substantial. Plus, we have been working with the Manitoba
Metis Federation as it relates to the tripartite discussions. That has been ongoing in a major way.
So I say in fairness to the staff of the
Department of Native Affairs, they have been working extremely hard, and a lot
of issues are being dealt with. We have
not given up on an Urban Native Strategy.
We are very much involved in discussion on it. Again, to say there is a
hard and fast conclusion to it, I cannot lay one before the member here
tonight.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, perhaps then I can ask
the minister, this $1.3 million, how was that money spent? Where is it spent? Do you allocate sums of money to the
aboriginal organizations and they do the work themselves, or does the
department hire consultants to do the work?
How is the money spent?
Mr. Downey: All this money is spent to support aboriginal
groups, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Lathlin: How is it being spent? What method?
Mr. Downey: There is an annual grant to each organization.
Mr. Lathlin: What about consultants? Is there money being spent on consultants?
Mr. Downey: No, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, very limited, if
any.
Mr. Lathlin: So the minister then is unable to say at this
time when this strategy, a draft document at least, can be produced.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to be able
to commit to the member as to have one out very shortly, but again, I have to
depend on the same staff as I have said who are working on the many, many
issues that are before them.
I do not want to put pressure on them, to
say I want you to stop the work you are doing, AJI et cetera, to stop to do an
Urban Native Strategy. I do not want to
put a time frame on it. We are working to one.
When we get one, I will be able to produce it. It is difficult, I can tell you that, to say
that at a certain time, I will have a certain document to table. I would like to, but I cannot commit to that
right now.
Mr. Harper: I wanted to ask the minister how the Native
Affairs Secretariat is structured and how the whole process works within the
government.
I know that when we were in government, we
had the Native Affairs Secretariat, but also we had a Native Affairs Committee
of Cabinet. I ask the minister whether
he has that structure in place, whether he is chairing a committee, a Native
Affairs Committee of Cabinet. Does he
have such a committee in place?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: Yes, how often does the Native Affairs
Committee of Cabinet meet?
Mr. Downey: On a fairly regular basis, usually at the call
of the chair or any other committee member, but we have been meeting fairly
regularly.
Mr. Harper: And you are the chair of the Native Affairs
Committee of Cabinet?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: It deals with these policies and the strategy
of the provincial government on native issues?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: I know that the Native Affairs Committee of
Cabinet, I think, will be dealing with many issues possibly in the next while,
dealing with the constitutional issues that are developing very rapidly at this
time, and also dealing with the AJI report recommendations and also the Urban
Native Strategy which the minister enunciated some points on. I know that there is a lot of expectation of
the efforts that were done by this whole process.
I think the native community here in
I want to know what is happening in regard
to the Core Area Initiative Program, as to the involvement of the department,
the native secretariat, and whether there is any progress or whether there is
an agreement forthcoming shortly.
Mr. Downey: Yes, we are working with the Urban Affairs
department, City of
Mr. Harper: I know that within the urban area, we have an
issue that has been brought forward in regard to the old CP station. I know that the aboriginal people have been
requesting the provincial government to come up with the funding.
Can you provide some response to
that? What is happening there? What is the provincial government doing? Is it prepared to provide the financial
assistance that is required?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we have been working
with the federal and city government to try to come to some agreement. We have made a commitment to support that
initiative at this stage. We are not
complete in our negotiations at this point, but hopefully we can conclude
something before too long.
Mr. Harper: In that regard, the issue seems to be that it
was the province that was holding up the process and that they had already
secured the commitment from the federal government. I was wondering what the problem is.
Mr. Downey: I think it is a matter of making sure that
everybody carries a fair share of the responsibility, and that we get the best
deal possible for the aboriginal community and for the people who are putting
the taxpayers' money forward.
Mr. Harper: Yes, there is another issue that was raised
earlier which deals with the Abinochi Language Program. Is it being considered by your department to
provide further funding?
*
(2340)
Mr. Downey: As the member knows, this funding had come under
a federal‑provincial agreement previously, and the funding for the
program ran out.
Neither the Department of Education nor
the Department of Family Services had funding.
I picked the funding up under Native Affairs for one year at $60,000 and
gave notice at that time there would be no additional funding, because we are
not a program funder per se.
I do not want to mislead the Abinochi
language program people. I compliment
the people who provided the service, but we just do not have it within the
Native Affairs Secretariat. We are not a
program funder. Hopefully, if there is a
new agreement, that can be entertained under that agreement.
Mr. Harper: Is the minister saying that under the urban
Core Area Initiative, this program is being considered?
Mr. Downey: As far as I am concerned, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, I will be advancing it to make sure that there is a consideration
for it under that program.
Mr. Harper: Under the Core Area Initiative program, are
there some programs being considered in dealing with some involvement by the
aboriginal organization dealing with The Forks developments taking place?
Mr. Downey: I would have to get details of that question for
the member. I do not know whether The
Forks issue is being discussed at this particular time. Urban Affairs would know that, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: Has there been any request by the aboriginal
community, in regard to the development of The Forks, in which the native
secretariat will be involved?
Mr. Downey: I would have to check with the department. I am not aware of any at ministerial level,
Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: In terms of the Urban Strategy, I think there
were some recommendations that were made, one particularly. The native initiative council was recommended
by, I guess, the people involved in the report, the people who made the
recommendations. Is there a consideration being made at this point at all?
Mr. Downey: It is all part of the proposal, and
consideration is being made in all fronts.
Again, I want to assure the member, it is not my intention to establish
another body, a new body that draws a lot of resources and does not get to the
people who need it.
Mr. Harper: Yes, in the House, the Minister responsible
for the social assistance program, in which the federal government indicated to
the province that they would be withdrawing, I guess, stopping the payments to
the province for the municipalities‑‑is there anything being
considered to address that problem?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, all issues are being
considered. That is a major concern to
us. We believe it is the federal
government's responsibility to pay for off‑reserve Status Indians as far
as the social welfare program is concerned.
We will stick to that position and have the support of the native
leadership and the support of the municipal leaders.
Mr. Harper: Is it the position of this government then
that in respect to the Status or treaty Indians, you are saying that the
province supports the aboriginal people that they are federal responsibility?
Mr. Downey: Yes.
Mr. Harper: Also, that the treaty Indians, their rights as
treaty Indians are also the federal responsibility?
Mr. Downey: Yes.
Mr. Harper: Also, that these treaty rights do not end at
the reserve boundary, including the rights to education, to health care and
other issues?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: Is the provincial government prepared to
support in a very strong way the treaty Indians in terms of securing that
right, in terms of forcing the federal government to live up to their treaty
obligations?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: I know that this is creating some problem in
regards to the aboriginal people, regardless of whether they are Status or
treaty Indians, in the welfare payments and in social assistance. Is the province at this time prepared to
provide assistance whether or not they get guaranteed reimbursement by the
federal government?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the Minister of
Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) has already announced that the province will
be paying the costs but have not given up‑‑we do not want to
prejudice our position‑‑the position that we believe it is the
federal government's responsibility. But
we have paid the costs.
Mr. Harper: Has this policy been conveyed to the
municipalities concerned, like, for instance, Brandon and Thompson?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: And they are prepared to provide assistance to
any treaty Indian that would come for assistance?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: In regard to the taxation issue, what is being
discussed at this time with the aboriginal organizations, especially the treaty
Indians, with respect to taxation on reserve in terms of whether it be federal
or provincial taxation? Is there any
work being done right now?
I remember some time ago we had initiated
a study and then a further dialogue would have taken place with the
chiefs. Is that being pursued at this
time?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, those questions
would probably be more appropriately asked of the Minister of Finance (Mr.
Manness) who has done a lot of work and is doing a lot of work in that whole
area.
Mr. Harper: But some work, some policy work is being
developed by the native secretariat?
*
(2350)
Mr. Downey: In conjunction with the Department of Finance.
Mr. Harper: I wanted to raise some questions on this
because there are some concerns that the reserves especially have in regards to
taxation. I do not know whether the
minister would be in a position to ask the special questions. Maybe I should direct them more appropriately
to the Minister of Finance.
I know that is an issue that is going to
have an impact in respect to the economic development of many reserves, but I
will leave it for now. Maybe I can ask
the minister responsible for taxation and the minister responsible for Finance.
The other issue that I wanted to get into
is in respect to gaming. I know the
minister has announced‑‑he has concluded some agreements with some
bands, with some of the reserves. There
is one particular band that I had a meeting with, and that is
So my question is to the Minister of
Native Affairs. Has he talked to the
people in
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: Is it then the position of the province that
they will assert their jurisdiction on the reserve?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not believe it is appropriate
to discuss an issue that could well be going before the courts at this
particular time, but we have said today Fort Alex band, as we have said to all
the other bands, that we are prepared to sign agreements as per the original
one that was established at The Pas with the honourable member who now
represents The Pas, with the changes that were made recently dealing with an
upgrade of that agreement to allow for other specific things. So we are open to signing of agreements, but
I do not want to deal specifically with one that may well have to go before the
courts or be before the courts.
