ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Emergency Physicians' Strike

Mediator's Report--Tabling Request

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Premier (Mr. Filmon).

Unfortunately, last night, Madam Speaker, the emergency doctors at community hospitals and pathologists were unable to reach an agreement with the provincial government through their elected representatives. As we understand it, the parties were meeting with a mediator, Mr. Jack Chapman, who was appointed by the provincial government, and Mr. Chapman has reported to the Minister of Health at one o'clock today.

I would like to ask the Premier, will he agree to table in the House the mediator's report in that it is a very, very important public issue, the whole provision of emergency services in our community hospitals? Will the report be tabled in the Chamber and before the public so that we can read the recommendations of the mediator?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I was very disappointed, as I am sure all honourable members would have been yesterday, when what appeared to be a hopeful situation turned out not to be such by the end of the day. However, I have received just moments ago the report of the mediator, Mr. Jack Chapman, QC. I would like to thank Mr. Chapman for his work with the parties. I personally delivered copies of Mr. Chapman's report to the two parties.

At this point, I have not been able to go through in detail the mediation report, but I have asked the parties to make a response to the mediation report by the end of the business day on Friday.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I am quite surprised that the Minister of Health would allow the parties to deal with this matter in a private way until Friday. I think it is important for the public which is intimately involved in this dispute--it is not a dispute just between the doctors and the government. The public is affected by the withdrawal of services at our community hospitals. Surely the public has a right to this mediator's report, and surely the public has a right to move the parties along and not allow this report or the material within this report to be dealt with on Friday, just prior to another long weekend.

I would like to ask the minister to table the report today and to shorten up the time line to get this thing resolved, Madam Speaker. Friday, I believe, is just leaving it a little too long. The report has been conducted. Let us make it public and let us get this thing moved along and get it resolved.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, if my wish comes true, the parties will resume discussions almost immediately. That would be my wish, and I do not want, by following the advice of the honourable Leader of the Opposition, to in any way precipitate problems between the parties that we really do not need. We have enough problems already without the honourable member's idea of negotiating this thing in the public media. That seems to be his way. Maybe that is the way he has always done things, but it does not always get the proper result or the best result for the public.

The result that I would like would be the safest and the best emergency services possible. The honourable member's only concern is how we can make some points for him and his colleagues in Question Period. Madam Speaker, we have more serious work to do than that.

Mr. Doer: Again, it has been over a month that the strike and withdrawal of services in our community emergency wards has taken place, Madam Speaker.

We wrote to the Minister of Health long before the session started and before the strike and withdrawal of services took place. We did not talk about the fact that one party is allegedly at zero percent and the government is at minus two and the lack of flexibility that we see with the government in terms of what they did for casino workers.

All we are asking, Madam Speaker, is that government release the mediator's report and move the deadline up to get this thing resolved.

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier, does the Premier not feel that the mediator's report should be released to the public insofar as public service has been withdrawn and it is a public service, that health care services will be provided in the emergency wards?

Surely the public has a right to the mediator's report. It is not a dispute between two private parties. It is also a dispute that affects the public of Manitoba, and we should have that report. It should be released in this Legislature to the public today, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) has said, it is certainly our deep regret that the emergency room doctors, having been given an increase of 26 percent just two years ago, now demanding 15 percent increase, have withdrawn their services from the public of Manitoba.

That is certainly something that we are not happy about, Madam Speaker, but what we are committed to do is to do everything that we can to try and resolve the dispute and let it come together with our encouragement and our active participation.

That is not necessarily served by the suggestions of the Leader of the Opposition. All he wants to do is have another political football for him for Question Period. We want to solve the problem, Madam Speaker.

* (1345)

Emergency Physicians' Strike

Government Action

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, we wrote to the government asking them to step in before the strike. We asked for binding arbitration from the government during the strike and there was no response. The minister gave the mediator two weeks to make a report, two weeks in the midst of an emergency doctors' strike, and now the minister has stood up and said, now we are going to give the parties until Friday to come back. It is totally inappropriate for this government to continue its hands-off attitude.

