Winnipeg Arena
Election Campaign Commitment
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.
A number of people have been calling us over the last couple of days who have recalled clearly the Premier's words in the election campaign on a number of debates and in a number of public presentations that he made, stating that he would be limited to a $10-million contribution to deal with the Jets and the arena proposal in the city of Winnipeg.
They feel that the Premier, having said one thing in the election campaign, does not have a democratic mandate to proceed with something substantially more than his election commitment and his word in that campaign.
I would like to ask the Premier: What democratic mandate does he have to go way beyond his word in the election campaign after the election is over?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as I indicated previously this week on several occasions to the Leader of the Opposition in response to the same question, the proposal that had been put forth before the election campaign by the Manitoba Entertainment Complex people did not prove to be viable in terms of being able to maintain NHL hockey in Winnipeg.
A proposal was subsequently then reworked with the addition of substantial additional private sector funds so that there would be a matching concept of $111 million to build a Manitoba Entertainment Complex facility by the public sector and a matching amount raised by the private sector to own and operate the team and cover ongoing losses.
The Jets' operations here and the construction of that arena result in $10 million of direct tax revenue to the provincial government for the construction of the facility and $6 million a year ongoing in the operation of the team.
On that basis, a decision was made by our government and other levels of government to provide the capital infrastructure for the ongoing enjoyment of the people of Manitoba.
Referendum
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the question was: What mandate do you have to break your word and your promise in the election campaign? The Premier has not answered that question.
On a number of occasions, people who have been calling us say they have heard that the Premier only limited the public contribution from the provincial government in the election campaign for $10 million. They wonder what mandate he has to break that promise.
I would like to ask the Premier today: In light of the fact that he only has a democratic mandate for $10 million, will the Premier have a referendum on the extension and multiplication of the amount of public money in the provincial public sector to this project so that we can have a true democratic mandate for the decisions that are being made, rather than having promises broken after the election campaign?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): In our parliamentary democratic system in this country, which all of us are elected under and which all of us participate in and support, Madam Speaker, the fact of the matter is that people elect governments on a whole series of issues: on a philosophy, on integrity, on leadership, on all sorts of issues.
Primarily, though, they elect people to make judgments on their behalf, judgments that are ultimately in the best interests of the province and its future.
We are in office with a mandate to exercise our judgment and to make decisions on a whole range of issues under new and changing circumstances that perhaps were unforeseen during an election campaign.
* (1010)
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, to say that this was unforeseen when the Premier was involved for years with this portfolio--
I would like to ask the Premier, why is he afraid to have a referendum on the decisions that his government is making, given the fact that you promised only $10 million in the campaign.
You have broken your word, sir, and it is a time to allow your word to go before the public to test all across Manitoba whether this project makes sense at all for all the people of Manitoba rather than just some in the Premier's constituency of Tuxedo.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, of course the Leader of the Opposition has had the luxury of being on all sides of this issue. At one point, he said that the public sector would build the whole facility. At that time, he said that he and Mr. Axworthy at the time were trying to convince the City Council to build a facility. This was back in the mid-'80s, when he was Minister of Urban Affairs.
Point of Order
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order.
Mr. Doer: The Premier knows that I was never elected when Mr. Axworthy was a minister of the Crown. I would like him to be honest about this issue, please.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Leader of the official opposition does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts.
The honourable First Minister, to complete his response.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will get the transcript from CJOB where the Leader of the Opposition said that when he was the Minister of Urban Affairs he was supportive of building the arena facility with public funds.
He then, of course, changed his position and said, no funds. Then he said that he would change his position again and that he would transfer the funds from the Kenaston underpass to build the facility, and then he changed his position again.
He has the luxury of being able to say five different things on the same issue and never have to, of course, account for his actions or his words.
That is the kind of dishonesty that we get from him on a regular basis. That is why he is on that side of the House.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I would remind the Premier of what the Premier said in Estimates about the NDP position dealing with the arena, saying that we would need substantial funding from the private sector. That is on page 4109 of Hansard. I would ask the Premier to refer to his own words.
At the same time, he said it was against his conscience to spend $111 million on this arena. The Premier never answered the question.
Given the fact that he has a $10-million mandate legitimately in the election campaign, which was his commitment, and I respect that, and given the fact that now that we are substantially over that commitment, why will the Premier not put the whole plan and all the public investment and all the potential benefits before the people of Manitoba in a referendum campaign?