Mr. Harper: As you know, as I mentioned before, there are
discussions dealing with the First Ministers, with the Constitutional
Conference coming at a rapid pace. One
of the issues dealing with that issue is, of course, the recognition of the
inherent right to self‑government.
There have been some proposals, I think, as part of the package, that
the native organizations, individuals, whether it be the provincial governments
or the federal governments hold off for a period of three years from
prosecuting anyone dealing with the inherent right to self‑government,
and this particular issue dealing with the gaming could be one maybe dealing
with the inherent right to self‑government. On that basis, would the provincial
government back off from taking the band to court?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think it is a little
bit hypothetical at this point to presume, as much as we have seen progress in
the constitutional discussions. We have
proceeded to carry on the operations of our lotteries, carry on our agreements
as if we are on a normal path of doing business. So at this point as far as I am concerned,
unless the Attorney General may want to respond differently, we are on the same
path that we were on previously. We
believe we have a good agreement out there which the bands have been
signing. We have one more signed today
with Nelson House, and so we believe that it will continue on as per previous,
not assuming anything as it relates to future constitutional change.
Mr. Harper: If
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that would be an
appropriate question for the Attorney General.
I would anticipate that he would proceed as the law allows him to do so.
Mr. Harper: So as the Minister responsible for Native
Affairs, you would make that recommendation, or if he asks your advice you
would leave it up to the Attorney General?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, he is the appropriate
minister. He is the chief law officer of
the province, and I would anticipate he would enforce the laws as they are
written.
Mr. Harper: If the Fort Alexander reserve is adhering to
all the regulations, and even they have the band issue creating under their
authority jurisdiction to do that, and it meets all the regulations, would that
be sufficient to warrant the province from going into the reserve?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I cannot answer
that. That is an Attorney General's
question, and one which I do not believe is within my jurisdiction to answer,
and the area which we are dealing with here.
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister in his
dialogue mentioned a few minutes ago that the AJI Reports, they were preparing
a response. Can the minister advise
where they are in response to the AJI Report at this time?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we tabled our
response several months ago.
Mr. Gaudry: You mentioned that you were working with the
Department of Education and the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer),
and I am sure you are working with the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae)
also. There have been a lot of questions
as to when we will implement some of these recommendations from the AJI
Report. Can the minister tell us what is
their position at this time?
Mr. Downey: We have working groups that are working on packages
or proposals for implementation. A major
part of them refer to federal responsibility, constitutional responsibility,
but any that are accomplishable within provincial jurisdictions, we have a
committee of all the departments working on them now. Hopefully they will be
joined by the aboriginal community, and as soon as a conclusion to the
proposals that are put forward, then they can be, in fact, moved on.
Mr. Gaudry: Yes, and the other thing that you mentioned
was a negotiation with tripartite on Metis self‑government. Can the minister tell us where he stands on
this at this time?
Mr. Downey: There is a group working within the Native
Affairs Secretariat, the federal government and the Manitoba Metis
Federation. They have been working on it
for some time now. I am not sure how it
relates to the current constitutional discussions, but we do have a working
process in place.
Mr. Gaudry: Do you expect to have some recommendations
shortly after, if there is an agreement in the Constitution, as far as the
agreement with the Manitoba Metis Federation?
Mr. Downey: As soon as there is something to report, then it
will be reported.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 4.(c) Aboriginal Development Programs
$1,338,000.
Mr. Harper: I wanted to ask the minister, in regards to
the Aboriginal Development Programs, can he provide to us as to how much each
organization‑‑I know that in some areas there has been some areas
of research and work that several organizations are involved in, the Metis
organization, the AMC, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs.
Mr. Downey: I will get that information for the member.
Mr. Harper: There is also of course some areas that the
provincial government is involved in working out with the‑‑like the
AMC, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, to work on issues like child welfare and
taxation. Are those ongoing?
Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Harper: I also wanted to ask the minister in respect
to what the native secretariat is doing to some of the things that the province
could be doing in respect to recognizing treaty rights. For instance, in
respect to, let us say, the Sparrow case in which rights of the aboriginal
person or the Indian has been recognized.
I am sure that the government is beginning to look at its legislation
and statutes that would support that and continue to enhance that.
*
(0000)
I want the minister to answer, in what
areas are they working toward at to change laws respecting treaty and
aboriginal rights?
Mr. Downey: This could enter into a fairly long answer here,
and I think I should, to cover the area appropriately. I guess for some time now there has been a
considerable amount of interest and concern as it relates to the whole question
of hunting and fishing and trapping and treaty rights that I think are understood
within this country. He refers to the
Sparrow case. He is referring to certain cases that have laid out and set a
precedent as to future decisions.
What we have done in certain areas,
particularly as it relates to the wildlife and the resources of this province,
are to try to establish co‑management agreements. I think working together to deal with the
whole question of making sure that there are resources here for aboriginal
people, for the rest of society, is extremely important. I think the whole co‑management concept
will help accomplish that.
I know from talking to many of the Native
leaders that they feel very strongly that there would be more interest, if more
responsibility were provided to the aboriginal communities, that it would allow
them to feel more a part of the conservation projects and the need to conserve
the wildlife for their people. I guess we have seen progress. I know we have seen progress.
I think the Minister of Natural Resources
(Mr. Enns), who I think could enter into a substantial long‑term debate
on this whole issue, would be more than pleased to respond to it during his
Estimates process. I think, though, we
have built into the Split Lake Cree agreement‑‑and I say this at
this point‑‑again, the opportunity, through the resource management
area, to do just that. It may not be the
perfect agreement, but I think it is as close as we can get to deal with a
broad range of issues within a land base that has been the traditional trapping
and hunting areas of the Split Lake Cree.
So I think progress has been made.
I guess what I am hearing from many people
and that is the need to make sure future generations of this province and of
this country have a resource base from which to work. I know I have heard considerable criticism of
the spring hunting season or the taking of birds for food by the Native
community. I do not get as alarmed about
that as some people do, because I have happened to see the unfortunate
situation, in
I think we have to see both sides of
it. I think it was the intent of the
treaties to allow for the taking of game for food for aboriginal people, and I
think that is a supportable position.
What troubles society and what troubles members is if we see, for
example, the unfortunate taking of some of the female elk recently. Regardless of who it is, aboriginal or
nonaboriginal, that is a very difficult thing to defend because it is the
resource base that we all depend upon.
Again, I think we have got to come to the
table responsibly, both as aboriginal people and as nonaboriginal people, as
government, to talk about the issue of conservation and how we are best to
preserve it. The issues of all these
things, I think, are timely. As we are
talking about constitutional change, as we talk about Native self‑government,
the rest of society, I believe, wants to be assured that there is a co‑operative
approach put forward.
So, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will do my
best to make sure that fairness is applied, and hopefully we have the support
of the members of the opposition in doing so.
I would hope we could pass this so we could deal with other issues very
soon.
Mr. Lathlin: I am just wondering whether you want to canvass
the committee to stop now.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The hour being after ten o'clock, what is the
will of the committee?
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to suggest
that we spend a little bit of time tomorrow afternoon further on in the
Department of Northern Affairs. I wanted
to speak to the Capital, and a bit more on the Aboriginal Justice and some of
the initiatives that the minister has been referring to this evening. It probably will not take long tomorrow
afternoon.
I would suggest to the Chair that perhaps
we adjourn for tonight and reconvene tomorrow afternoon.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do appreciate the fact
that we have some staff from Thompson here, but there is one other thing that I
think should be taken into consideration.
Normally, I would be pretty tough on this
and make the member stay here to finish this, but just to show you that I can
co‑operate‑‑the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) has been in
hospital this week, and one has to consider the health of one's
colleagues. We would be better advised
to rise.
I think I heard a commitment from the
member for The Pas that it should not take too long tomorrow. He is a man of his word; he has been all the
time in the past. I would think that
given that he is prepared to take a short period of time tomorrow‑‑I
emphasize the short‑‑then I am in agreement with that.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Then it is the will of the committee to
rise? Committee rise.
EDUCATION
AND TRAINING
Madam Chairperson
(Louise Dacquay): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. This section of the Committee of
Supply is dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Education and
Training. Would the minister's staff
please enter the Chamber?
We are on page 45, item 6. Universities
Grants Commission.
Mr. Reg Alcock
(Osborne): Just let everybody get their books open.