My question for the minister is, why will the minister not ask the parties to return their responses tomorrow and not Friday, and will the minister not take some assertive action, rather than waiting till Friday, before the long weekend?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member suggests some kind of assertive action and suggests perhaps binding arbitration, in fact urges binding arbitration. It is my understanding that neither of the parties want that. The MHO and the MMA, as I understand their position, do not want binding arbitration, so that is hardly a very good place to start.

Madam Speaker, the other point that I make is that some time before Friday would be just fine. As a matter of fact, I said to the people who were asking me just a few minutes ago, I said that two o'clock this afternoon would be fine or 1:45 p.m., but we have already passed that time line.

There was talk of deadlines, and I think the honourable member wants to maybe try to bully his way through this process. I suggest that if we followed his advice, the next comment he would be making would be that we are bullying our way through the process, which we do not want to do.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my question for the Minister of Health is, can the Minister of Health explain to this House whether or not the report indicates that the doctors, whom the Premier (Mr. Filmon) called the aggressors and who again reiterated that today in Question Period, in this strike, whether or not the doctors were flexible and had considered and had moved down towards the area of zero percent or in that range in terms of the settlement, whether or not that is the case, and it is the government through its negotiators at MHO that has been inflexible with regard to this? Can the minister confirm that?

Mr. McCrae: Well, let us remember that even though the honourable member has referred to the action taken by the doctors as an artificial strike, I certainly do not accept that. Every day I am reminded that we are in a very real strike situation, Madam Speaker.

The honourable member is asking questions about the process and about the positions being put on the table. The answer is basically the same as the one given to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), that the matter is for the parties to work out and not for he and I to negotiate here in the Legislature and in the media.

I think that asking the parties to respond to what the mediator has had to say is a reasonable thing to do, and I hope that the parties will come together and put an end to this business of withdrawing emergency services from people in this province.

Mediator's Report--Tabling Request

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, can the minister who seems to forget that there are 700,000 Winnipeggers involved in this dispute as well, who forgets the public involved in this dispute, indicate whether or not the government who are the 100 percent funders and are the other side in this dispute--can the minister advise this House whether or not the issues of recruitment and retention of emergency physicians, as well as some form of arbitration for some issues, are contained in this report? Will he table it finally?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I received the report only about 20 minutes ago, 30 minutes ago from Mr. Chapman, and I have not reviewed the whole report to this point. I will be doing so and I certainly hope the parties to this dispute, the MHO and the MMA will review the mediator's report, get back together, come to an agreement so that we can put an end to what is going on here.

* (1350)

Dauphin Regional Health Centre

Layoffs

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, during the provincial election the Filmon team denied there were cuts on the horizon for the Dauphin Regional Health Centre and New Democrats were accused of fearmongering. Today, however, 32 nurses, 15 support staff and five management people are being told their jobs are being restructured, resulting in a reduction of at least 10 positions.

Will this minister admit that these health care workers are being laid off as a result of a $1.4-million reduction in the budget to the Dauphin Regional Health Centre which is money it receives from this minister?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): I believe the honourable member is speaking about action being taken by the Dauphin Regional Health Centre in response to the report of the committee studying the staffing guidelines in the province of Manitoba at the various facilities. That report was known to the people at Dauphin Regional Health complex late last year, long before any electoral matters taking place in this province. The honourable member ought not to mislead anybody about that.

Mr. Struthers: Is this minister telling this House that these layoffs and reductions in service would have occurred even if funding levels from this minister had remained even with last year's?

Mr. McCrae: The staffing guidelines, Madam Speaker, assist everybody in the sense that they allow us to, in a rational way, set funding levels in accordance with the needs at the hospital, the needs at the hospital as set as a result of recommendations made in their dietary areas, the nursing area, the administration area and the plant and equipment area of the hospital.

All of those main areas were the subject of subcommittee work. There was very, very significant input from staff of hospitals in this province, not to mention the MALPN and the MARN and the College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Mr. Struthers: Instead of passing the buck, Madam Speaker, can this minister assure this House that his cuts were only the result of the provincial election and that residents of Dauphin and the Parkland can rest assured without this minister cutting services further?

An Honourable Member: Fearmongering.

Mr. Struthers: Those are the facts.

