When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 11.2. Labour Programs (j) Employment Standards, on page 103 of the Estimates book.
Item 11.2.(j) Employment Standards (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Chairperson, I take it that the minister is going to test my memory here with the question we left this morning. I will have to go on with another question, because I take it that he has forgotten and it has slipped my memory at this time, as well. So I will have to ask him at another opportunity.
Employment Standards, of course, has changed its process by way of The Payment of Wages Act which changed sometime back. Does the department keep statistics or dollar values on wages that are recovered, and do you have that information here today?
* (1440)
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): Mr. Chairman, the historical range is from $1.2 million to $1.5 million.
Mr. Reid: That is recovered on behalf of individual employees or workers in the province of Manitoba and remitted to those employees, or have they had to go to court themselves to collect those funds?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes and no.
Mr. Reid: Can you tell me, has the Employment Standards branch proceeded to court with any of the cases? If so, can you give me an indication on how many?
Mr. Gilleshammer: The historical level for the department going to court to recover wages is about half a dozen times per year.
Mr. Reid: Any vacancies or secondments through this branch?
Mr. Gilleshammer: There are no vacancies currently in the branch.
Mr. Reid: And no secondments, I take it then.
Mr. Gilleshammer: No, there are a number of secondments.
Mr. Reid: Can you tell me how many and where?
Mr. Gilleshammer: There is one that has been seconded to Better Systems and one to Workplace.
Mr. Reid: I take it, then, that these positions will be backfilled and before summertime.
Mr. Gilleshammer: They have currently been backfilled.
Mr. Reid: I want to ask questions tying in with what we had talked about earlier dealing with farm safety. Looking at the information with respect to farm safety, we have had some significant discussion on it here. There has been and there probably will continue to be a growing hog production industry in the province here, which, of course, ties in with the expansions of Maple Leaf and Schneider and other processing plants. Can you tell me, where does the government draw the line with respect to employment standards when it comes to industries such as hog production? When does it move from a farming operation into a commercial operation with respect to employment standards?
Mr. Gilleshammer: If it is on the farm, we do not have a role to play there other than in the area of enforcing wages.
Mr. Reid: So wages in the sense of the minimum wage of the province, and you have no role in its payment of wages. So the Department of Labour has no role to play with respect to employment standards or any of the other issues that the Department of Labour would normally deal with for working people in areas such as we are seeing expansion up here, where we are moving more into commercial operations versus farming operations, where you perhaps could have a significant number of people employed in the growth and production of hogs in the province.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes, for the production on the farm, in that phase of farming we are not involved, but if you are talking about the processing industry, then we are involved.
Mr. Reid: Because we are moving into a new era in this province with respect to hog production, and it seems to be a significant expansion area, is there a reason why Employment Standards would not be involved or be able to regulate conditions under The Employment Standards Act for commercial operations that would be beyond what one would consider to be the normal family farm operation?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, historically, government has not been involved with farms in terms of The Employment Standards Act, and, for sure, the member is right. The economy is booming, and there is going to be tremendous expansion not only in the hog industry but probably in the cattle industry. There is tremendous diversification going on in vegetable growing, special crops. Crops like canola have been tremendously significant in the income that producers are making from that, but the law is such that if it is a farm operation, they are not subject to The Employment Standards Act, but we do get involved on the payment of wages side.
Mr. Reid: So then I take it there is no policy consideration being undertaken by the branch or by the minister through his policy advisory committee or group to have some reconsideration of this issue?
Mr. Gilleshammer: The issue has not been brought forward, but that is not to say that from time to time discussions on matters like this do take place within the department.
Mr. Reid: So is this matter being undertaken under consideration by the department at this time?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I have indicated that no such policy has been brought forward, but we do have people who do some thinking within the department on a regular basis, that look at what is happening across the country, what is happening in policy shops across the country. All I am saying is that those discussions may take place from time to time, but we are not advancing that at this particular time.
Mr. Reid: I am just worried here that somewhere down the road there is going to be a need here for a policy or some type of direction to the branch to give an indication of when one terms a farming operation and when it becomes a commercial operation. I do not know if you are in the process as minister responsible in developing that particular policy.
If these operations continue to grow, they could be significantly large employers within the province and yet still not fall under any of the jurisdictions of legislation with respect to Employment Standards or Workers Compensation or any other of the legislation that was designed to protect people who are employed by firms. That is why I am trying to get an indication here of whether or not the minister himself is considering where you draw the line between a farming operation and a commercial operation here. I am not sure if you would be willing to give an indication in that regard.
Mr. Gilleshammer: I live in a part of the province where farming is one of our major industries, and all of the producers that I know, all of the active farmers I know consider themselves to be a commercial operation. That is the way they derive their income. They produce a product, the product is marketed, and the whole idea is to make a profit, make a living out of it. As such, they are commercial operations.
I would be interested in what my honourable friend--I think he is making the distinction between a large farm and a small farm or a small and medium and large farm and just in his mind where he would draw the line that government needs to intervene.
* (1450)
Mr. Reid: I am just trying to get an understanding here of what the distinction would be in the minister's mind or on advice from the department, Employment Standards. Yes, I agree that farming operations are a business and that they need to derive a profit from their business operations to make them viable and allow them to continue into the future. I do not have a problem with that.
I am just trying to get an understanding here because, if you have an operation, for example, a family farm operation that hires in seasonal people to help with the planting or the harvest or perhaps some odd days where there is maintenance done on equipment, perhaps that should not be under The Employment Standards Act, but if you have larger commercial operations in the sense of if you have maybe 20, 30, 40, 100 people, where do we draw the line with respect to employment in this operations? That is what I am trying to get an understanding of. How does the department view what becomes more than just the farming operation, when it becomes a commercial entity itself?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I am not sure that you can draw a line between what you call a family farm and a commercial entity. I think they are all commercial entities, and I am not aware of family farms or corporate farms or what have you, no matter how they are structured, that have a hundred employees. That type of state farm was more of an experiment in eastern Europe, I think, than in Canada.