I would like to start off or pick up from where
we left off just prior to the adjournment on the remarks that the minister‑‑the
question was around the issue of whether or not there is an open discussion
between the Universities Grants Commission and the universities as to the
analysis undertaken by the Universities Grants Commission and the findings and
the positions that they arrive at, whether or not that information is going to
be shared with the universities so that the universities would have some
further guidance as they go into their next operating year and their budget
preparations for a future year. What I believe the minister said was that, no,
it would not be appropriate to share information between the Universities
Grants Commission and the universities, because that would somehow pit the
universities against the government. I
am wondering if she can clarify that remark.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Madam Chairperson, the
budgets from the universities to UGC when approved by the Boards of Governors
then may be made public by the institutions.
Now, the issue that the member is
referring to is whether or not the analysis should be made public following the
presentation to government and the decision by government on a global
percentage increase. I would just like
to take the member through again to say that the recommendation to government
by the UGC‑‑these recommendations are considered as policy advice
and are therefore confidential. Now, the
confidentiality is intended to preserve the integrity of that arm's‑length
relationship between government and universities and also to maintain a stable
relationship between universities and the UGC and the government and the UGC.
It would be very important not to have
universities be pitted against one to another based on the kinds of analysis
that the UGC has done or universities potentially pitted against government
based on decisions, and therefore the decision and the process is that the UGC,
based on the presentation by the universities both of a budget expectation and
a further discussion relating to the stresses and the priorities of the
universities, then leads to an analysis by the UGC and then the UGC presenting
to government a global percentage increase recommendation. It is then up to government to determine what
that increase may be, whether or not that increase is something that is an
increase level that can be afforded by government, and then government gives to
UGC the global amount of money available to universities. Then it is UGC's job to then determine with
that global amount how much goes to each institution, again preserving the
arm's‑length nature of the relationship between governments and
universities.
So the UGC acts as a buffer agency. It is a primary link between government and the
universities and vice versa, and that relationship has been quite
effective. However, if the member wishes
to review that relationship or wishes that relationship to be reviewed then he
may wish to see that it is discussed in the upcoming Universities Review.
*
(2010)
Mr. Alcock: Well, Madam Chairperson, I want to get into a
discussion of the Universities Review, and I certainly would hope that the role
of the UGC is reviewed in some depth. I
would like just to quote from the annual report of the
They do not say, "Because
Universities Grants Commission grants."
They talk about the government.
When the presidents of the various universities and the college talk
about funding, they do not talk about the Universities Grants Commission, they
talk about the government. They talk
about the government policy. It would be
interesting, it is an interesting thought that there is something going on
within the UGC that is so strange, that if it were to become public, it would
pit the four universities against each other.
I mean, it strikes me that if there is a significant public issue where
universities might be contesting, given the need for efficient use of limited
resources, that what we might want to do is to have the four universities
having that kind of discussion with the Universities Grants Commission.
This is a government, after all, that
campaigned on, "open government" and bringing a new style of
management and confronting the community with the realities of the current
budget situation, and looking for innovation and co‑operation with the
various sectors that receive government funding, and it just seems odd to me
that in one area where they could promote some dialogue on an important public
policy issue, they refuse to do so. Maybe
I expect too much to have this minister, at such an early point in her tenure
as minister, make a policy decision on that.
The University Review does seem to be a comfortable shield, but I would
hope that as we approach the next budget year, we can have a little bit more openness
and a little bit more forthrightness about the policy considerations that
underlie the funding of our universities.
Mrs. Vodrey: Well, again, I would like to describe for the
member the process in government. Once a
policy is made and the funding is allocated, it then is a matter of course and
for public record that there can be a public debate, which is what is taking
place in this House right now, or a discussion as the member would like to and
has said he would like to call it.
This principle is an historical one. It has been established via the history of
the parliamentary and cabinet and legislative operations. The universities have not been arguing about
this policy, and I think that is a very important point.
But if the member is wanting to make the
point more broadly about the extensive discussion that is necessary, then I
would like to remind him that the universities do have discussion with the
UGC. In addition to that, they also have
discussion with the minister. I have had
several meetings with the presidents of the four universities. In addition, I meet with the students of the
universities, the student unions of the universities.
So it is not that there is no discussion,
there is. There is, in fact, discussion
that goes on throughout the course of a year.
I think that it is very important for the member not to suggest that
that discussion, which goes on at other times of the year, is not important
because I believe that it is important.
Mr. Alcock: I do not [interjection]
‑‑Madam Chairperson, the two backbenchers in the government are
wishing to contribute to this debate. I
certainly am prepared to give them an opportunity, but I think if they
understood the question, they would be over here hectoring this minister in as
virulent a fashion as I might be this evening.
I have to ask the minister this: The minister or the government appoints
people to the board of the various universities; has the minister met with the
government appointees on the various boards?
Mrs. Vodrey: I think, in terms of the four universities, I
did have a meeting scheduled recently for the members of the Board of Governors
of the
Mr. Alcock: Was that meeting planned with the entire Board
of Governors of the university or simply those people who had been appointed by
the government?
Mrs. Vodrey: Well, the meeting was for the Board of
Governors, but again that meeting was cancelled. I will tell the member, in addition, when I
had just been named minister, I was invited by the president of the
Mr. Alcock: Is it ministerial practice in this government
for the minister to meet just with the appointed members of the board?
*
(2020)
Mrs. Vodrey: There is a mixed practice; occasionally
ministers have met with the board appointees appointed by the government and
also have met with the whole board.
I have met with the presidents of the
student unions in
Obviously, the ideal would be to have an
opportunity to meet with whole Boards of Governors, to be acquainted with the
issues directly from that Board of Governors.
I have recognized the importance of meeting with the boards, which is
why I did attend one meeting and will be looking forward to meeting with the
board members, the Boards of Governors and the Boards of Regents for the
universities across
Mr. Alcock: What purpose would be served by the minister
meeting only with government appointees?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, government might meet with
their own government appointees at times because those individuals do represent
the views of the public as opposed to the views specifically of an area of the
university for which those other individuals may have been appointed. Those members of Boards of Governors and
Boards of Regents who are appointed by the government also reflect larger
public views, wide public views and concerns, and it allows the issues of the
university to be placed in that larger context.
So those are some reasons why governments may choose to meet with their
specific board appointees.
Mr. Alcock: Do those meeting not violate the arm's‑length
principle that is established or that is the purported reason for the UGC
existing?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, the meetings that might
take place with‑‑I am sorry, I need to clarify. Was the member asking Boards of Governors
totally or government appointees to Boards of Governors? I mean, government appointees to Boards of
Governors‑‑no, it is not our opinion that violates the arm's‑length
nature, because first of all, there are not specific decisions being
taken. I am informed specific decisions
have not been taken within those meetings.
I have not had a meeting like that yet myself, and I am also informed
that the agenda for those meetings, again, is not to discuss specific funding
issues; but instead they have related to more global issues relating to
university concerns, and they have been a way for the government to remain
informed on a number of issues as they relate to universities.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, perhaps we could move on to
the area of new course approvals which the minister had indicated in the
earlier session was somewhat different and one in which government may play a
more direct role. Can she explain to me
the difference in the process between course approvals as opposed to general
budget approval?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, the budget approval process
and the budget approval‑‑the budget approval is set out in The UGC
Act, and I think that is an important place to look at the differences between
the budget approval function of the UGC and then the program approval.
The UGC does have three
responsibilities: The first is to
allocate resources; the second is to approve programming; and the third is to
approve capital projects.
The process of program approval, as I said
earlier today, is a series of steps.
First, a university has to submit in
writing to the commission a statement of intent which provides the commission
with sufficient information to decide whether the university will be allowed to
proceed to the development of a program proposal.
The second stage is contingent on the UGC
granting approval to proceed to the development of a program proposal. If the commission grants the university the
right to proceed, a proposal is then developed and subsequently vetted through
the various processes within the university itself. These include the various committees and sub‑committees
at the departmental, the faculty and university‑wide undergraduate or
graduate program committee levels with a final adjudication by the Senate. Once this internal process is concluded, and
if the program is retained, it is then submitted to the UGC for approval.
The third stage consists of the UGC
submitting the program proposal to the other universities for comments. Then these comments are in turn sent back to
the initiating university for rebuttal.
The final stage is the consideration of
the entire package for a decision by the UGC.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, in that process, one is
taking into consideration the needs for the entire province and the programs
proffered by the four campuses. To what
extent does the government or the UGC exercise some control over duplication of
programs?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, again, the government does
not provide the approval. The UGC
provides the approval. The three
criteria that the UGC uses are, first of all, the issue of duplication, which
has been raised. The second is the issue
of cost. Will the implementation of this
new program be costly, and cost more money?
Thirdly, the issue of market.
Will there be a demand for this type of program or the training this
program provides? The analysis in the
area of market is provided to the UGC by the universities.