Mr. McCrae: Quite often, Madam Speaker, we are accused of not answering questions and yet honourable members do not listen to the answers when they are given. I gave the honourable member an answer to the question about the staffing guidelines and the way the business is done between the government and the hospital involved. I do not know what more I can say to the honourable member but that which I have said, and I have repeated very many times that staffing guidelines can be set but only with the patient being the No. 1 priority and patient care being the No. 1 priority and that remains the policy.

Emergency Physicians' Strike

Back-To-Work Legislation

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health regarding the emergency services strike. It has become fairly apparent that this government's priority, as the minister just finished stating, that the patient is in fact our first priority, is not in fact the case.

We have seen yet another mechanism that this government's attempt to resolve the strike appears to have failed, and we are going to ask once again, will this minister now entertain the possibility of supporting back-to-work legislation?

In fact, we have had Legislative Counsel over the last four days develop the necessary legislation. Will this minister be prepared to support back-to-work legislation?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): At every opportunity the honourable member has made sure we all understand his position, that to heck with any negotiations, just legislate them back to work.

We know the honourable member's position, and we just wish that he would, instead of advocating that sort of approach, discuss issues with his counterparts in Ottawa who have so much to do with the pressure that all facilities and all health functions right across this country have to deal with because of the speed with which the federal government is taking out hundreds of millions of dollars from hospital budgets throughout this country.

* (1355)

Mr. Lamoureux: I would put the question in this way to the Minister of Health: Is he prepared to live up to what he just said a few minutes ago, the best emergency services possible? This is what the Minister of Health has said.

Is this minister prepared to live up to those words along with the words that he has said in terms of putting patient care first and indicate to this House that he is prepared to look at legislation to go back to work?

Mr. McCrae: If there is a time to look at such things, it is not now because we have just received the report from the mediator, and I have asked the parties for their response to the mediator's report.

It seems to me the appropriate thing to do would be to await their response.

Mr. Lamoureux: Then will this Minister of Health indicate to the House that in fact the emergency services are going to continue in that 24-hour, seven days a week after the strike is over and settled?

Mr. McCrae: The honourable member asked me this question yesterday. I told the honourable member that given the capacity that we have in the city of Winnipeg for emergency services, our commitment is to provide the highest quality and best emergency services to Winnipeggers and Manitobans that we can possibly provide.

Social Assistance

Amalgamation

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, the provincial government is currently negotiating with the City of Winnipeg to take over the social services caseload, over 16,000 cases.

The City of Winnipeg has many advantages and in many ways is superior to the provincial system. They have better-trained staff, they have a more sophisticated computer system, they have more and better job creation and job training programs and a more efficient ratio of staff to recipients.

I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services if she can assure the House that when they take over the city's Social Services Department, they will keep all of the good features of this system, including the better-trained staff.

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I am not so sure I can thank my honourable friend for that question, calling into question the staff of the Department of Family Services that were the same staff that were there under an NDP administration and indicating his lack of confidence in any ability for our staff to deliver anything.

I have to say, Madam Speaker, that I believe there are many good people working with our Social Allowances Program at the provincial level. I believe there are many good people working in the city system who have the needs and the interests of those who are most vulnerable in our community at heart, and we will endeavour through any new programming to ensure that we utilize the very best people who are available to deliver the service.

Mr. Martindale: Will the Minister of Family Services assure Manitobans, particularly children on city social assistance, that she will listen to the City Council of Winnipeg which passed a resolution on September 27 asking this minister specifically to maintain current child clothing, food and personal needs allowances and adjust them annually according to the consumer price index, or does harmonizing the rates mean lowering the rate for food for 7,000 children on city social assistance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, I do thank my honourable friend for that question because it does allow me to put on the record again that our first priority is for children and for families and those who are in need.

Madam Speaker, we will look at a standardized rate that treats all children in the city of Winnipeg in a fair manner, taking into account, of course, something that we all know, that the dollars that are allocated for food in every instance do not get into the mouths of those children who need that nourishment and that nutrition.

The programming that we are going to have to put in place, Madam Speaker, is going to have to address that issue and try to put into place the tools that will provide families with the ability to understand that nutrition and support for their children has to be of paramount priority.

