4th-36th Vol. 59B-Committee of Supply-Justice

ORDERS OF THE DAY

(Continued)

House Business

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would like to obtain the unanimous consent of the House, notwithstanding the sequence for consideration of Estimates as outlined in Sessional Paper 142, tabled on March 24, 1998, and subsequently amended, to consider in Room 255 the Estimates of the Department of Housing on completion of the Estimates of the Sport Directorate.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to alter the sequence of consideration of Estimates in Room 255 to consider the Department of Housing immediately following Sport--until further notice?

Mr. McCrae: These changes would apply until further notice, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Until further notice. [agreed]

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I wonder if there would be a disposition to waive private members' hour today.

Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House to waive private members' hour?

An Honourable Member: No.

Madam Speaker: No. Leave has been denied.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Vodrey), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

Motion agreed to.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

(Concurrent Sections)

JUSTICE

Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon, this section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Justice.

When the committee last sat, unanimous consent had been granted to have all questions and answers considered under line 4.1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Just to let the minister and staff know what my intentions are so they can make plans for other departments that are waiting, my intention for the remainder of the Justice Estimates is to ask questions in regard to a subject that briefly I gave notice about, a Manitoba police college or a police program. That is the next area that I plan to, so whatever staff would--after that, there might be some questions, general questions, but after that I think I will save the remainder of the questions for concurrence. I am sure the minister could answer many of the questions without his staff being present there in concurrence that I would have to ask there. So that is my intention.

I think I and the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh), from the time we have been elected in '93, we have established a reputation of being able to use a lot of Estimates hours if we have the opportunity, but I think I am going to confine it to those subjects, the Manitoba police college, and after that I will be asking questions in general terms. The rest will be concurrence. So possibly, the member for St. Johns, I do not know if he has any questions at this point. No, okay.

So my question in regard to the Manitoba police college, as mentioned, I have recently been informed by a number of people within police associations, the police community, that we are starting to have an outflow of trained police officers from Manitoba. This is after a great deal of money is expended upon training police officers, whether it is by a municipal police force, the Winnipeg Police Service, Brandon Police Service, and it has an effect even on the smaller departments in that, as those trained officers leave, quite often what will happen is some of the small-town police officers then lose their trained officers to Brandon or to Winnipeg.

One of the reasons why it has nothing that we could do about, I think, I know from being in the Winnipeg Police Association for over the past decade, the bargaining contracts that have gone through have given raises to the members on the force, and to get those, basically what was negotiated was a lower starting wage. So right now you have in Winnipeg a very low starting wage which makes police forces like Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver, where they are offering certain perks to move, we are losing police officers.

Now one way we could save the taxpayer money, from spending this, you know, paying recruits for a number of months while they are being trained, only to lose them, is make the recruits pay for their own training. I gave the example of the Maritimes Police College where anybody who wants to be on a municipal police force in the Maritimes has to graduate from the Maritimes Police College or an equivalent course, and it is right in their police act; otherwise, you are not eligible to be hired on the municipal police force.

So once you have that, graduate, you go there as a trained officer, and there is always some internal training, but at least the police force is not paying you a salary during that training period, just as no one paid anyone a salary while they were becoming an architect. They pay their tuition, they go to university, and they come out. I believe there is a B.C. Criminal Justice Institute, as an example, and I would like to explore the cost of this, if there is money in this budget that could be looked at studying this, what are the impediments, what could be done.

I do not think I would satisfied to say, well, okay, if it is a good idea let someone bring us a proposal. I would like the Department of Justice to be proactive in this, and if it has not already done a study, do a study on it because it would be a benefit to the police service and to the justice system in Winnipeg if we did not lose trained officers. I am looking at the Winnipeg Police Service where, if every eligible officer who was eligible retired, we would have a vacuum of expertise on the police service. So there is a benefit, and I think there is a certain responsibility for the minister to be proactive on the subject.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, there were some issues that were left outstanding from yesterday, the community service orders and the work in that respect. I think my staff have some information on that, and perhaps I should briefly address that at this time, if that is all right with the member for The Maples.