Mr. Alcock: Does the UGC undertake any independent
analysis to determine whether or not there is a market?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, the answer is no, that the
UGC does not undertake a separate analysis or market analysis‑‑they
have not until this point, I am informed‑‑and that it is important
that discussion with the universities, however, does provide additional kinds
of information for the UGC to use in its decision making, particularly around
the area of market.
*
(2030)
Mr. Alcock: So, if I understand the process to date, then
the only determination as to whether or not a program is necessary is based
upon the university's belief that it is.
There was a relatively recent decision to expand the athletic program
offered by the
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, it is not true that
decisions are made only by the information submitted by the particular
university seeking to develop that program.
I gave the member the three issues which were to be considered: duplication, cost and market. In the area of the program that the member
has referenced, the University of Winnipeg's major in sports studies, I am
informed first of all, when the question was asked: Did this program duplicate a program
currently offered in the province?‑‑based upon the information
received by the commission, the answer was that, no, there was not an
unreasonable duplication of programs.
Now, again, it is important to remind the
member of the step, that this proposed program was then sent out to all of the
universities for comment. So the program
proposal was put forward by the University of Winnipeg, discussed by the
Universities Grants Commission and then the proposal of this new program sent
to the other universities for their discussion.
The information back from those other universities was that, no, there
was not an unreasonable duplication.
I think that step, involving the other
universities, is a very important one for the member to take note of so that he
understands it is not just the university submitting the proposal. In addition, the issue of cost was discussed‑‑were
there any additional costs related to this program?‑‑and the
documentation presented showed that there would be no additional cost. Was there a demand for this kind of
program? From the information provided,
there does appear to be a demand for this program both by students, including
those at the
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, the same issue of
duplication has come up when we look across the Prairies, and the one notable
example of co‑operation is the three
Mrs. Vodrey: Relating to the issue of a school of
veterinary medicine, the contacts should be made and are made by the
universities or by the Council of Ministers of Education. The UGC itself has no equivalent. In
So at this point the discussion should
occur between the institutions or be instituted by the Council of Ministers of
Education, and I understand there has been some discussion between the
institutions.
Mr. Alcock: Discussion in what areas?
*
(2040)
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, first of all, just let me
clarify the role of the Council of Ministers of Education. They are the ones who facilitate the
discussion. They do not make the
specific approach, and I would not want to leave that unclear on the record.
The member has asked then for examples of
discussion between universities. He has
referenced one being veterinary medicine, another is ophthalmology, and most
recently there has been discussion of medical training across the provinces
looking partly at the issue of cost efficiency.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, is that discussion on
medical training a discussion of further co‑operation among the three
provinces to share some services, perhaps reduce the total number of spots
available? Is that the nature of the
discussion?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, there has been discussion
by the Deputy Ministers of Health in relation to the Barer‑Stoddart
report. The Barer‑Stoddart report
was very briefly discussed at the last CMEC meeting. To say it was a brief discussion‑‑it
was a very global discussion in terms of what might be the impact, what is the
situation in individual provinces at this time.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I would like to come back
to this question of the direct funding and the recommendations from the
Universities Grants Commission to the government.
I notice here, that on page 122 of the
Supplementary Estimates, Supplementary Information for Legislative Review, it
quotes, what I assume is Section 13(1) of The Universities Grants Commission
Act, which says that, "The Commission shall inquire into the financial
arrangements and requirements of the universities . . . ." et cetera. I presume that is the basis upon which the
budgeting system that the minister has described a couple of times to this
House‑‑I would like to ask a more general question.
By a series of, I think, relatively
objective measures, the universities in this province have been underfunded for
some time, not just in the term of this government, although I think some
aspects of it have grown worse under this particular government, but they have
been underfunded for a period that predates the 1988 election.
I just wondered, given the needs
demonstrated by the various universities, we are not talking about new programs
now, but just to maintain existing programs, and the objectives stated by this
government around higher education, is the minister satisfied that the support
proffered to the four campuses is adequate to meet their operational needs?
Mrs. Vodrey: The member is asking for a somewhat subjective
comment, but I do have some information which I believe is important objective
data for him in looking at that.
First of all, comparing
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I am glad the minister has
raised the question of some objective comparisons. Is it not the case that the
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, we do not have any specific
statistics with us that speak about teaching load, but I will remind the member
of some of the information contained in the Maclean's survey in 1991 in which
the University of Manitoba ranked eighth among 46 universities in providing
operating budgets per students, and that the University of Manitoba ranked
ninth and Brandon University ranked fourth among 46 Canadian universities in
student‑teacher ratio.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I believe if the minister
were to check the statistics today, she will find that, at least at the
Now, one of the things that this government
has talked about when it has talked about the role of the university in the
community is its value in building a well‑trained, competent labour
force. I note in‑‑I assume
this is quoting Section 15 of the Universities Grants Commission Act: "The commission shall study the
requirements of the province for post‑secondary education at the
universities and colleges in terms of kind, quality and quantity of such post‑secondary
education required." So presumably the commission undertakes these
studies, comes to some determination as to the suitability of the courses
offered, and that is why we are now putting the
*
(2050)
I realize that decision has not been taken
formally, but the decision is talked about in the report of the president, in
the annual report, and it is talked about quite openly on the campus, that they
are going to be moving in the direction of closing enrollment to the Faculty of
Arts so that there will be no open‑enrollment faculties at the University
of Manitoba.
Now, is this decision based on a study by
the commission that suggests that we have achieved sufficient quantity of post‑secondary
education, that we no longer need to make this resource available to any
Manitoban who can meet the criteria to access it?
Mrs. Vodrey: First of all, in the comments around teaching
load, and the member's allegations of where the
In relation to the admission to the
Faculty of Arts at the
There have been questions concerning the
admission policy to the Faculty of Arts at the
The change this year is that the Faculty
of Arts has introduced a priority system of registration to be in effect for 11
days from July 23 to August 7.
Therefore, high school students with an average of 65 percent or better
on the best three of the 300 level high school subjects will be eligible to
register during that priority period.
Then on August 10, all admitted applicants will be able to register.
Now, the issue of quality, studies have
not been done recently in relation to the issue of quality; however, this issue
may be one which Manitobans would like to discuss around the Universities
Review.
Mr. Alcock: The information on the teaching load comes
directly from the administration of the
I would like to continue with this
question of enrollment. It says here in the Activity Identification, Section
15:
"The Commission shall study,(a) the
requirements of the province for post‑secondary education at the
universities and colleges in terms of kind, quality and quantity of such post‑secondary
education required;(b) the capacity of the universities and colleges to provide
the post‑secondary education required for the province . . . ."
Not only do they determine the quality and
quantity, they also make reference to the capacity. I now would like to quote from the report of
the president in the annual report of the
So the university is clearly headed in the
direction of limiting enrollment to the only open faculty on the campus. The Universities Grants Commission clearly
has a responsibility to determine both the quantity and the capacity.
So I am asking the minister, is this
decision, is this direction, undertaken by the University of Manitoba, one that
is consistent with the studies undertaken by the UGC relative to quantity and
capacity?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed that the
Universities Grants Commission has not done a specific study on the issue of
admission in the Faculty of Arts and that it is important that the university
who is at arms length has then made this decision. The university has not said, the faculty has
not said that it will cap admission.
However, they may have some studies which indicate that students with a
particular average will have a better chance within their faculty.
This was a decision which was reached as a
result of information that comes from the university. I am informed the university has had this
discussion, and I stress that there has been discussion, there has not been action
by the university on this, that the university would have done this not relying
on data from the Universities Grants Commissions. Just to remind the member again, and I know
he knows this, that the universities are autonomous institutions and are able
to make this particular decision or enter into this kind of discussion.
*
(2100)
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, if I may be permitted to
quote the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness):
It is passing strange that the largest university in this province can
be openly musing about limiting enrollment, and the government body responsible
for ensuring that the kind of quality/quantity of post‑secondary
education required by this province has not even studied whether or not that is
an acceptable circumstance.
How is it that the Universities Grants
Commission is so passive in the face of such a statement from the university
that seems to intersect directly with one of the sections of The Universities
Grants Commission Act? You would think
that an active Universities Grants Commission would want to know whether or not
such a policy direction or an action on the part of the
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, perhaps this may add some
understanding to the issue of the studying of the quantity. The Universities Grants Commission does not
study the issue of individual enrollment but instead will look at, study and be
aware of the quantity of programs offered within the universities.
That may allow the thinking to be somewhat
broader than to a specific, individual enrollment. That enrollment in other faculties is capped,
as the member knows. Now, again, the
So at this point, the Universities Grants
Commission‑‑it is important that they monitor the situation. Certainly if this becomes a trend, then there
perhaps would be some concern and some reason for the Universities Grants
Commission then to look at this particular issue much more closely.
Mr. Alcock: Something about barn doors and horses keeps
coming into my mind here.