Mr. Martindale: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister if her idea of fairness is to tell the parents of children on city social assistance that love is more important than food, understanding that all of us need to be loved, but is reducing the social allowance and telling these people that they can eat love, is that the way she is going to treat the 7,000 children on city social assistance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity over this past weekend to have a fairly long and thorough discussion with a mother, a single parent, in our Winnipeg community who is struggling to make ends meet. She was with her young daughter and said to me, I want you to look at my daughter and tell me whether you think my child is living in poverty. I had to agree with her that she was putting her child first in all of the issues. Even though there was not much income, she ensured that her child came first and that she was well nourished and well loved and well supported.

Madam Speaker, I think that is the key issue we are talking about. If, in fact, we can provide the tools for all parents to accept the responsibility of putting their children first as we are trying to do as a government, that is what we will be doing in any new programming and any new direction of resources into the future.

* (1400)

Social Assistance

Housing Standards

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, the reality for low-income families is that the highest cost they face is housing and rent. Many families on social allowance who live in private rental accommodations are paying more than 50 percent of their social allowance for rent, and often this is going to landlords who are not complying with the government's own safety and health standards for housing.

I want to ask the Minister of Family Services if she will confirm that more than $50 million of social allowance money is going to rent, and how much of that money is going to housing that is not meeting government standards and is not up to health inspection standards under City of Winnipeg regulations and regulations for the Manitoba government.

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question, because I do want to indicate to all Manitobans that indeed the amount that we pay for rent under our Social Allowances Program is an amount that is adequate to cover the rent requirements in subsidized housing that is available throughout the province.

It also covers much other rental accommodation. In fact, as money is provided to social allowance recipients, they can make choices. They can make choices to live in rental accommodation that is higher than what is allocated, but I know that the social allowance dollars that we provide for rent accommodation is covered in subsidized housing. There are many other rental accommodation spaces available within that guideline.

Ms. Cerilli: I would think and ask the government, will she not jump at the chance to ensure that all of the social allowance money being paid for rent in this province is going to housing that meets the standard of health for this province, and will she not work with the municipalities, the minister for Residential Tenancies, to ensure that health inspection orders automatically go to Residential Tenancies so we will ensure that Manitobans do not have to choose between food and adequate housing but they are going to be guaranteed that the rent money is going to adequate housing?

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): What the member for Radisson is alluding to in effect is the fact that the housing that was put forth for occupancy is based on rent geared to income which is 27 percent of what the income is coming about.

If the member has incidents of where someone is in public housing where they are paying more than their 27 percent, then we would be willing to look at it.

As for the safety and the health of the persons that are living in public housing, that has always been the first and primary concern of anybody that is going into any of our public housing. It is done on an inspection basis before the person goes into the housing, and it is an ongoing basis.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Radisson, with a final supplementary question.

Ms. Cerilli: I just want to have you call the government ministers to order, and if they are going to refer questions to their minister--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Radisson was recognized for a final supplementary question. Will the honourable member please put her question now?

Ms. Cerilli: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

An Honourable Member: She rose on a point of order.

Ms. Cerilli: I rose on a point of order.

Madam Speaker: I did not hear the honourable member say that she was up on a point of order.

Ms. Cerilli: I apologize if I did not say "a point of order" loud enough, but I would like to make a point of order.

Point of Order

Ms. Cerilli: My point of order is when I ask a question to a certain minister and a different minister answers the question that is not even relevant to the tasks in that department--it was more likely that it could have been answered by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ernst) who is responsible for the Residential Tenancies Branch, but this minister has no responsibility in this question at all--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Radisson does not have a point of order, and I remind the honourable member for Radisson, according to Beauchesne 420, "the Chair will allow a question to be put to a certain Minister; but it cannot insist that that Minister rather than another should answer it."

* * *

Ms. Cerilli: I will ask the Minister of Family Services if she will not ensure that money from social allowance to pay rent is going to go for children and families ahead of slum landlords who are not providing adequate housing. Will she ensure that?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. A question has been put. I am sure all honourable members would like to hear the response.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I want to indicate clearly the policy of this government, our government, is indeed to ensure that families come first and children come first, and every effort around any programming that will be available into the future for Manitobans most in need will have that as the priority.

Provincial Auditor's Report

Health Care System--Bed Counts

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance responsible for convening the Public Accounts committee.