Particularly in Manitoba, most farms are relatively small in terms of numbers of people employed. They may have grown larger in terms of the number of square acres that are within the mandate of that particular farm, but the majority of the farms in Manitoba are not major employers in terms of looking after either animals or crop, with the possible exception I suppose of the vegetable growers who bring in migrant workers particularly during harvest time. Even with these very large farms, with the technology that they have these days and the size of their equipment, there is a tremendous amount of land base that can be farmed by very few people. The cultivators that are out there now, the air seeders, the combines, do a tremendous amount of work in a very short period of time. Those who do not have access to that equipment on their own tend to have custom work done. Custom combiners, which migrate up from the south, come into Manitoba every year as the crops are taken off down south.
Perhaps the Hutterite Brethren might be the largest farms in Manitoba. I know that their colonies tend to be in the range of 60 or 70 people, including the men, women, and children, but I am not sure that the type of state farm that the member is talking about exists in Manitoba.
Mr. Reid: It was not in the sense of the political state farm that the minister is talking about. It was more in the sense of people who have an ownership of a particular operation and would employ people specifically and solely for the purpose of producing one product. I will just leave that with the minister. I have asked enough in that regard dealing with that.
I do not know--because the minister has his staff here at this time and it is an issue that is fairly current--if the committee will allow a bit of latitude here so that the minister can utilize his staff perhaps for some advice on these matters. I would like to ask about Beatrice negotiations, Beatrice Products. There is currently a strike in here, and I am quite worried about what is happening because there is some thought that the company, much the same way we saw with the Boeing situation, was in the process of moving equipment out of the plant site.
Now, I do not know if the department is involved in that, if Employment Standards is the section where we would deal with that, to give the minister the opportunity of advice from staff. I am not sure if he has even involved others to assist with that particular process to make sure, first, that we do not lose the industry from the province and that we do not lose the jobs that are associated with it, and then we can resolve this matter in a timely fashion. Can the minister provide some update with respect to that matter?
Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. I think that with respect to this, if this is not to deal with Employment Standards, then we would need unanimous consent of the committee to deviate from it. Is there unanimous consent? [agreed]
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, there certainly is a work stoppage that has just commenced at Beatrice and, of course, this is a part of bargaining that can take place. There are risks involved as the member has referenced. We have had a conciliation officer involved in the process. It is very early on in the actual work stoppage, but our role so far has been to provide a conciliation officer to assist with the process.
Mr. Reid: Can the minister confirm, because I do not want to see a repeat of what we saw in the Boeing situation, which was not the best for our province or for the industry itself, whether or not the company is indeed moving its particular production equipment from their site here?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I was not the minister at the time of the Boeing work stoppage, but I know that we certainly do not want a repeat of the riot or near-riot conditions that took place there. I know that we have done some work with the Winnipeg Police Service to be sure that there are good communications and people are aware what is happening without disrespecting anybody's rights, so I am pleased so far that that type of activity has not taken place. As I have indicated, we do have a conciliation officer who has been assigned to the task of working with the parties to try and resolve the matter. As far as the removal of equipment or other parts of the operation, we are not aware that any of that has taken place or is likely to take place.
I did come in early this morning and have a chance to go through the newspapers. I did see, reported in the paper, comments by union and management about the work stoppage, and probably my honourable friend has seen that, too. There was a reference there, I think, to continue service by using product from other jurisdictions.
* (1500)
Mr. Reid: I believe that was in the article and my concern here is that--and this is what I am trying to avoid--if we can find out and if the conciliator can play a role and not have a heightening of the tensions between the parties until there is a chance to work out some contractual arrangements. If there is a way to discourage any removal of the equipment or indication of removal of the equipment, so that there would not be a heightening of the tensions between the parties, then I think it would be in the best interests of finding a resolution to the contractual dispute. So I would encourage the minister, through the various branches of his department, to find out if that can be, in effect, if the company and the union would agree to further discussions with respect to the contract and that the company would not take any steps to even attempt or to indicate a removal of any of the equipment until the parties can sit down and have some more discussions. I will leave that with the minister for his further consideration.
Mr. Gilleshammer: We very much want to see the parties resolve the issue amongst themselves, and we will do whatever we can do to provide positive resources to the situation and hope that they can resolve this sooner rather than later.
Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): I would like to ask a couple of questions on call centres and where they fall in terms of jurisdiction in terms of employment standards, workplace safety issues. This is directly related to a case that I am dealing with through a constituent who has phoned and has had a very negative experience in a call centre. My first question is: where do they fall jurisdictionally? Does the Department of Labour have a role in call centres?
Mr. Gilleshammer: The majority of them would fall under the responsibility of the province.
Ms. Mihychuk: I am going to cite the call centre, because there was some confusion about the jurisdiction. This was AT&T. The situation was that an individual who had been injured many years ago in an accident had been unemployed, collecting social assistance for well over 10, 15 years. He had been employed at a workplace, at a call centre; was actually enjoying the opportunity to be in the workforce, and then was--it was quite obvious to everybody who meets the individual that the person had a physical handicap--placed in an environment where there was significant, I am going to use, horseplay, tomfoolery. Toys and other projectiles were being thrown around in the call centre, resulting in the individual being struck. This situation ultimately led to the person no longer working at the call centre, unfortunately, and is, in fact, no longer employed. My question is in the circumstance, would the Department of Labour have jurisdiction over this call centre?
Mr. Gilleshammer: The federal Department of Labour is claiming jurisdiction and is currently working with that individual.
Ms. Mihychuk: It is my understanding that actually the federal Department of Labour has claimed that it is outside its jurisdiction because it is an international call centre.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, the advice that I am getting from my staff is that the federal government is claiming jurisdiction for this operation and is currently working with the individual the member referenced.