I understand that the minister corrected
me on two things. One is that, as the minister correctly suggested, it is not
the enrollment of any individual university but it is the overall courses that
they were looking at, at the four campuses, the four institutions, that is what
the Universities Grants Commission studies.
If that is the case, then I ask her the
same question. Whether it be in the context of the one university that is
signalling its intention to limit enrollment or whether it is on a province‑wide
basis, has the commission studied, and do they have an answer to the question
of whether or not, should the university proceed to enact a policy that limits
enrollment, that will have an impact on the ability of Manitobans to access
university education?
Now, it would seem that if the largest
campus does that, that it would have such an impact. It is astounding to me that the Universities
Grants Commission should wait until the university has taken an action before
it gets around to studying it. I mean,
presumably, one studies things so one is prepared to have the discussion with
the university as opposed to simply reacting to a decision undertaken.
The university senate is clearly
signalling a concern about their capacity to continue to have an open‑enrollment
faculty. It happens to be nicely contained in writing in the annual report, but
it is also one of the first things one is confronted with when one goes out to
meet with the administration. I know
this minister has taken her responsibility seriously, and I know she has been
out on the campus meeting with people.
So I am assuming that she has heard about this too.
It is, again, strange to me that the
Universities Grants Commission cannot offer an informed opinion as to the
impact of a decision of this sort on the students in this province.
Mrs. Vodrey: I think it is important, again, to distinguish
that the Faculty of Arts has not chosen to cap its enrollment. The faculty has merely indicated a desire to
increase the admission average. The
In terms of other studies, of course, we
cannot anticipate everything that universities might consider doing, might wish
to discuss in the course of looking at their institution, decide that they
might like to talk about. However, I can
assure the member that certainly I as minister‑‑and I know the UGC
do take their role very seriously. I am
informed that the UGC is certainly monitoring this situation and has been very
careful to distinguish what the university has discussed among themselves, and
what the university has actually indicated a desire to do, that being the
increase of the admission average, and what the university has simply left for
discussion but has not taken any action on.
Mr. Alcock: Let me quote one more time, page 5, Report of
the President,
Now, that does not strike me as
particularly iffy or subject to a whole lot of speculation. They are giving consideration to imposing a
numerical limitation on students admitted to the faculty.
The question is, given that the university
is signalling this so clearly, why had the Universities Grants Commission not
given consideration to the impact of this on this province, given that Section
15 of their act suggests that they should do so?
*
(2110)
Mrs. Vodrey: The member has referred to the university's
annual report in which the president has expressed his opinion, but I would
like to add to that, for the Universities Grants Commission, that the
Universities Grants Commission has been anticipating a Universities
Review. That such a review will take
place has been announced.
I have made it clear in this House that I
am expecting to announce the scope and the mandate of that Universities Review
shortly. Within that Universities Review
then, I would expect that some of these issues, such as enrollment in faculty
capacity, might be discussed under the Universities Review or raised from any
number of areas of interest, perhaps from the university, from the students,
from the member opposite.
Mr. Alcock: Well, we will discuss the Universities Review
before the evening is out, I trust, or perhaps tomorrow afternoon. I would like, however, to talk briefly about
the support services available to graduate students.
One of the things that is a mark of a
healthy and productive university environment is the kind, quantity and quality
of the graduate students that one is able to attract. I note, looking at the numbers, particularly
at the university with the largest number of graduate faculties, the
When I question why that is, I am told it
is because the university is no longer competitive nationally in this country
in its ability to offer fellowships to graduate students. I am also told that the government does not
provide any support for fellowships outside of something which is referred to
as the Duff Roblin fund, which I believe is something in the order of some
$200,000. I would like some details on
that tonight. But I am told that our
neighbouring
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am very happy to explain
to the member some of the differences.
In addition, let me remind the member that
Then I would like to tell him that the
full‑time graduate enrollment by faculty and degree level between 1988‑89,
1989‑90, '90‑91 has in fact remained fairly consistent. So I think those numbers are important to
look at the encouragement and the support for graduate programs in our
universities and at the
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, before I deal with the
rather silly argument the minister put forward relative to
Is the minister saying that the current
situation relative to support for graduate students is acceptable?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, the support to graduate
programs and graduate education is important, and I think that the member,
first of all, should understand that we as a government and I as minister take
that very seriously as we do support to the universities.
I would like to inform the member, first
of all, that the
*
(2120)
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, the minister is sitting
with the Universities Grants Commission which has this responsibility to study
and determine kind, quality and quantity and the capacity of the universities
to meet those requirements. The question
is simple. Is the current support in
this province that is available to graduate students adequate?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, as I have said, this
government does take very seriously the support to post‑secondary
students and students studying at the graduate level.
I am informed that the Universities Grants
Commission does review its support yearly, and in the last two years, as I have
described to the member, has provided the support in the range of $450,000 in
the base funding for scholarships. This
support will be reviewed again in the next budget year. I think that ongoing process of review is an
important one, and may be an aspect of what the member is looking for in terms
of our constant assessment of support to post‑secondary students and
particularly students at the graduate level.
Mr. Alcock: Let me ask the question this way, Madam
Chairperson. The
As a result, top students are attracted
elsewhere because they can receive greater research support and greater base
salary or income support. That is the
case put forward by the universities. Is
the minister or the Universities Grants Commission saying that they are wrong,
and that in fact they do have sufficient support to be competitive?
Mrs. Vodrey: It is well within the university's
responsibility and the university's ability to, again, out of the total funds
granted, provide some additional support to graduate students.
The Universities Grants Commission has, as
I have told the member, specifically earmarked funds, the $450,000 for graduate
scholarships. If the university, apart
from that $450,000 and the support of the UDF, and the support of the
university's own endowment fund, wishes to increase the support, then they
certainly are able to do so if they have an expressed concern about the support
to graduate students.
Mr. Alcock: Another statement that is related that the
university makes is that the kind and quantity of research is beginning to
decline, that they are not able to maintain their competitive position relative
to other universities in this country. As
a result, their ability to access research contracts is beginning to
slide. They attribute that to the severe
constrictions in support from government.
Is the minister and the Universities
Grants Commission saying that they are wrong on this also?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, well, the issue of research
is an important one. It is an important
one economically. It is important for
the economics of the province. Again,
the universities I know are looking for that balance between teaching and research,
and there is an importance attached to the attracting of grants. The information that I have is that the
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, the university administrations
make the following statement, that the quantity of research they are able to
attract is beginning to decline because they are increasingly noncompetitive
when they are attempting to attract such research grants. They attribute that directly to a
constriction in funding from government.
Is the minister saying that they are
wrong?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, again, universities are
able to internally reallocate resources or allocate resources to the area of
research grants, but obviously what the member has raised is a point of
discussion between the universities and those people that they wish to talk
about this issue to. They may wish to
raise it to the Universities Grants Commission.
The presidents for universities may wish to raise this in discussion
with the minister. However, they have
presented some statistics as a point of discussion. I do have some statistics which speak
otherwise, but, again, I am happy to continue the discussion around this issue
with the universities.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I wonder if the minister
could table the statistics that she has that suggest otherwise.
*
(2130)
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I did just read that
information into the record, and the source was the Maclean's article, Maclean's
survey.
Mr. Alcock: Why is it when we have a Universities Grants
Commission that has a mandate under its legislation to study issues of this
sort that the only research source that the minister can quote is Maclean's
magazine?
Mrs. Vodrey: The issue of study as raised by the member,
again, as we have discussed during the course of this evening, may refer to a
number of different methods. It may
refer to the examination by referral to other sources. The source I named in that particular
discussion was one available widely to the public. Also, issues may be studied by discussions
with the universities. The universities
do provide information to the Universities Grants Commission, and through that
providing of information the Universities Grants Commission is then able to
look at what the allocation may be for that university, budgetarily in that
year.
So again the issue of study, I think, is
an important one, but the issue of study is not necessarily a single
statistical study provided by the Universities Grants Commission, but may, in
fact, involve study in a number of different ways.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, just reading from page 122
of the Supplementary Estimates, Section 15 of The Universities Grants
Commission Act says: "The Commission
shall study, a) the requirements of the province for post‑secondary
education at the universities and colleges in terms of kind, quality and
quantity of such post‑secondary education required; b) the capacity of
the universities and colleges to provide the post‑secondary education
required for the province; . . ."
Can the minister tell us how many written
studies were undertaken by the Universities Grants Commission in the last
fiscal year?
Mrs. Vodrey: There have been no formal studies undertaken by
the UGC in the last fiscal year, studies in the statistical form that I believe
the member opposite is referring to.
However, the UGC does study issues and they do study issues with the
universities. Issues such as base
allocation, renovation and all of these issues, as they are discussed and
studied with the universities through that process of discussion, are then
taken into account in the allocation of funding.