In the Auditor's report tabled yesterday in the House, the Auditor noted the need for a reporting time frame for the Quality Health for Manitobans action plan that was tabled several years ago in this House. Yet, in the most recent report of the Health department, critical information that would allow Manitobans to judge whether there has been progress or not on that action plan, namely bed counts and crib counts, has been for the first time ever omitted from the annual report.

Will the minister please answer the question of whether this critical information is being suppressed so that bed closures will not be able to be noted by Manitobans when they read the annual report?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I understand what actuates the honourable member's question today and basically agree with what he is saying, agree also with the Provincial Auditor in recommending that actions flowing from the action plan of the spring of 1992, that we make more full public disclosure. I agree with that. Indeed, in many ways we have been doing that, but the way suggested by the Provincial Auditor is quite satisfactory to us.

We will be bringing something to the House by way of a status update of all of the changes that have happened thus far and all of the changes we expect to see in the future. There is a good reason for doing that. I assume the Auditor agrees with this, and that is that the more public input and the more public understanding and education about all the health issues there is out there, the more likely we are going to succeed in all of our reform initiatives.

ARCOR

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, my question again is for the minister responsible for Public Accounts committee.

Can the minister tell the House whether he is in agreement with the statement of the Provincial Auditor found on pages 73 and 74 of the report, which notes that a departmental review of the business plan of ARCOR would have challenged their optimistic forecasts with a view to assuring that they were attainable, that based on their conversation with departmental officials, the department representative's role could have been strengthened, perhaps preventing the loss of many millions of dollars? Does the minister responsible for Public Accounts agree with the Auditor's comment, Madam Speaker?

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, the Auditor's report--I believe even prior to the tabling of this report, action had been taken by the government to act in the public interest. A serious attempt was made to create an industry, to develop an industry, which would have been very positive for the province.

The actions that have been taken by the province following the management decisions that were taken and the recommendation from the board have, we believe, been a responsible move to make.

* (1410)

Standing Committee on Public Accounts

Meeting Request

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, will the Minister of Finance, in light of the comment of the Auditor on page 7 of the report indicating the need for meeting more frequently on a regular basis of Public Accounts during the year, will the minister today commit to the House that he will convene at least one more meeting of the Public Accounts committee before the rise of the House on November 3 to consider Volumes 1 to 3 of the 1993-94 Public Accounts?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, the member for Crescentwood refers to certain recommendations on page 7. I would remind him that the recommendations from the Provincial Auditor in terms of how the Public Accounts function go much further than purely the issue of how often the committee meets. She talks about the need for clarifying agendas in advance. In previous reports, she has talked about the need for putting questions in writing. So, as he and I discussed at Public Accounts and subsequent to the meeting, I think there are many things that could be done to enhance how Public Accounts functions.

If there is a genuine and sincere effort on the part of the opposition to want information, to want quality information provided to them, we are certainly more than prepared to undertake to provide that kind of information, but it requires significant changes to how Public Accounts functions, how Public Accounts meets and deals with issues beyond purely how often they meet, and as we discussed in terms of the next meeting of Public Accounts, that is an issue to be resolved between the respective House leaders.

Mineral Exploration Incentive Program

Audited Statements

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Energy and Mines.

In yesterday's report released by the Auditor, several very serious concerns were raised about the lack of accountability and procedures for the Mineral Exploration Incentive Program.

Given that over $7 million has been approved through this program, why did this government not enforce its own regulations requiring audited statements?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for the question.

One of the things that we have been doing in this particular department since I assumed responsibility on the 9th of May was to review that particular program.

I am pleased to indicate that we have ended the existing rules for that program and have put in place another exploration incentive program which I think takes into account the concerns that were raised by the Auditor as well as several other concerns that we had in terms of the operation of that program.

Ms. Mihychuk: Can the minister inform the House why the government did not enforce its own regulations and why they chose to ignore Part 8(2) of those regulations? On what basis did it choose to ignore those regulations?

Mr. Praznik: I can assure the member that the department's staff who administered that program were quite aware of the program and its operation to ensure that the public did get value for money expended. There were some problems with the way that program was originally established which we have endeavoured to correct.

I say, Madam Speaker, we recognize the concerns that were raised by the Auditor, and we have taken the steps to make the appropriate corrections. That will not be the case under our new program.