Ms. Mihychuk: Is the minister, through his department, aware that the federal representative was not allowed access to the worksite?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told that we are aware of that, and that the case is proceeding to court.
Ms. Mihychuk: The individual, who was unfortunately in this situation, is not in the financial means to take this--and I know that he has appealed to virtually every government representative he can find--to appeal. Can the minister provide more detail as to who is going forward with this obvious problem, a breach in jurisdiction? Is it the province that is going ahead with the court case?
Mr. Gilleshammer: It is the federal government Department of Labour that is proceeding with the court case.
Mr. Reid: Is the criterion that the department uses to determine responsibility for the call centres based on whether or not those particular call centres make or place calls into other jurisdictions provincially or internationally? Is that the criterion that is used to determine responsibility and whether or not those companies fall under provincial or federal jurisdiction, or can you tell me of some other criterion that is utilized to make that determination?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes, the guiding principle is that the federal jurisdiction falls with certain industries or certain operations such as banks which is federal, telecommunications, airlines and railways, to name a few.
Mr. Reid: I am aware of that information. I am just trying to get an understanding here when we should not be coming to the Department of Labour Employment Standards with issues like this to get an idea of where the responsibility or the jurisdiction lies in dealing with matters. Are these call centres considered telecommunication industries, and, if so, then why does the province retain responsibility for most of them, as you said in your earlier comments?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told that we do not have complete clarity here on some of these cases, and usually the federal government Department of Labour co-operates with the provincial Department of Labour, and the working relationship is such that we work our way through these. In this particular case that you have referenced, the federal government is taking the lead on it.
Mr. Reid: Well, is it possible then, so you do not have to do this on a case-by-case basis, perhaps the deputy ministers of Labour across the country could sit down with the federal government, minister, deputy minister and work out some kind of an arrangement whereby you would not have interjurisdictional disputes or have to go through this on a case-by-case basis? Is it possible to do something like that to resolve the jurisdictional issue here?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I accept that as a very worthy suggestion and will pursue it.
Mr. Chairperson: Item 11.2. Labour Programs (j) Employment Standards (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,823,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $642,900--pass.
Item 11.2.(k) Worker Advisor Office (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $586,900.
Mr. Reid: Can you tell me the caseload of the worker advisors themselves, please?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told that the average workload would be in the neighbourhood of 60.
Mr. Reid: I take it from your comments earlier, you have two vacancies in this particular department. Can you tell me when we might expect that these vacancies would be filled?
Mr. Gilleshammer: We do have two vacancies. We have somebody starting on May 4 and the other one will be starting in the near future.
* (1510)
Mr. Reid: Are there any people that are seconded in or out of this particular area?
Mr. Gilleshammer: We have one person that has been seconded to BSI, and we have brought in somebody that is an employee of the Workers Compensation Board.
Mr. Reid: So an employee of the Workers Compensation Board has come into the Worker Advisor Office to work in that capacity?
Mr. Gilleshammer: That is correct.
Mr. Reid: I have had the opportunity to utilize the services of the Worker Advisor Office in an advisory capacity through--I think it is Mr. Hampson who, I believe, is the director there and appreciate the support that they have shown in helping to resolve some of the cases. Are there any cases that you aware of that were noteworthy in their successes by the department in this past year?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, we will certainly pass your kind words along to Mr. Hampson and his staff, and I know that throughout the department, there is always interest in reading Hansard to see what the current issues are. We will be sure that your good wishes and support are passed along to him and his staff.
There are a variety of cases that are part of the work activity of the worker advisors. I am not sure whether there is any in particular that we would want to go into any detail on, but I do believe they do good and valuable work.
Mr. Reid: So then I take it there has been no large cases that have been dealt with by the Worker Advisor Office that they would consider to be major successes in resolving the issues?
Mr. Gilleshammer: The work is certainly important, and each individual case is given the appropriate attention. As we are dealing with individual employees, I am sure that in every case there is a feeling that the issues being resolved are important to that individual, and we try to see that we can provide the best service possible.
Mr. Reid: You mentioned that the caseload was 60 per worker advisor. You have 10 professional/technical people that are in that area, and your Expected Results is over 1,000 cases. Would that not indicate that the caseload per individual would be about 100 cases?
Mr. Gilleshammer: To resolve the arithmetic problem, some cases take longer to deal with than others, and at any one time an employee would have about 60 cases that are deemed to be active.
Mr. Chairperson: Item 11.2. Labour Programs (k) Worker Advisor Office (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $586,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $165,800--pass.
Item 11.2.(m) Office of the Fire Commissioner, no dollars--pass? The item is accordingly passed.
Mr. Reid: I have questions on the Fire Commissioner.
Mr. Chairperson: Sorry. Is there unanimous consent to revert back to the Office of the Fire Commissioner? [agreed]
The honourable member for Transcona, proceed with the question.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, the Fire Commissioner's office has been converted into a special operating agency, I believe, for a little over a year now and perhaps maybe slightly longer than that.
There was a distressing situation that came to the attention of our office a short time back dealing with the fire at the Pine Falls Three Bears Day Care. A number of questions arise out of that particular fire, not the least of which is the concern for the two-year-old Katrina Rae Guimond, who lost her life in that particular fire.
That daycare was housed in the basement, I believe it was a church, and there has been some discussion about whether or not daycares or places of child care looking after children, whether or not it is appropriate to have those particular facilities housed in the basement of any building considering that should fires occur on the main floor or upper floors of that particular structure, then those who would attempt to exit from the building would have to go up through the smoke and flame of the fire. It draws to my mind questions with respect to how many daycares or child care facilities in our province are housed in basement accommodations.
I want to ask the minister the question, can he provide information with respect to how many would not be on the ground floor and would be below ground level?
Mr. Gilleshammer: We do not have that information lodged in this department. I would suggest that the most appropriate place to get that would be the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), whose Estimates are coming up following ours, a little way down the road, and through the Day Care Branch.