Mr. Alcock: Section 15 of The Universities Grants
Commission Act is fairly clear. It says
the commission shall study the requirements of the province for‑‑and
I shall not go on. Then (b) is the
capacity of the universities and colleges.
When was the last time the university undertook such a study?
Mrs. Vodrey: I believe the member referred to the
universities in his question. We are not
aware that the universities have undertaken such a study.
Mr. Alcock: I guess I should have expected that. It is too much for the minister to add the
words "Grants Commission" when I have referenced the Universities
Grants Commission and quoted from their act.
So, let me re‑ask the question, and I shall continue to ask the
question right through the week until the minister chooses to answer it.
Now, I am on page 122 of the Supplementary
Information for Legislative Review, 1992‑1993 Departmental Expenditure
Estimates, Manitoba Education and Training.
On page 122 it is headed "Universities Grants Commission," and
in that under Activity Identification ‑ From The Universities Grants
Commission Act, it headlines a section called "Study of needs of higher
education," and then it says Section 15 "The commission shall study,
(a) the requirements of the province for post‑secondary education at the
universities and colleges in terms of kind, quality and quantity of such post‑secondary
education required; (b) the capacity of the universities and colleges to
provide the post‑secondary education required for the province; . .
."
Now, I asked the minister what studies
were conducted in this last fiscal year and she said none. I now ask her when was the last time that
such a study to determine the requirements of the province, as is required by
the act, was undertaken?
Mrs. Vodrey: I certainly know the area and the page that
the member is referring to, and I have answered the question for the
member. I have explained to the member
that in terms of a statistical study, statistical studies have not been
undertaken by the UGC. However, studying,
through discussion with the universities as the universities present their
concerns and their issues, and I did give some examples, is certainly
undertaken all the time.
The act provides that the UGC shall study
and that studying has been done, as I have explained to the member, on an
ongoing basis in discussion with those institutions.
*
(2140)
Mr. Alcock: So is the minister saying that Universities
Grants Commission has never conducted such a study? Unbelievable.
Mrs. Vodrey: Again, the word study can be interpreted
several ways as the member knows. The
Universities Grants Commission has studied in terms of examining and reviewing
and overseeing and monitoring through ongoing discussion with the universities.
Now I do understand that several years
ago, many years ago, through the post‑secondary research reference
committee there were some printed studies done, but the UGC is not at the
moment doing printed research studies.
However, they are doing ongoing studying by virtue of the ongoing
discussion which takes place between the UGC and the universities around the
issues of concern.
Mr. Alcock: Well, I shall let that one go for the time
being. We discussed a question, it has to do with research support out at the
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, well, I am informed that
the UGC has not been contacted, has not been contacted by the university, and
the member might like to ask these questions then of the Minister of I, T and
T.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I shall indeed take that
forward to those Estimates which I believe are coming up in the relatively near
future.
Can we move on to the question of the
Universities Review, and can the minister describe for us what her intentions
are?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, my intentions around the
Universities Review are to follow through on the review which was proposed, I
understand, in the throne speech and also has been discussed in this
House. I am in the process of finalizing
the scope and the mandate of that review and also how that review will be
conducted, what the process of that review will be, and I do expect to announce
that review shortly.
Mr. Alcock: Is the minister able to discuss any aspects of
the review at this time?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am not in a position to
discuss the details of the Universities Review because I have not yet announced
it, but I will tell the member that we have met with the university presidents
to get their input.
The presidents did provide some input
regarding a university review in writing through the Council of Presidents of
Universities in
Though I am not able to speak of the
details, I think I have alluded through the process of Estimates of the breadth
of this particular review. I do expect
that it will cover a great deal of scope and areas of interest to all segments
of Manitoba, not just universities and those people who are closely associated
with universities, but also to the public of Manitoba in general.
Mr. Alcock: Line 6.(d), in this particular section is the
Access Fund, and I am wondering on what basis it was decided not to provide any
increase in the Access Fund this year.
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that one of the main reasons
that the Access Fund was not increased is that the Access Fund has not been
totally used in over several years, so there have been years when those funds
have not been totally accessed.
Mr. Alcock: So, if I understood the minister correctly,
the UGC determined that the $790,000 that was being made available this year
was sufficient to meet the demand for ACCESS funding?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that in the last fiscal year
there was approximately $13,000 remaining in the fund unused and that there was
also money remaining in the fiscal year before that. So, at this point, it does
appear that that Access Fund is sufficient; however, I would like to say that
is certainly an area that we will monitor.
We believe it is important.
Mr. Alcock: I am prepared to pass this line.
Madam Chairperson: Item 6.(a) Salaries $252,500‑‑pass;
(b) Other Expenditures $212,100‑‑pass; (c) Grants $206,328,500‑‑pass;
(d) Access Fund $790,000‑‑pass.
An Honourable
Member: Page by page, Madam
Chairperson.
Mr. Alcock: I am sorry, I am waiting for you, Madam
Chairperson, to call the Expenditures Related to Capital, Resolution 32.
*
(2150)
Madam Chairperson: Madam Chairperson would like to read the
appropriate resolution for item 6.
Resolution 31: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $207,583,100 for Education and Training, Universities
Grants Commission, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 7. Expenditures Related to Capital.
Mr. Alcock: Are there additional staff required for this
section? Are there additional staff to
come in? Then we will just wait until
they do.
Mrs. Vodrey: I would like to introduce Mr. Tom Thompson,
the Director of Finance for the Department of Education.
Mr. Alcock: I note that this particular item deals with
capital across a whole range of area school divisions, as well as
universities. The area of vocational
equipment, which was something we discussed when we were talking about the
colleges earlier, I will come back to that in a second.
Can the minister start by just allocating
for us the $12,419,500 in Universities capital?
Could she tell us how that is allocated among the four campuses?
Mrs. Vodrey: I just would like to ask the honourable member
leave, because the order that the budget lines and the appropriation lines
appear in 16‑7(a), deal with the acquisition of equipment and
construction of the physical assets for community colleges. Then following, we have the lines which deal
with the universities capital and also public school finance. There are
different staff who would be available for the different lines. So can I ask the member would he have any
questions on line 7.(a)?
Mr. Alcock: I have no difficulty with that at all. Just by way of reference, I note here, I am
looking at the detailing at the bottom of page 125 of Supplementary Estimates,
Vocational Equipment. I presume that is
just in the school division, so acquisition and construction of physical assets‑‑$2,385,200
is the number I have before me here.
When we discussed colleges, one of the
questions that came up was the capacity of the colleges to re‑equip and
maintain current their inventory of equipment that students were training on, the
desire being that students were training on the most appropriate kinds of
machinery for today's market.
The minister had indicated we were better
off discussing that under this particular line.
So, of that $2,385,200, I see that it is broken out here Red River,
Assiniboine,
Let us start with
Mrs. Vodrey: We do have broken down in specific detail,
equipment such as oscilloscopes and time‑base corrector and so on, but to
give a more global figure, approximately 99 percent of that amount is for
equipment.
Mr. Alcock: Would that also be true for the other two,
Assiniboine and
Mrs. Vodrey: Yes, that is correct for the other two
colleges also.
Mr. Alcock: Is this rate of replacement according to some
sort of schedule that is designed to keep the equipment current? Is it in response to specific capital
purchase requests from the institutions?
Well, let us ask those two questions first.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed that each
program within the college does have a look at its equipment and then comes up
with a list. So the criterion does rest
with the colleges and with the college programming.
Just for the member's information, there
has been an increase related to capital for all three colleges totally of
approximately 26 percent. So each
specific analysis of each of the program's needs, again, is done by the
programs, and they come up with a list.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I believe the member for
Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) has some questions on this particular area.
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): Madam Chairperson, yes, I actually have a
number of questions that I am going to roll into what will appear very much
like a statement. My two colleagues are
not going to be here for the conclusion‑‑what I hope will be the
conclusion‑‑of the Department of Education Estimates this
evening. So apart from a number of
questions that I will roll into my commentary, I am also going to, sort of,
provide some closing remarks in lieu of remarks on item 1.(a) The Minister's
Salary.
First of all, I guess the Estimates
process in the Department of Education has been, to put it mildly, a little
unusual this year. Part of that, of
course, is the fact that we are dealing with a minister who has been newly
assigned this responsibility, and, despite what I might say later on, certainly
we would wish the minister well. It is a
tremendous challenge, and I think there are opportunities to do what is right.
*
(2200)
Unfortunately, I think this minister runs
the danger of following in the steps of her predecessor. There are a number of outstanding issues in
the field of education which are begging for address. There are a number of issues which come to
this minister which have been on the plate of this government for now five
budgets and four years. The government
and this minister are going to have to address them.
We cannot simply afford to let the system
continue without some fundamental change.