Ms. Mihychuk: My final question to the minister is, why did he not take the lead? Why did the minister not take measures to ensure that the government was not making payments for these incentives without determining the reasonableness of the claim and increase those inspections on the work programs while tightening auditing?

Mr. Praznik: The member asked why this minister did not take those steps. This minister was appointed on the 9th of May, and how quickly members forget.

I can assure the member that my predecessors in office and the staff of the department who administer that particular program have taken, I believe, reasonable steps to ensure that the expenditures under that program were properly incurred and that in fact the taxpayers of Manitoba have not been put at risk or have unwisely spent dollars in the improvement or . . . exploration program.

So I think the member's point simply is that the rules and processes should be in place. We have fixed that. In fact, I do not think there was a problem in fact or practice with how that program was carried out, but the rules have been corrected in the new program.

Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation

Marketing Restrictions

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Madam Speaker, my questions are directed to the First Minister.

Under current regulations of the Freshwater fisheries, fishermen from north of the 53rd are not permitted to sell fish south of the 53rd.

I would like to ask the Premier whether he or his staff have ever discussed this matter with the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation with a view to changing this policy which is, in my estimation, grossly unfair and discriminatory.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I will take that question as notice.

Mr. Lathlin: I would like to ask the Premier, again for my second question, since a handful of fishermen in the Gimli area are allowed to sell fish both south and in Winnipeg and also north of the 53rd parallel, has the minister asked for the same rules to apply on both sides of the 53rd parallel?

Mr. Filmon: I will take that question as notice, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Lathlin: I would like to ask the First Minister again, will the Premier meet with officials from the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation to see why fishermen at Pukatawagan cannot get permits to sell pickerel and other fish from their area elsewhere in Manitoba and elsewhere as the Island Lake area fishermen have been granted?

Mr. Filmon: I will take that question as notice, Madam Speaker.

Infrastructure Works Agreement

Selection Criteria

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance responsible for the infrastructure program.

An analysis of the infrastructure program shows that province-wide Conservative constituencies receive 52 percent more per capita than NDP constituencies and in rural Manitoba 46 percent more. In the city of Winnipeg, Conservative constituencies receive 35 percent more per capita, but when we remove those projects that affect more than one riding, we find that per capita expenditures are 49 percent higher in Conservative constituencies in Winnipeg.

How can the minister possibly justify these excessive expenditures in Conservative constituencies?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, without accepting any of the analysis done by the member for Brandon East, I want to remind him of the approval process when he brings to light those kinds of accusations.

The approval process for $60 million out of that $204 million is on the recommendations of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities and the Manitoba Association of Urban Municipalities. The recommendation for another $60 million, that comes from the City of Winnipeg, is based on the elected council and mayor of the City of Winnipeg, and the remaining $84 million is based on the recommendations from a Liberal federal government and a Conservative provincial government, and that is the basis of the distribution. So I really am offended by his suggestions and accusations about where the money ends up.

The process is all-inclusive. It includes people of all political stripes, of people from various elected levels of governments, and it has been a process, Madam Speaker, that is being modelled right across Canada.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Brandon East for one very short question.

* (1420)

Mr. Leonard Evans: Is the minister telling us that this government has no role whatsoever to play in decision making? Madam Speaker, how can the government justify spending millions and millions of dollars on so many noninfrastructure projects, such as cultural and recreational facilities, instead of the very basic infrastructure that is badly needed in this province such as water, sewer, roads and bridges? There are millions of dollars spent on noninfrastructure projects and many worthwhile infrastructure projects have been denied throughout this province.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Finance, for a very short response.

Mr. Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, the member did not listen to my first answer. I did not suggest for a minute that we do not have a role to play, but I also pointed out very clearly to him that it is also a role that includes the federal government and municipal governments from across this province.

In terms of his suggestion about priorities for traditional municipal sewer and water and so on, 120 million out of that 204 million was allocated very specifically for those needs. But is he calling into question that the infrastructure requirements, whether it is the arts or the cultural or those kinds of communities, a rural gasification and so on, do not add to the economic development of our province? I would suggest to him that they do, and they do in a very significant way.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The time for Oral Questions has expired.

Committee Changes

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Economic Development be amended as follows: Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) for Wellington (Ms. Barrett); Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans) for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) for Thursday, October 5, 1995, for 10 a.m.

Motion agreed to.