We have a voters list, we have the ability to consult the public and get a true mandate as opposed to the mandate the Premier broke after the election campaign.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the question is repetitive; my answer is the same.
Winnipeg Arena
Development Costs
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.
To date, the three levels of government have committed only $94 million to the cost of a $111-million arena, yet the Premier has stated that there is a fixed-price contract to build that arena for $111 million.
My question then is: How are you going to build an $111-million arena for $94 million, Mr. Minister?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, first of all, the reference to a fixed-price contract is one component of the total package of $111 million. That is the actual development of the facility itself.
There are many other aspects of developing an entertainment complex, from clocks to development for internal concessions and so on and so forth.
So the fixed-term contract is on the actual building of the facility, and that is about a $65 million to $70 million component of the $111 million total figure. So that represents about two-thirds of the total cost of the potential development.
So there is the opportunity, and we do have $94 million committed from three levels of government. That is 85 percent of the requirements. There is the opportunity to look at controlling costs. There is the opportunity to continue to have further discussions with the federal government about other contributions from the federal government. There is the opportunity to look at revenue sources for the facility, to look at other mechanisms in terms of some financial assistance towards the development of the facility, and we are very confident the facility will be developed within that price range and the contributions from government will be held at the levels as currently committed by the city and by the provincial government.
* (1015)
Information Tabling Request
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): To the same minister, Madam Speaker: Will the Premier and the minister then table the letter of May 20 which accompanied the MEC offer committing to the $111-million arena and accompanied apparently by a $10-million deposit? Will you table that letter in this House?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, at the appropriate time I am sure all information will be made available to not only this House but to the citizens of Manitoba on this entire transaction.
The private sector right now is in very serious negotiations with the current owners of the Jets about taking over and getting involved in the operations of the organization, about taking over the losses effective immediately in terms of the operations of the hockey team here in Manitoba.
All information will be made available as deals are concluded.
Tender Process
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, to the same minister, will the minister explain to Manitobans how there can be a fixed price commitment to build a publicly funded $111-million arena without working drawings, without a public tender? Is tendering no longer mandatory for hundred-million-dollar projects in this province?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): I think, as the members opposite know, this project has been worked on for many, many months.
The MEC organization has done a great deal of work in terms of detailed drawings of the facility, determining where the site would be, having discussions with contractors about tenders and costs and ensuring that, when they do come forward in terms of the development of a facility, they know with certainty what the facility can be developed for, what the costs of building the building will in fact be. That has been the basis on which all information has been provided.
School Boundaries Commission
Recommendations
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Education.
In yesterday's press release, the minister indicated that she is not committed to the three-year phase-in plan for the implementation of the Norrie report on school boundaries.
Would the minister make clear to the House today what the implications of this are for the timing and term of office for school board elections across Manitoba?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the member indicates that I am not committed to a three-year phase-in. I do not know specifically what she is referencing, because what I said yesterday was that we would be sending out the Norrie commission again, or asking them to receive written submissions from those who would be directly affected by any change in boundaries, to get that opinion, to analyze it, adjust if needed any of their recommendations, report back to us by September.
Our plan continues to be that that period in the next school board term would be a period of transition should any of the boundary lines be adjusted.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, can the minister tell the House what will be the economic impact on Manitoba education of her rapid implementation of school choice, exactly that of the Manness action plan, ahead of a defined timetable for boundary changes, given the existing wide disparity in assessment per pupil?
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, I misheard her. I thought she said "not," and I understand she said "now" in her original question.
The member knows that what we are looking for now is feedback as to many of those items school divisions were expecting. Other interested parties will indicate to us how they see these recommendations impacting in a wide variety of areas.
We will receive that information. After we have received it, we will then be in a position to make a decision based upon reaction to the report in all arenas that are of interest to affected parties.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, what safeguards will the minister be proposing to protect the stability of small schools, which in some areas will be vulnerable to the movement of quite small numbers of students?
* (1020)
Mrs. McIntosh: As you know, we have indicated that we do not wish to see any changes being made in the short term to items such as school closures, for example, that type of thing.
As well, as I have indicated in my first two responses, we will be looking for feedback on many of those items before we announce our final decision.