Mr. Reid: Well, I would have thought that the minister who was responsible for the Fire Commissioner's office as a special operating agency would have some idea, even some historical information with respect to the number of daycares in the province and the inspections that are done for them. It is my understanding that it is a licensing requirement to have fire inspections undertaken, and since you have to make some kind of a determination on when you are going to do that, because it is a workload for your department, you would have to have some idea of how many of those facilities would be in place in the province.
Perhaps the minister could indicate why he does not have that information available to himself and his staff.
Mr. Gilleshammer: I would point out to my honourable friend that what the Manitoba fire code states is that the owner-occupant is responsible for ensuring that provisions of the fire code are met and maintained. The owner-occupant takes the responsibility, and most of the facilities are inspected by the local fire department.
I would like to just say one other thing, that, unfortunately, the Fire Commissioner and the Deputy Fire Commissioner are not here today. They had a previous commitment, and I indicated they should go to that commitment. They were here for the last three days, and we felt that their commitment to the International Fire Service Accreditation Congress was significant enough that they should attend that.
I would like to introduce Ms. Brenda Hollier, executive project co-ordinator, and Mr. Ken Nero, comptroller, who are with us today.
Mr. Reid: Before the Fire Commissioner's office became a special operating agency, was it the responsibility of that office to undertake annual inspections of the daycares within the province?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told that nothing has changed.
* (1520)
Mr. Reid: Rural Manitoba has a significant number of volunteer firefighting forces in the province, and I believe that each of them would have a fire chief who would be responsible for that particular service, and each of those individuals themselves are no doubt gainfully employed in other areas and that being a fire chief is not a full-time occupation for them. Do these particular people that do the inspections, whether it be the fire chief or others, have the training that a Fire Commissioner officer would have to go into daycares in the province to do the inspections to ensure that they are meeting licencing requirements and other building code requirements?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I can tell you that we are just extremely proud of the Fire College and the work they are doing and the volunteer fire brigades across this province. I have had the opportunity to recently attend the graduation at the Fire College. [interjection] I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I am getting heckled by the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) there and I am losing my train of thought.
Mr. Chairperson: Order, please.
Mr. Gilleshammer: The training that these local fire departments are receiving over the last number of years, I think, has been tremendous. I know that the communities that they represent, the municipalities they represent, have a great deal of confidence in their local fire departments. They have become more than just the volunteer fire brigades. I think there is a tremendous interest in accreditation in receiving the best possible training that they can get in updating their equipment. The communities in my part of the world, in western Manitoba, not unlike the rest of the province, I think are doing a tremendous job in providing a service to their community that simply cannot be done by hiring professional firefighters in smaller areas.
I would mention that The Municipal Act compels local municipalities to provide fire protection, and inspections can be part of this protection service. The Office of the Fire Commissioner readily assists local authorities in doing inspections when asked, so we feel that there has been a lot of progress made in terms of equipping and training of local fire departments. Part of our mandate is to give them assistance in those areas if they require it and request it.
Mr. Reid: So then I take it that the people that do not know that they do not possess certain skills that would be required to ensure that structures or facilities meet the fire code, the building code, and the licensing under the daycare act, for example, if the people that are doing those jobs in the rural communities do not know that information, then they are not going to be aware of what it is that they have to inspect for. If they do not have the finances, or finances are tight in some of the smaller communities, they may not send people to your particular facility for that training. That is why I am trying to get an understanding here of whether or not all of the people that are doing the jobs, charged with the responsibility of doing the inspections, have the particular training necessary to allow them to make those determinations as would a Fire Commissioner officer. That is why I have asked the question here.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, the member can be critical of those local fire departments if he wants to be. I happen to think that they do have resources and talents far beyond what the member is giving them credit for. I would also point out that the Office of the Fire Commissioner conducts the initial inspection of all licenced daycares, and we also will assist local authorities in doing inspections when asked.
Mr. Reid: Then I take it, in the Pine Falls situation, that the person charged with the responsibility of doing the investigations there possessed the training necessary to make the determination that that particular daycare was operated in a safe manner and met all of the code provisions?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I am going to give my honourable friend a similar lesson and answer that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) did today. This issue is currently before the courts, and I do not think it is appropriate for he or I to comment on it.
Mr. Reid: Yes, I noticed your government has a history of trying to escape issues for which you have responsibility. It seems to be a standard practice protocol amongst your ministers. I guess that since there is not an inquest or an inquiry that is called, or perhaps there is, to this point, would you be able then to comment on whether or not that particular facility had an alarm system that was working?
Mr. Gilleshammer: My honourable friend makes some disparaging remarks, but really what he is doing is counselling us to break the law. I have indicated to him that, when an issue is before the courts, it is completely inappropriate for myself as minister, or he as an MLA, to get into a public discussion of this.
Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me, did the wall in question that did not have the fire break all the way to the ceiling, did that meet the fire code requirements and the building code requirements for housing of a daycare in this province?
Mr. Chairperson: I will allow the minister to answer that, but beyond that I think the questioning is out of order.
Mr. Gilleshammer: I would simply refer the member to my previous answer.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, I am trying to get an understanding here of how it is that you have jurisdiction when the Speaker--
Mr. Chairperson: I have not recognized the honourable member for Transcona.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, I am trying to figure out how it is that you have jurisdiction on this matter when the Speaker of the House does not rule in a similar fashion inside the Chamber and you are attempting to do that here today. Can you provide me with some guidance on that, please, Sir.
Mr. Chairperson: For the benefit of the committee, my advice is that this line of questioning is out of order. If there is a decision that has to be made, I can take this matter under advisement and report back to the committee at a later date.