The challenge will be for the minister to pick up some of the pieces
that were dropped by the previous minister and to move forward.
Madam Chairperson, for my inner‑city
colleagues who would have liked to raise questions‑‑unfortunately,
this process has not always lent itself to people dropping in and asking
questions‑‑there are concerns about what is happening in the core
area of the city of
There are questions about why this
government has failed to push for a renewed Core Area Agreement. We know that school divisions like the city
of
We have yet to see any commitment on the
part of the government or any recognition of how important training, educational
opportunity, support programs are for inner city students. We have seen the demise of the parent‑child
centres. We have seen the demise of other core area programming or programming
supported by the Core Area Initiative, and that is going to be sorely
missed. It is a vacuum that this
minister is going to have to fill in one way or another.
Madam Chairperson, the ACCESS
programs. I know that this minister has
maintained the government continues to support them. I suppose we would be more convinced if we
could see some evidence that this government, in fact, was pursuing the federal
government vigorously to see those program reinstated, to create new programs
if for some reason the federal government did not find them successful enough. I do not believe the minister can show us any
set of evaluations which said the ACCESS programs were not effective or
efficient, and the quiet acquiescence to the federal government's decision to
pull out funding I do not think is understandable. The minister may believe that they put up the
good fight. I do not think that there is
much evidence that was the case either.
Madam Chairperson, the public school
system is standing in want. More than
three years ago now, or approximately three years ago now, the Minister of
Education issued the first High School Review report. We have had, I guess, a long waiting period
between the release of that report and any kind of real attempt on the part of
the government to create some structural change in our high school system in
particular, which, I think, is an obvious need.
I know that change creates uncertainty, and the minister may not want to
move in that direction, but I think that some change is required.
The government continues, despite the
protestations of groups like the Manitoba Teachers' Society and MAST, to follow
its course of aid to private schools, follow unabated in that program. We are seeing tremendous increase, certainly
in our opinion, in the number of students attending private schools. It should be noted that the amount of money,
millions and millions and millions of dollars that are going to private
schools, are going there to the detriment of public schools.
An Honourable
Member: Many of them are the
children of teachers.
Mr. Storie: The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) says
many teachers are sending their sons and daughters to private schools. Madam Chairperson, I do not know if that in
fact is true, but I can only tell the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) or the
Minister of Education or the Minister of Finance, the objective of the
government should be to improve the public school system not undermine it. If the Minister of Finance is correct and
teachers are, then he had better ask himself some serious questions and so had
the Minister of Education, about what they are doing to the public school
system and why that is happening, because‑‑[interjection]
Well, Madam Chairperson, the increase in
private school attendance has changed dramatically, increased dramatically in
the last couple of years. [interjection]
Oh, yes, it has. It has been increasing.
An Honourable
Member: You said dramatically.
Mr. Storie: Dramatically, yes, dramatically, considering
it had been relatively constant for‑‑
An Honourable
Member: Put it on the record.
Mr. Storie: I did put it on the record.
An Honourable
Member: The numbers.
Mr. Storie: I do not have them before me, but I know that
it is over 10,000 students and rising.
Madam Chairperson, the reason the Minister
of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) and the Minister of Finance get exercised
when we talk about funding to private schools is because their constituents do
not like it. They do not want this
public money going to the private schools.
The fact of the matter is that the
government has also introduced an extremely modest Education Finance reform
package which, in its first incarnation, saw a reduction of funding to some 26
school divisions, approximately. The new
minister who assumed responsibility with this program in place, amended it and provided
some additional assistance to a number of school divisions, but it leaves a lot
to be desired and is not, in the final analysis, Education Finance reform. It still leaves the burden on the local
school divisions increasingly, and it certainly looks like school divisions
will be increasingly carrying that burden.
For a government that continues to say
that we have not increased taxes, the Minister of Finance knows, and so does
the Minister of Education, that if you ask any homeowner, any property owner in
this province to look at their tax bill now for education costs compared to
what it was four or five years ago, they will tell the Minister of Finance and
the Minister of Education that, yes, this is not a tax‑free
government. All they are doing is
offloading just like their federal cousins.
The Minister of Finance wants to raise the
question, well, does more money just fix everything? If the Minister of Finance had been
listening, they have not done anything else either. They have not really
reformed the process. They have not done
the high school review that was promised or needed, Madam Chairperson. [interjection] Quite correct. The Minister of Rural Development is quite
correct. In the fall of 1987, I
appointed the panel and the report was supposed to be approximately six and a
half or seven months later. This
government‑‑
An Honourable
Member: You were in the
department for a year after that and you still‑‑
Mr. Storie: No, I was not.
That is not true at all. Not
true. Pardon me, the minister is right.
It was the fall of '86 and the report was supposed to be ready in the
fall of 1987. This minister did receive
the report in the spring of 1988 and nothing has been done four years
later. So, Madam Chairperson, it is just
typical of this government to want to deny responsibility for anything that is
happening, including the problems that school divisions across the province are
facing.
An Honourable
Member: . . . revisionist history.
Mr. Storie: Well, Madam Chairperson, the Minister of
Finance (Mr. Manness) may want to say it is revisionist history, and I may not
have all the dates correct, but I do know that this government has had at least
four years in which time it could have implemented change in the high school
program if it wanted to. At the same
time, it could have revised and provided new opportunities for our community
colleges, new programs for our community colleges. Instead, we have seen the continuing demise
of programs. We have seen students'
waiting lists for courses increase, and we have not seen any answers from the
government.
*
(2210)
Certainly the universities are chronically
underfunded, and the government of
We are the only industrialized country
that has no national responsibility for post‑secondary education and
training. Until we do, we are going to
continue to flounder as individual provinces, attempting to cope with world‑class
demands in terms of training. It would
be nice to think that the Minister of Education was taking the lead in terms of
trying to convince some of her provincial colleagues, some of her federal
colleagues that in fact we are going to continue to fall further behind in
terms of our ability to train on a competitive basis with other countries,
unless there is some sort of national responsibility and national strategy for
post‑secondary education and training.
Madam Chairperson, although we have not
seen the final stages of the community college reform that the government
announced a year and a half ago or a little more, but we do know that the
stated intent of this proposed reform is, I think, admirable. The idea that
community control should be offered to the colleges, I think, on the surface
sounds like a good idea. The problem is
going to be, of course, if the government proceeds to fund colleges on a block‑funding
model, that many of the programs that are currently supported by the government
because of their, I guess, essential nature in terms of the functioning of our
society, whether it is community health workers or mental health workers or
licensed practical nurses or many other things.
Those kinds of projects are not likely to be easily absorbed by outside
funding to the community colleges.
Over time, the community colleges are
going to find that they, out of necessity, are going to have to reduce,
particularly, courses that are designed to meet social needs, the needs within
our communities. So while we head toward
that, I guess, we will not know what the final outcome is going to be until we
see what kind of funding arrangements are made with the community colleges.
I would like to encourage the minister
particularly with respect to the creation of some kind of northern
college. I know that it is not on the
minister's agenda immediately, but I think that if the minister will take the
time to sort of study the proposal that was created internally in the
department some three and a half years ago or four and a half years ago, she
will find that there in fact may be some merit to creating a northern polytechnic
that encompasses and co‑ordinates the offerings of our universities and
our community colleges, other post‑secondary and continuing education
offerings, because the northerners, I think, are still very much alienated from
the delivery of post‑secondary education.
There is no university, no body, that
addresses their specific concerns. While
If you consider all of the funding that
goes to training in northern Manitoba from the various levels of government,
support from various institutions, the amount of money certainly at one time
was considerably more than the amount of money that the province provides to
Brandon University, for example, to operate a campus, and no one was
recommending a campus. I think that I would
encourage the minister to review the opportunity now of creating some sort of
northern polytechnic university/college that would operate with a northern
board of governors, reflect perhaps more directly the interests of northern
people in that kind of institution.
Madam Chairperson, I do not think we are
going to be asking for the Minister's Salary to be reduced this year when we
come to item 1.(a), but the minister is put on notice that there is a long list
of things that can be done and should be done in the Department of
Education. The minister will only be
granted a certain period of grace before she will have to assume responsibility
for her action or lack of action. It
will not be quite as easy to simply blame the previous minister or, if she
wishes, the previous government. At some
point, she will have to take responsibility for her own action or lack thereof.
We will be watching on this side and
providing advice and sometimes perhaps even positive advice to the minister.
Hopefully, we will see some rewards when we do offer that advice.
Mrs. Vodrey: I would like to thank the honourable member
for his comments. I do have a long list
of issues that I would like to respond to, but perhaps they may become more
evident over the time that I am answering questions in the House and that the
initiatives of this government are put forward.