School Boundaries Commission
Public Consultations
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, the Minister of Education has just stated that the second round of consultations on the school boundaries commission report will be in the form of written submissions that will go back to the commission by September.
The residents of Brooklands, in my constituency of Wellington, face under the current proposed recommendations tax increases of $27 per $10,000 of assessed property value, which for residents of Brooklands is an unbelievable increase and far larger than any other community in the province of Manitoba.
Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Education, why, given the fact that residents of the entire city of Winnipeg had only one opportunity to make public presentations before the first round of meetings, there is only written submission form and that the submissions have to be in by September? What is the hurry, Madam Minister?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, with all due respect to the philosophy behind what the member has just said, I recall other ministers in this government being criticized incessantly, repeatedly for having taken time to review reviews. So I find this a little inconsistent with earlier criticisms of other ministers who take the time to analyze the effect of recommendations on affected parties.
Brooklands people are invited, are most welcome to submit their perspectives to the commission.
We recognize and we have indicated in terms of the comments that were put out yesterday that inequities in terms of divisions of assets and liabilities will be one of the very factors that we will be considering when we look at any decision on school boundaries.
We do know there have been divisions that have been frugal with their dollars, managed their money well. We know other divisions have for whatever reason not been able to be as thrifty with their dollars or as cost conscious.
We want to make sure that the division of assets and liabilities will make certain that those who have worked hard are not penalized. Witness the people in Brooklands' concern which will be invited to be presented to the commission.
Ms. Barrett: Madam Speaker, how can the Minister of Education say the public and interested stakeholders will be invited to participate in consultation when there are not public hearings, there will not be community-based hearings? There will only be written submissions over the summer months. How does that equate--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, the member may be unaware that they had public hearings already and that many, many people took the time, the trouble and the energy to present very well-researched, very in-depth commentary to the commission.
It took the commission a long period of time to analyze those presentations. Those presentations were very helpful to the commission, and we are now saying to the people now that the report has been compiled that we would invite their commentary on that compilation of recommendations to see if adjustments need to be made in light of the recommendations that have been put forward.
Ms. Barrett: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Education, again, how she compares the one opportunity that the residents of Brooklands and other areas of the city of Winnipeg in particular who have inequities in the current proposed boundary reviews and their tax increases have--how can she equate a written submission--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, I repeat again to the member three points that I have already made. One is that the people of the Brooklands community would be most welcome, indeed, encouraged to submit any concerns they might have to the commission.
Two, I have indicated that as a government we have said for further government review we want to take a serious look at divisions of assets and liabilities should any consolidation occur as a result of decision making to ensure equity.
Thirdly, school divisions such as the one that Brooklands currently belongs to are also in the process, I understand, of making presentations to the commission and those factors identified by the member undoubtedly will be included with their current representatives' concerns to the commission. So all of those arenas are coming forward.
I have great faith in the ability of the commission members to be able to analyze a written submission as easily as a verbal submission. It does not preclude any member of the public from presenting information or ideas verbally or orally to me or any commission members.
* (1025)
Infrastructure Works Agreement
Selkirk Project
Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the minister responsible for infrastructure here in the province of Manitoba.
As the minister is aware, there was an agreement signed in 1993 by all levels of government which would finally end Selkirk's reliance on the Red River as an emergency source of drinking water.
Phase one was the construction of a storage container and phase two was a well to fill it.
It now appears that phase two of that project may be in jeopardy due to lack of funding from the federal government. In fact, our M.P. has added to the confusion by stating that the funding was in place but is now being held up because of the Jets issue or the arena commitment.
Can the minister, as a partner to this agreement, clarify for the people of Selkirk the status of phase two of this much-needed project?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to assure the honourable member that there are no traditional municipal projects that are being held up as a result of a potential entertainment complex here in Winnipeg.
I will remind the member in terms of how the infrastructure program has worked.
There was a $60-million allocation for traditional municipal projects here in Winnipeg, a $60-million allocation for rural Manitoba and $84 million within a strategic initiative.
I would have to get the details on the Selkirk application. I am assuming it has come out of the $60-million rural allocation for traditional water and sewer projects and so on, and that process, Madam Speaker, was one in which we had a review committee of representatives from the Union of Manitoba Municipalities and the Manitoba Association of Urban Municipalities. They prioritized all of the projects in rural Manitoba, and we accepted each and every recommendation that they made for projects.