Mr. Reid: I would ask you, if you want to have a few moments, I am willing to recess this committee to allow you to consult with the Clerk of the House and perhaps the Speaker to find out why conditions are one way for Chamber matters and why they do not exist for this particular committee and why there are discrepancies between the two. I am willing to have a short recess to allow that to take place.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, the member is completely out of order. There is a long-standing law in Canada that issues that are before the courts of this land are not debated in parliaments of this land. The member heard that a couple of times today; he is hearing it again. I am sure that if there was a lawyer in this caucus maybe he could consult with him or with the Legislative Counsel, but the rulings have been very consistent on this matter.
Mr. Chairperson: For the benefit of the committee, under 506. (1) of Beauchesne, "The sub judice convention has been applied consistently in criminal cases. Debates, June 29, 1942, p. 3745. Debates, January 29, 1948, p. 710, and Debates, February 27, 1968, p. 7020.
"(2) The precedents in criminal cases are consistent in preventing reference to court cases before a judgment is rendered; however, the convention ceases to apply after the judgment is given. Debates, February 10, 1928, p. 366. Nevertheless, the convention is applied again when an appeal is launched."
* (1530)
Mr. Reid: I understand what you are saying there, Mr. Chairperson, and even though I do not see that practised within the main Chamber itself during Question Period, I will have to accept your comments here today.
My comments are going to be, in a general way, dealing with daycares in the province. Not to ask questions with respect to jurisdictions that would fall directly under Child and Family Services, but to find out about building code and fire code provisions as they would apply to these particular facilities in the province. So the questioning that I have from now on will deal in a general way with daycares in the province, if that is in order.
Mr. Chairperson: For the benefit of the committee, we will allow the questions as they are, and the Chair will reserve the right to determine whether or not the committee can endeavour to deal with the question raised.
Mr. Reid: Of the daycares in the province, can you tell me, do all of those daycares, the ones that you have inspected or the ones that have been inspected by the various jurisdictions here, meet the fire code of the province?
Mr. Gilleshammer: They are inspected, and they met the fire code at the time the inspection took place.
Mr. Reid: So I take it, then, that all of them have alarm systems functioning?
Mr. Gilleshammer: If that was the fire code of the day, when they were built, then they would have to comply with that.
Mr. Reid: Is it allowable under the fire code or acceptable by the Fire Commissioner's office to have fire breaks not extend all of the way to a ceiling, and are T-bar ceilings with regular tiling systems acceptable as fire break as allowed for under the act?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I have indicated that these facilities were built to the code of the day. They were inspected and met the code that existed at that particular time.
Mr. Reid: When a Fire Commissioner officer finds deficiencies upon inspection of a facility, including daycares, does that officer have powers of enforcement for findings of deficiency that could put at risk the people that would be in that particular structure, or does that power rest solely with the minister, and has the minister ever issued such an enforcement?
Mr. Gilleshammer: If in a building that is inspected there are deficiencies, it is expected that the owners of the property would correct these deficiencies. If it is a new building, they will not get an occupancy permit certificate. If it is an existing building, they have a period of time to bring it up to the appropriate standard.
Mr. Reid: Have owners of buildings refused to upgrade to meet the code, not in the sense of something that would not be considered to be part of the fire code, but if a fire commissioner goes into the structure and makes a determination that they are unsafe, what power does the Fire Commissioner have, or anyone for that matter, whether it be a fire chief in a rural municipality? What power do those individuals have to make sure that those particular structures are brought up to standard?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that they have a range of options, including closing the building.
Mr. Reid: What enforcement mechanisms does the Fire Commissioner's office or fire chief, for example, have if someone refuses to undertake that meeting of the code?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Potentially there could be prosecution.
Mr. Reid: So a fire commissioner would then be able to go back to the department head or the director of the Fire Commissioner's office or to the minister to have enforcement of the deficiencies?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Matters of this nature are handled in the Fire Commissioner's office, and I have indicated that one of the remedies is prosecution.
Mr. Reid: Have any building owners ever refused to upgrade to meet code?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told that we have been in court on some occasions.
Mr. Reid: I guess the courts then would make a determination on whether or not the owners of those structures then have to meet the code. So then it would be the discretion of the Fire Commissioner's office or the minister on whether or not these matters would proceed to the courts then.
Mr. Gilleshammer: I want to assure you, in the months that I have been minister, I have not dealt with this. This is dealt with in the Fire Commissioner's office, to do the inspection and do the day-to-day work and achieve the compliance.
Mr. Reid: It is my understanding the Fire Commissioner's office now charges a fee for inspections. Can you tell me, what is your fee for inspecting a daycare?
Mr. Gilleshammer: On the initial inspection that I referenced earlier there is no charge, the inspections are done by the local fire authority. Where it is, for whatever reason, done by the Fire Commissioner's office, there is a charge of $250.
* (1540)
Mr. Reid: Do you have a list of fees that you charge for your inspections, and is it available?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Just a clarification on the fees. If the member was referencing daycares, currently there is no fee for doing that. It is anticipated that there has to be a regulation change over these inspections, and then it will be up to local authorities whether they charge a fee or not. I might mention, the City of Winnipeg Fire Department is being contracted by the Office of the Fire Commissioner to perform these inspections on their behalf, and the City of Winnipeg has required that they be paid for this service at $75 per inspection. At the current time, the Department of Family Services is paying that fee.
Mr. Reid: Are hotels in the province, do they fall under the responsibility of the Fire Commissioner's office, and can you tell me, do you inspect those facilities? Do they have to meet the fire code of the province, and do you have a listing for the inspections that you would have done in these particular facilities?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes, I am told that we do inspect hotel facilities, and they are inspected based on the code that is in force at that particular time. It is done on a rotating basis, and particular attention is given to the inspection for the building code when facilities are sold.
Mr. Reid: So, if a hotel changes hands, then that is when a fire code inspection would take place to determine whether or not that particular structure meets the building and fire codes of the province and that you do it on a rotational basis. So when would an owner of such a structure be expecting an inspection to take place? Is it once every two years? Is it once every five, once every 10? Can you give me some indication on when they might expect an inspection to take place?