The member then will be able to have a look at the initiatives and the
commitment of this government to the issues of education in
The member is correct, I am a new
minister. This process of Estimates has
been an extremely instructive one for me.
It has been an extremely good process for me to have the opportunity to look
in depth at my department. It has been
seen by me as a very positive way, again, to become extremely familiar with the
issues.
I think it is also very important for the
member to know that during the process of Estimates or questions there has
never been any blaming on my part for my colleagues in government. I think that we have tried very carefully as
a department, and I as minister, to look at the issues raised and to comment on
them in what I believe is a fair way.
However, I will also tell the member that
my style is to have one of open discussion, and I have so far made many
attempts to have open discussion with Manitobans, and with representative
groups of Manitobans, as I come to know my department and as I come to know the
issues of education more fully. My
background and my work experience have been in the area of education, and it is
an area of particular importance to me.
Because of some of my background in education, people have taken the
opportunity to come up and to tell me the issues that they think are important.
I have been happy with the fact that the
people of
In the short time that I have been
minister, I believe we as a government, and I as minister, have been responsible
for the movement forward of some of the particular initiatives. I look forward to announcing in the near
future the Universities Review, which is an initiative which has been announced
in this department before I became minister, and I look forward to also
bringing that through to completion.
I also look forward to seeing the
educational finance model, the new ed finance model, through its first year,
with the recognition that it is a very dynamic model. I also look forward to seeing our new student
support branch in action. Our new
student support branch is designed to provide support for some of the‑‑the
member referenced inner city students; I would call them students at risk
across the province.
*
(2220)
I also look forward to college governance
as another issue which was begun before I became minister, but which I look
forward to seeing through the process.
Then, as the member said, I also look forward to the formulation, along
with my government colleagues, of other initiatives which I will bring forward
and which I will be prepared to defend and discuss both with the members of the
House and also with Manitobans. So I
thank him for his comments and I tell him that I have learned a great deal in the
process of these Estimates, and I look forward to learning more and to working
with Manitobans.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I wonder if we might move
on to the discussion of the capital available to the universities.
Madam Chairperson: Item 7.(a)(1)
7.(b) Capital Grants: (1) Universities.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, rather than going at great
length on the distribution of the funds available, I would simply like the
minister to explain. The minister has been
out to the campus. She has reviewed the
situation, particularly at the
I am wondering, in light of such an
apparent need, why the Universities Grants Commission has been unwilling to
recommend increases in the Capital Grants or unwilling to recommend to
government that they address that particular problem because their current
level of funding will not address the identified need or the need that the
university has identified.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, again I would like to refer
to the Universities Review to say that the Universities Review will likely look
at, among other matters, some of the long‑term needs of the university
and the most efficient methods to assist the universities to look at the
capital needs. So I think this is an
important area. For the member's
information, the Universities Grants Commission was able to provide to universities
approximately $4 million for all universities.
Since 1988‑89, approximately $63
million in capital have flowed to the universities. If we include with that the UDF funding, then
the capital provided does proceed to the range of $70 million.
Mr. Alcock: Madam Chairperson, the university with the
most acute capital needs or most apparent capital needs is the University of
Manitoba which puts forward an analysis of its repair and replacement plus
equipment replacement regimes that would total, on what seem to be fairly
modest schedules, something in the order of, I believe it is some $30 million a
year.
I note that this goal has never been
reached. This is not a problem that I
would lay at the feet of this government, although this government has not done
much to address it. It certainly is a
problem that has existed at least for the last two decades. But I am curious as
to why government has been unwilling to institute a policy of incorporating
into the university budgets sufficient support for regular maintenance and
replacement?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am surprised that the
honourable member refers to the $70 million commitment since 1988‑89 as
nothing because certainly the taxpayers of
Now, Madam Chairperson, in this year, the
1992‑93 Estimates provide for capital grants in the range of $12,419,000,
and I believe that is a significant amount of funding. Again, we have to fund against the
availability of
I will remind the member that we have
provided $11.2 million for the replacement of the main service tunnel and $1.8
million for the animal metabolism. We
are also providing $500,000 cost shared for the upgrading of elevators for
access to the university. So I think
that we as a government are providing very significant contributions to the
capital needs of the
*
(2230)
Mr. Alcock: I assumed that we were about to bring this to
a close. I did say when I asked this
question to the minister that I was not holding her or this particular
government accountable for it, but she seems to want to debate for a while, and
I guess we might as well enter into it.
What I had asked her, I did not make any
comment contrary to the statements of the minister about the $70 million, or
whatever the figure she may wish to puff it up to, that this government has
contributed. But I made very specific
reference to the proposal, the suggestion.
The University of Manitoba alone, one of
the four sites, albeit the largest, if they were to offer a 2 percent annual
renovation budget on their physical plant, a 2.5 percent services‑‑that
includes their tunnels, roads, sidewalks et cetera, utility distribution system‑‑a
2.5 percent repair and maintenance depreciation allowance, and on equipment a
10 percent as opposed to a 20 percent, which is quite standard in
organizations; their annual requirement would be $30 million, 10 times what
their annual budget is.
Now, when you see a difference of that
scale, you assume that within the two sides of that argument, there is some
flexibility or some over‑ or understatement of something. However, the gap between $30 million and $3
million is considerable, and the allowances that the university has made are
well within private sector repair and replacement allowances. In fact, they are modest, to say the least.
Now, I note that, in 1976‑77 the
annual budget was $2.8 million. This is
well before the term of this government.
In fact, that would go back to the previous Schreyer government‑‑was
proffering an amount of money that was not that different.
I am simply curious. I am not wanting to hold this minister
personally accountable or to pin this government down on this particular
point. I am just curious as to how the
Universities Grants Commission explains this difference between the apparently
rational assessment of a $30 million annual need for renovation and an offering
by government or a support from government that is considerably less than that.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, first let me start by
acknowledging for the member our understanding that the capital and repairs and
replacement of buildings at the university is a very significant issue. As the member notes, I certainly have visited
the university, and I have seen specifically some concrete evidence of what the
university is concerned about in terms of their capital and their repair and
their replacement. The money available has been rationalized. The money made available has been
rationalized by the money available to provide for the capital and the repairs
and the replacement.
The UGC then does review the requests, but
we certainly recognize that what may be needed is a thoughtful assessment plan,
a method to provide consideration perhaps by a more objective scale. As I have said to the member, we are looking
to the Universities Review to perhaps look at this as one of its major areas of
consideration.
Madam Chairperson: Item 7.(b) Capital Grants (1) Universities
$12,419,500‑‑pass; (2) School Division $23,347,100‑‑pass.
Resolution 32: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $38,151,800 for Education and Training, Expenditures
Related to Capital, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
At this point I would request that the
minister's staff please leave the Chamber to give consideration to item 1.(a)
Minister's Salary.
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(a).
Mr. Alcock: I shall be brief. I would like to really just make three
points. The first is I would like to
thank the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) for the time she has taken in
these Estimates. I think we started on a
relatively rocky basis and then settled down and got a lot of work done. I am pleased frankly with the kind, quantity
and quality of the information that has been presented here.
I have absolutely no intention of making
any motion relative to the Minister's Salary, for I think she earns every penny
of it, as do most ministers in this House, despite what I might think of their
particular policy or ideological positions.
I am disappointed by the government in
their approach to education when they play the kind of games that they play,
particularly with student aid. I think
the nonsense that goes on about what is a new program and what is not a new program
and what is support and what is not support is unfortunate, and I think it
detracts from the public discussion of education.
I do, as an individual, feel very strongly
about this. I do believe that education
is a key element in the economic health and well‑being of this
province. I fear that, because of a
rather narrow analysis on the part of this government and not on the part of
this minister however, but on the part of this government, we have missed some
very important opportunities.
I wish the minister well in the coming
year. I think she is doing a credible
job. I think once she settles in and
gets her hands on the department and understands it‑‑I suspect the
minister has things to say that she feels constrained from saying at the present
time, given both her newness and the stated position of her government. I hope that she will have some of the
influence on this government that she could have, given her background and
willingness to listen to people throughout the community on issues of
education, for I think that, in a small province in an economy that is
increasingly global, if we do not address the quality issues in training, we
simply are going to shrink further.
With that I would like to pass the
appropriation.
Mrs. Vodrey: I thank the honourable member for his
comments. As I have said, I found the
process of Estimates to be extremely instructive in my learning and becoming
very familiar with my department. I look
forward to continuing to work very hard on behalf of Manitobans in the area of
education.
*
(2240)
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(a) Minister's Salary $20,600‑‑pass.
Resolution 26: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $5,478,400 for Education and Training, Administration and
Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993.
This concludes the review of the Estimates
for the Department of Education and Training.
Committee rise. Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
Madam Deputy
Speaker: Order, please. The hour being past 10 p.m., this House is
adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Tuesday).