So I will check on the specifics and get back on the Selkirk project, but I am assuming it would come out of that $60 million. It has absolutely no relationship to potential funding for an entertainment complex in Winnipeg.
* (1030)
Mr. Dewar: Madam Speaker, my question to the same minister is: Will the minister commit himself today to raising the issue the next time he meets with Minister Axworthy when they are discussing the millions of dollars that are going to the arena issue? Will he ensure the residents of the Selkirk community that he will raise this issue with Minister Axworthy?
Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I have already indicated I will check on the Selkirk projects that are being funded out of the infrastructure program. I have already indicated as well that I would anticipate that will come out of the $60 million allocated.
There has been a very thorough review process. We have had the involvement of our municipal leaders from across this province. It has been a process that has been acknowledged by most people who have participated in it to be a very effective and efficient one and very inclusive. It is one that is being modelled right across Canada and always used whenever the Prime Minister and other people talk about the infrastructure program. They talk about what is being done here in Manitoba.
The specifics on the Selkirk project, I will follow up the status and get back to the member.
Mr. Dewar: Madam Speaker, it is unfortunate that there is money for--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Dewar: Madam Speaker, my final question is: Will the minister meet with the officials of the town of Selkirk as soon as possible so they can have a united front to solve this problem?
Mr. Stefanson: First of all, Madam Speaker, I do not necessarily accept that there is a problem, just from what the member here is outlining.
I have indicated I will find out what the status is of the Selkirk project. The municipal review committee distributed the $60 million on a very equitable basis right across rural Manitoba. I am sure Selkirk received their fair share of the infrastructure dollars available here in Manitoba. The community of Selkirk would have prioritized their project. I will certainly check on what the status is of their projects moving forward.
I want to assure members opposite, although I know they are very much opposed to an entertainment complex in Manitoba, I know they are very much opposed to seeing the Winnipeg Jets remain in our province, but his link, the link that he makes, that is no surprise, Madam Speaker.
Point of Order
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, our rules are quite clear that answers should relate to the matter raised, which was very specific in terms of the concerns of the member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) to protect the project.
I believe the comments of the member, while they might be appropriate for another debate which we are glad to participate in, are not appropriate in answer to the member's question.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson indeed did have a point of order.
I would remind all honourable members that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, should deal with the matter related and should not provoke debate--Beauchesne's 408.(2).
* * *
Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Finance to quickly complete your response.
Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I will quickly complete my response.
I know the members are very sensitive to their nonvisionary views of our province, but I will follow up on the issue of the Selkirk project and, as I have indicated, I will report back to the member for Selkirk on the status of the projects that he has referred to.
Health Care System
Eye Examinations--Deinsurance
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health.
Two years ago, this government rationed health care by eliminating eye examinations for Manitobans between the ages of 18 to 65. Now there is a proposal on the table to completely eliminate general eye examinations for Manitobans.
Can the minister today tell this House what the government's position is specifically on this issue of eliminating eye examinations from medicare coverage?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I have not received such a proposal, so I am not able to tell the honourable member a position that I might take on a proposal I have not yet received.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, will the minister today assure this House that this government's policy will be, no further deinsurance of medicare services?
Since the proposal is one of the proposals of the minister's own committee that he set up to determine under the MMA agreement, will he assure the House that they will not deinsure any more services?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I am not able to assure the honourable member that I am wanting to substitute my judgment for the judgment of the people who sit around the table at the Manitoba Medical Services Council without having seen any proposal coming forward on the point the honourable member raises.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, will the minister today assure this House that there will be no further deinsurance of any services, because what is going to be next after eye examinations? Will it be chiropractic services. Will it be others?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, one thing I will not do is abuse my fellow Manitobans as the honourable member and his colleagues would like to do.
Lake Manitoba
Water Levels
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.
Due to the unfortunate levels of water that we have in our province at this time, the flooding situation has also increased the levels of Lake Manitoba and has created problems downstream of Lake Manitoba. The communities of Little Saskatchewan, Lake St. Martin and Fairford have been asked to take more water into their areas as a result of the high levels in Lake Manitoba, and, of course, upstream of that is creating quite a problem.
Yesterday, Madam Speaker, the minister's department met with the communities.
Can I ask the minister: What were the results, what were the discussions, and what were the outcomes of the meetings?