Mr. Gilleshammer: The inspections in the city of Winnipeg, of course, are done by the Winnipeg Fire Department and in other municipalities by the local authorities. I am told that they would expect to have that inspection other than when they are sold, probably on a three- to five-year basis.
Mr. Reid: It is my understanding that there was a hotel fire in Melita. One individual man died. This is not a case before the courts to the best of my knowledge. Can you tell me, did the Fire Commissioner's office do an inspection of that particular facility, and was the alarm system or the lack of an alarm system for that particular structure written up and not adhered to?
Mr. Gilleshammer: We do not have information on that with us today, but we could provide it for the member in due course.
Mr. Reid: I would appreciate that information, whether or not that particular structure met the codes, because it is my understanding that it did not and that that facility had been written up through an inspection and there was no follow-up with respect to enforcement of that report. So if the minister could provide some details on that, we would be pleased to receive that information.
The personnel within the Fire Commissioner's office, because this is now based on for profit from what the minister has said in past Estimates process, that he wants and expects that there will be a profit shown by the activities of the Fire Commissioner's office, even though that is not the case at this point in time, can you tell me, what activities has the senior staff of the Fire Commissioner's office undertaken? Has there been some travel involved in trying to draw people to our Fire College in Brandon?
Perhaps the minister can give me an indication of what travel has taken place, what jurisdictions have been contacted and what associated costs are related to that particular activity in trying to market that structure.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I want to comment on my honourable friend's opening remarks. I am not sure where the, in quotations, "for profit" line comes from, but I think what I would suggest to him is that we have a budget, and the challenge for the leadership at the Fire College is to live within their means, and I am very pleased that in the second year of operation that they are able to do that.
The member is asking what sort of marketing of the Fire College we are doing. Certainly, one of our areas of interest is in the city of Winnipeg where we believe that there is a good opportunity to train firefighters who could seek employment and be employed by the City of Winnipeg. In fact, I am meeting with officials from the city in the next short while to further discuss this.
We have also been in discussions with the City of Saskatoon, and they are very interested in hiring graduates of the Fire College. I know I am supposed to call it the Emergency Services College, so I should do that; but the City of Saskatoon is quite interested in the graduates from the college. In fact, I just had the very wonderful opportunity to attend the graduation just a few weeks ago where 24 young people graduated from the Emergency Services College and are now able to seek employment as professional firefighters, so that we are going to be able to provide that training and certainly they will get the opportunity to have jobs within Canada.
A more recent initiative is we had four students from Cuba who were trained at the Emergency Services College. This provided some wonderful experiences, some unique experiences for staff there. I believe we were able to secure a Manitoban who was able to act as an interpreter. I think it should be part of a worldwide initiative to make Cuba more welcome, certainly not only in the Western World, but right across the world, and this is one step in that direction, so that they not only export baseball players, but that they also are able to use our facility and our training. I think even though there were a few bumps on the road on the way, it was a successful venture, and they were able to complete some training there.
As well, I know as part of the initiative to secure, I suppose, students from other parts of the world, there have been efforts expended in Brazil, Chile and Argentina to offer the services of the Emergency Services College, and we do have a memorandum of understanding signed, as I indicated in my opening remarks, with the University of Santiago. This initiative is also being shared by other educational institutions in the province: the University of Manitoba, the University of Winnipeg, Brandon University, Red River Community College and Assiniboine Community College.
* (1550)
I do not know whether my honourable friend has ever been out to the Emergency Services College. It is located in Brandon, and it is located in close proximity to Assiniboine Community College, and I think also in the same vicinity as Brandon University. I think there are opportunities there, and we see a lot of opportunities for growth as a training institution. I can tell you from attending events with volunteer firefighters and fire chiefs, meeting with the professional fire chiefs throughout the province, for the most part there is good support. We are optimistic that through discussions with the City of Winnipeg, we are going to be able to enhance the institution and provide for more classes and more training.
I happen to think that it is important that we provide the best training possible for our firefighters. It is an occupation that I had never considered for myself, but I do have a tremendous admiration for those people who have the training and the interest in firefighting and want to go into burning buildings, risking their lives with the motivation of saving others. There are others who might even say that we are not training brain surgeons here, but I think that is perhaps a rather negative, derogatory comment. I would maybe even table this article where this comment was made. It is one that I do not agree with, that the fire service does not agree with, and I think that we need to educate people who make comments like this to get a better understanding of the importance of the fire service in Manitoba.
I might also add that in the very near future we are going to be opening a training site in Brandon, and it is going to allow the instructors at the facility, I think, to carry the training to a higher level. I know that there has been considerable interest in the training site. It is located adjacent to the Brandon Airport. There has been a fair amount of private-sector contribution to that facility, and I think it in many ways rounds out the facility and the opportunities for the Emergency Services College to offer a rather full package.
So I would invite the member, when he has time, to travel outside the Perimeter Highway to the city of Brandon. I am sure that, if we knew when he was coming, we could give him the full tour of the facility and it would, I think, be enlightening to him.
Mr. Reid: Well, I would be pleased to take up the minister's offer, if that is what it is, to take a tour of the Fire College and the facilities there. I think it would be interesting to see the type of services that are provided for those that avail themselves of that.
You did not answer the second part of the question, though, with respect to costs and to travel. That was the heart and soul of the question that I had asked, of course, and you skated all around it but did not answer that particular piece of information that I was seeking.
So I ask it again of you: What was the travel of the management of the Fire College, and what were the costs associated with it? Where did they go in marketing the Fire College?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I believe that I did give the member a fair amount of detail. I indicated the cities in Canada that we were targeting and those in South America. I did not get into the exact dollars that have been allotted in the budget.
The budget year for 1997 has just been completed, and we are awaiting the printing of the annual report, which I am expecting in the very near future. I did mention earlier today and I did mention previously that they were able to operate this current year within budget. In their budget, they did have a certain amount for both travel and for marketing. The travel budget within this institution was in the area of $200,000. Now, that is for all members and staff members of the institution. It includes travel back and forth from the city of Winnipeg. It includes travel costs for staff when they are doing their normal work. So the total travel budget within something like a $4-million budget at the Emergency Services College for travel was in the area of $200,000.
There was also some money set aside for marketing. I do not have the detail on it here, but the marketing would include such things as brochures and literature and postal expenses. It was in the neighbourhood of $50,000. I would also point out that within the travel budget, the vehicles, and perhaps the member has seen them from time to time, representing the Emergency Services College, the vehicle leases, and I am not sure how many vehicles we are leasing, I believe it is 27, that is part of the fleet vehicles that the college has, and that is found under another appropriation.
Mr. Reid: Well, the minister referenced travel of $200,000, and I would like some indication of who has been travelling, where they have gone, and what were the costs associated with it. If you do not have the information here, I do not have a problem with that. If you can provide it when you send over the package of information you have already committed to do, that may be an appropriate way of making me aware of that information.
You mentioned marketing costs associated with the college for which obviously people have been doing some travelling. If the travel costs are coming out of the marketing budget, perhaps you can make that indication and tell me what were the dollars associated with that and who did travelling for that aspect as well. So that is the type of detail that I am looking for, and if you do not have it here, then perhaps you can send it along with the other package of information.
Mr. Gilleshammer: We can send you some more information. We have, I believe, 41 staff in the Emergency Services College and probably at least 30 of them do some travelling, so we can try and get you a breakdown and send that along when we are able to finalize the other information that we have committed to you.
Mr. Reid: Does that information also include the marketing costs, travel associated with that? Is that going to be part of the information you send along?
Mr. Gilleshammer: We will give you more detail on that as well.
* (1600)
Mr. Reid: Can you tell me, in the marketing of the college and the services that you provide on a fee-for-service basis, is there some requirement--because I understand that the Fire Commissioner's office staff have been travelling to some South America jurisdictions and perhaps even to Latin America. Are your staff undergoing language instruction, perhaps, in Spanish language? Is that training ongoing for the staff to allow some communication? What is the cost associated with that and the number of people involved?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, as I indicated in an earlier answer, when we had the four Cuban students, we at that point had to hire out interpretive staff and were able to find in Manitoba an individual who was of great assistance. I believe our Fire Commissioner was also on the Team Canada trade mission to South America. He does have quite an interest in learning that language and is taking some training. We have, besides him, one other staffperson who is also taking some training.
This could be, I mean, not only an exciting area because of the Pan Am Games, but the north-south trade within North America is, of course, increasing by leaps and bounds, and Manitoba has become a tremendous beneficiary of that. Any contact that we can have with Latin American countries, with the Pan Am that is coming up, that we can continue to with our trade development and with our educational exchanges, the Fire College, the Emergency Services College certainly has a role to play here. We are very excited about what might lie in the future as far as offering training not only within the province and within Canada but doing some international work as well.
Mr. Reid: Then, I take it that you will be forwarding the information then with respect to the costs of this training, you will be sending it along with the other information regarding travel and marketing costs, along with a list of fees that you have agreed to send along?
Mr. Gilleshammer: We have people taking notes here of information that you are seeking and we will do our very best to comply with it.
Mr. Reid: I think I have said most of what I need to ask with respect to the Fire Commissioner's office. There is much more, of course, but I know my colleague here is wanting to get into Estimates as well for the next department. My concern here with respect to the Fire Commissioner's office, and I am not a proponent of doing these types of things on a profit basis. I see the fire suppression, the firefighting forces of the province, which I would include in the Fire Commissioner's office as a way to educate and take preventative actions versus a reactive force.
Looking at some daycares in the province where some of them are run on a not-for-profit basis and you have volunteer boards with them quite often, and looking at the fee that you are anticipating charging to these facilities, I am not sure how this is in the best interests for those particular operations to start charging the fee.
To leave it to volunteer fire chiefs or firefighting forces in the province who are historically trained in fire suppression versus prevention, origin and cause determination that actual duties and responsibilities and training that the Fire Commissioner's office has, volunteer firefighters that I know of are not full-time people. They do this as an additional duty. I am not aware of training that they would have with respect to report writing. I do not know what inspection training they have with respect to origin and cause of fires or whether or not the Fire Commissioner's office still gets involved in situations like that in all cases or you leave that to the local fire chief to do. But now that you have made this into a fee-for-service facility through your special operating agency, I am not sure that the safety of the public is best served by this type of approach.
In the beginning when you moved to this, I was not critical; I wanted to see what was happening. I have seen now situations that have come to our attention for a matter that the Chairperson has ruled out of order here today with respect to the Pine Falls daycare fire. I am not sure that this move is in the best interests. Yes, it may be to the government as far as the general revenues are concerned, and you do not anticipate to have a draw on general revenues for a period of time, hoping that the Fire Commissioner's office would become self-sustaining.
I am not sure your move to a special operating agency in this regard is the best for public safety, and I would hope that the Fire Commissioner's office would have been there to protect the public to undertake, as they have in the past, origin and cause of fires, and to provide the preventative training programs that they have in the past to make sure that the public is continually educated on the dangers of fire and the necessity for meeting or exceeding fire code and building code requirements within the province within the country.
I know you are trying to make this into a self-sustaining operation, but by pushing it in that direction and looking at what is happening at least in one case now, I am not sure that is the best move. I think the public safety is far too important to turn this into a for-profit venture. Public safety should come first before the profit of a particular special operating agency that the government has chosen.
I am going to close on this part, I hope, unless other questions arise out of the minister's answer. With the feasibility study that was undertaken, I believe, by KPMG regarding the special operating agency, do you have a study that was undertaken by KPMG and can you provide us with copies of that particular study?