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, the member is correct that my staff met with various leaders in the Fairford area, Lake St. Martin area, Little Saskatchewan area related to the potential flooding that is taking place there. There is some flooding taking place at the present time.
Based on the information that they brought back to myself this morning, the decision has been made that there will be no further water other than what is being released right now at the Fairford Dam. There will not be any further logs removed.
The situation is going to stabilize to some degree. We anticipate there is going to be possibly almost up to two feet of water that is going to increase at a certain level, but there will be no further logs removed to create a further problem.
Fairford Dam
Alternatives
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, can the minister tell us if he has discussed any other alternatives to alleviate the problem, any other ways that we can go with the water from western Manitoba through Lake Manitoba instead of just through the Fairford Dam?
Are there alternatives? Have you looked at the alternatives?
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for that question.
Based on the meeting that we had this morning, as of tomorrow morning the diversion at Portage is going to be cut by half of the water that is going into Lake Manitoba. By next week, Wednesday, it is our hope and anticipation that we will take and cut the flow out of the Shellmouth Dam to less than 1,600 cfs. It is these kinds of actions that we think are ultimately going to help stabilize the increase of the water level in Lake Manitoba.
Madam Speaker, it is a problem right now. We are looking at a matter of, I think the water is increased by about .5 percent of a foot, half a foot I guess in Lake Manitoba, and it is creating some flooding problems for farmers around the general area of Lake Manitoba. We are hoping by these actions that this is going to sort of control it and help level it off.
Mr. Clif Evans: Madam Speaker, due to the conditions that we have now in the area, the--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Will the member please pose his supplementary question.
Disaster Assistance
Flooding Compensation
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Will the minister tell this House if there is any compensation due to the communities for the actions that have occurred? Will the government and will the minister compensate and assist these communities?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Minister of Government Services): I thank the member for the question.
The disaster assistance organization is working diligently with municipal governments and various levels of government in adjudicating claims that have been received.
I would urge the member opposite to encourage his constituents to use that process. There have been over a hundred claims submitted to date, and I understand the organization is working very diligently on those.
In answer to the member's question, yes, we will look at using the same process for his constituents that we use for the constituents of all other members of this House.
Gasoline Pricing
Increase
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.
Manitoba motorists know they are being ripped off by the oil companies when gas prices soar 4 cents a litre just prior to a long weekend.
I would like to know: Is it a coincidence that prices rose the day after the election?
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, the question of gasoline prices in this province and elsewhere in this country for that matter has been under discussion by myself, our government and governments right across this country.
It has been apparent that increases in gasoline prices to the consumer do not always reflect, in fact, quite often do not just reflect the question of increases in crude oil prices but reflect either increased profit taking or increased revenues at least to the major retailers of gasoline products in this country.
After having had some detailed discussion with the oil industry last year, Madam Speaker, I raised the question with my colleagues the ministers of Consumer Affairs from across Canada and as a matter of fact have written to the Minister of Consumer Affairs Canada on four separate occasions demanding a meeting of all Consumer ministers from across the country, because this is a national problem, not a Manitoba problem.
* (1040)
Mr. Maloway: Madam Speaker, I would like to know how large a price increase it will take for this minister to finally do something concrete.
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, if the member for Elmwood is suggesting that the Province of Manitoba should put the gasoline prices under the purview of the Public Utilities Board, then I think he is sadly mistaken and he is going to hurt the consumer in this province a lot more than he ever anticipated. That has been tried.
It is being done in Prince Edward Island and they have the highest price in the country. It was tried in Nova Scotia and disbanded because of the very fact that they had amongst the highest prices in this country.
The question is a national problem, Madam Speaker, and that has to be addressed on a national basis. Minister Manley from Ottawa referred it to his department of Competition Policy and they came back and said, there is no problem. Tell the consumer to shop around.
Well, that is not acceptable to me and not acceptable to this government. We have said time and time again it is time we dealt with this matter on a national basis and not on a piecemeal one.
Mr. Maloway: Madam Speaker, once again the minister passes the buck.
Madam Speaker, to the same minister: Does he have any studies that his department has conducted during its monitoring process over the last few years that he can release to this House?
Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, as I have tried to explain to the House and to the member for Elmwood, we have been looking at this issue not only in a Manitoba context but in a national context in conjunction with our colleagues from across the country.