Mr. Gilleshammer: I do hope that my honourable friend would come out to the Emergency Services College in the near future to get a better understanding of the complete operation and appreciation for the professionalism that exists there and the talent that exists there and the services that are provided. I know that he would see the tremendously positive relationships that have grown up between the Emergency Services College and the fire departments across this province, the growth and the abilities of those volunteer brigades, the growth in the co-operation through the mutual aid districts and the growth in the equipment, not only in numbers but in updating the equipment in these fire brigades, I think my honourable friend would be very impressed.
So I urge him to come out in the near future and present himself with an open mind to view what is happening there. It might even be best when there is a group of students who have been taken in. I have just indicated that the graduation was held just a few weeks ago when 24 people graduated, but there are other activities going on, and there will be another class starting in September, I believe.
I know that it is not my place to ask questions here, but you have sort of piqued my interest in your criticism of the special operating agencies, and I wondered if you were opposed to all 16 of them or just this one in particular.
Mr. Reid: Special operating agencies differ, as you well know. Some provide glass, steel, plastic and rubber. Others provide human services. Some of those are safety related, as this one is. I draw a distinction between those. Where you have human safety involved, that is where I draw the line, when you have a for-profit--and I do not use that term in the negative context because the minister has referenced that in his statements last year, but I just draw on those statements.
Where you have a facility that you want to be able to stand alone on its own and it is charging fees to the public to do safety inspections, that is where I have a separation between that particular special operating agency and agencies that provide steel and rubber for people to travel around the province. A big difference between the two, human safety versus inanimate objects.
So those are my comments about special operating agencies. There are some cases where they may be appropriate. I do not deny that may be the case, from my own personal viewpoint. I cannot speak on behalf of caucus, but that is my viewpoint. But when it comes to human safety, to the safety of the public, that is where I draw the line between the two.
* (1610)
Mr. Gilleshammer: I gather the member is generally in favour of special operating agencies but is opposed to the Fire College or the Emergency Services College being a special operating agency.
Again, I would encourage him not to close his mind completely on that. What we have done--and I will look back in Hansard. I do not recall using the phrase "for profit" as he has indicated. What we are asking the Emergency Services College to do is live within its means. They operate on approximately a $4 million budget, or a little less than that. The vast majority of that comes from a fee on insurance policies and 1.25 percent of insurance policies. Over $3 million of their budget is raised in that manner.
So, you know, if he would come out to Brandon and meet the people and tour the facilities and come with an open mind and maybe even go to some of the conferences where the fire service is meeting--they tend to meet in Brandon now and are well received by the citizens of Brandon and the city council. We have a number of them coming up or at least there are one or two coming up this spring, you know. It is a good opportunity to see the facility but also to meet some of the people who are more directly involved in it.
Mr. Reid: It is not the Fire College that I have difficulties with, because I think they do some good work. I wish that a lot of their work would be internal to the province of Manitoba, providing public safety and training for people in this province. With the special operating agency that you have set up, of course, you have to expand beyond that because they have to recover their costs, as you said in your own comments here, which I just happened to bring along, a copy from last year's Estimates. It says here in your words, and I quote: "The objective, of course, is to balance the budget and even turn a profit if we can."
That is the comment that you made in last year's Estimates, and that is where I draw reference to those.
Your Fire College people, I think by far, for the little I know of at this point and hope to learn more upon my visitation, do good work. I just wish it would be done in a way that would provide for the public's safety for the people in the province of Manitoba and perhaps give others the opportunity to come in and pay those fees, if you want to import the dollars, instead of having to charge the people of Manitoba for those vital services. So that is the distinction I draw between the way you have operated it to this point, once you converted it to the special operating agency. I would prefer to see other jurisdictions, if you want to bring them in here and provide training, by all means, import the dollars. Bring the people in here and train them, but when it comes to providing services to Manitobans, that should be, as far as fire safety is concerned or hazardous materials protection, that human safety should be first for Manitobans. That should be our first priority, and that should not be done on a for-profit basis or fee-for-service basis, if you can at all avoid that.
So those are my comments with respect to the special operating agency, and if there is an opportunity to go to the Fire College in the near future--because I do, once sessions end, like to travel to various parts of the province as I have done in past years--I will endeavour to get to the Fire College at the minister's invitation and do a tour of the facility and perhaps ask some more questions at that time.
Mr. Chairperson: Item 11.2. (m) Office of the Fire Commissioner has been previously passed.
Resolution 11.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $12,662,900 for Labour, Labour Programs, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.
The last item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Labour is item 11.1.(a) Minister's Salary. At this point, we request that the minister's staff leave the table for the consideration of this item.
Item 11.1. Labour Executive (a) Minister's Salary $26,300.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, just a few closing comments here. We have covered a wide number of areas, and the minister and I do not always see eye to eye on the operations of the department.
There is a fairly large amount of information that I have requested from the department this year, and I look forward to receiving that information from the minister. If he has any questions with respect to the intent of my request, in other words, what information detail that I would like, he is more than free to let me know inside the Chamber or to call me, and I will provide whatever assistance I can.
There is some information that I still have yet to provide to Employment Standards people with respect to some of the business operations taking advantage, from what I am told, of young people, and I will provide that information to Mr. Dyson, Employment Standards.
I look forward to the continued debate and discussion with respect to the piece of legislation that the minister has introduced to the Chamber, and we will take him up at his offer to have a briefing sometime in the near future.
Mr. Chairperson: Item 11.1.(a) Minister's Salary $26,300--pass.
Resolution 11.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $476,400 for Labour, Labour Executive, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.
This now completes the Estimates of the Department of Labour.
The next set of Estimates that will be considered by this section of the Committee of Supply are the Estimates of the Department of Energy and Mines. Shall we briefly recess to allow the minister and the critics the opportunity to prepare for the commencement of the next set of Estimates? [agreed]