The fact of the matter is that the federal government has, up to this point at least, refused to acknowledge there is a problem on a national basis and has refused to deal with it on a national basis.
We are continuing, along with my colleagues from Saskatchewan, British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario, to press the federal government to deal with the issue, to bring together Consumer Affairs ministers from across Canada in order to address the issue of gasoline prices in this country.
Vulnerable Persons Act
Proclamation
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, in 1993, when there were three parties in this House, all three parties approved The Vulnerable Persons Act, an excellent piece of legislation.
Unfortunately, since then there has been no public education campaign, there has been no announcement by the minister of hiring a Vulnerable Persons Commissioner and no proclamation of the act.
I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services: What is she doing to implement this important piece of legislation?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question, because when that legislation was passed all members of this House recognized and realized that it was leading-edge legislation that would provide support for those living with mental disabilities in our community.
We have been working hard to try to get things up to speed. It is, as I said, leading-edge legislation. There is a lot of preparatory work to do before the legislation is proclaimed.
The competition has been held for the Vulnerable Persons Commissioner, and we are in the final stages of making the decision on the Vulnerable Persons Commissioner.
After that commissioner is in place and once the appeal panels are set and those members of the appeal panel are oriented as to their roles and responsibilities, we will be proclaiming the act.
Mr. Martindale: Can the Minister of Family Services tell the House if she has a timetable or a goal in mind of proclaiming the act? We have been waiting for almost two years, and it is long overdue.
Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, as a result of the type of legislation--and you know I have heard the member opposite comment about legislation that was 75 years old. We have new legislation.
I believe it is incumbent and very important for the people of Manitoba that this government and this Legislature take the time necessary to ensure that when the act is proclaimed, it will be a piece of legislation that we can all be proud of.
Taking Charge! Program
Implementation
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Can the Minister of Family Services tell the House if anything is going to happen in terms of the Taking Charge! program, which was announced in September of last year with the federal minister and herself? We have no office. We have none of the 4,000 people that are supposed to go through this program taking advantage of it. When is it going to open?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, again I thank my honourable friend for that question on Taking Charge!, because it is an innovative program that is not happening anywhere else across the country.
An Honourable Member: It is not happening here either.
Mrs. Mitchelson: It is indeed happening.
The board of directors has been appointed by both levels of government. They are in the process now of searching for an executive director. That bulletin has been placed already. They are in the process of negotiating a lease for a storefront operation.
As soon as those things are done the office will be up and running and single parents on social assistance will have the ability to change their lives.
Winnipeg Police Service
Additional Officers
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, my question is for the First Minister.
Recent news of an increase in the rate of muggings in the city of Winnipeg underlines concerns of all Manitobans about safety on our streets.
Given that the government was willing to respond to public outcry and commit more than three times the amount of money promised in the election campaign for the construction of a new arena, when can we expect a similar increase and commitment to put 40 additional police officers on the streets of Winnipeg?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question.
During the election campaign we did make a commitment of $2 million to put 40 additional police officers onto the beat in the city of Winnipeg to deal with issues of crime.
We have, through the Secretariat Treasury Board, asked the City of Winnipeg for their plan for the deployment of the forces because we wanted to be assured that this would lead to officers on the beat as opposed to administration being beefed up.
That plan is being awaited and I understand that there will be further discussions very, very shortly to deal with the plan and to give authorization to the city to proceed with the hiring of those 40 additional officers.
Justice System
Hearing Officers--Layoffs
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): A supplementary question for the Minister of Justice: Now that the government has issued layoff notices to hearing officers, will the minister explain how she plans to deal with the administrative problems associated with the hearing officer system in order to ensure that police officers spend less time transporting suspects from place to place?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Justice and have her respond as soon as she returns to the House.
Throne Speech
Crime Reduction Initiatives
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Can the minister explain, with the increase in the rate of crime in the province of Manitoba and the obvious concern of Manitobans over the issues, why there was no commitment to take action in the recent Speech from the Throne?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as the throne speech indicates, the government remains committed to all of the issues that are in the December throne speech, which was passed by this House, as well as any other statements that were in the very, very short throne speech that was introduced earlier this week.
I can assure the member for The Maples that the minister will indeed be putting forth an extensive program of matters to do with justice, safety in our communities and all of those issues that are of concern to him.
Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
* (1050)