I want to just indicate that, of course, we as a government are very supportive of these community services orders. The problem raised by the member for The Maples does not simply lie with youth justice committees. The same problem is found when courts order alternative work. That has always been a problem for as long as that particular disposition has been available to the courts or at least utilized by the courts.

This issue, I think, needs to be dealt with in a broader way than perhaps has been done previously. I will indicate that there are some steps that are being taken right now. I think there are certain steps that can be taken on an individual youth committee basis group as well, but, as you are aware, there is a Provincial Council on Youth Crime headed by Mayor Carlson. I have met with him a number of times. One of the things that is happening right now with that particular council is that they are being briefed by my department, not so much in terms of specific issues, but allowing them to become acquainted with my department and any problems that might be there. I thought it was very important that if they are going to be advising me on an ongoing basis that they have a good insight into how the department operates. I think this issue is clearly one that could be considered, if not addressed, by the Provincial Council on Youth Crime.

* (1450)

The other initiative, I think, that should take place is a more proactive utilization of nonprofit organizations through Manitoba and contact with those nonprofit organizations to see whether or not there is capacity for those organizations to take a larger role in that area. One of the problems that has always been identified is that private business people are often reluctant to take on someone, for example, who has been charged with theft and to have that person then working in their store or around their premises or even around a particular residential homeowner situation. There is a natural reluctance for that to occur.

I think that we do need to take further steps in co-ordinating our efforts to find alternatives and appropriate workplaces for these individuals in nonprofit situations. The other point that was raised, I believe, in our discussion two nights ago at the Maples Youth Justice Committee was that there have, in fact, been situations where youth have been used in profit organizations, and concern was expressed that these organizations are getting free labour and turning a profit. Well, I am not so sure that that always holds nor is that necessarily bad because, for example, if the organization or the profit, the business, the profit-generating business, is, in fact, the one that has suffered the loss, I see nothing wrong with the person working off that loss by working there. I think that we can explore those alternatives as well.

The youth justice committee, in the way it conducts itself, may well provide alternatives and placements. Number one, if the youth justice committee involves itself in victim-offender reconciliation, often the victim himself or herself, if they are comfortable with the accused person or the offender, then there may well be an opportunity for that victim right there to work out something with the offender in terms of alternative measures. I know that is done, but I think that this problem speaks to the necessity of having the victims there at these disposition hearings or conferences as often as possible.

In areas where the larger community is involved, and I am thinking usually of First Nations communities, they have been very active in having their youth who appear in front of these committees participate in community projects, whether it is cleaning the local fairgrounds or the curling rink or that kind of thing. I think in the smaller communities that even though it is smaller, there seem to be more opportunities and indeed a willingness to take on those kinds of responsibilities. I think that the same opportunities exist in the city in the communities, but we need to explore better ways of doing it, so the member raises a good point.

I would like to point out to him specifically that on May 5, in Winnipeg, the youth justice committee heads I believe all met with a member of the Winnipeg Police Service in respect of the graffiti campaign. So there are opportunities, I think, that are immediately available to send youth to work off their disposition in that way. That is something that I think could be quite easily facilitated.

The other matter which was raised with me by my staff and, in fact, was discussed with me at the Maples Youth Justice Committee--I do not know if the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) was there when we had that discussion, but, in fact, often the youth justice committee, as part of its disposition, requires the parent or the offender or both together to find appropriate work. So that becomes part of the disposition, that they find the work. So instead of utilizing valuable time from the youth justice committee members, in fact that becomes part of the disposition, and I think may well make the process much more meaningful.

* (1500)

So there are some things that are being done, that can be done by the local committees themselves, but I think that we can, as a government, explore the issue of the greater participation of nonprofits. So that is basically the answer I can give to the member at this time.

In respect of the question then posed today in respect of the police college and the possibility of there being--

Point of Order

Mr. Kowalski: Before we go on that, if the minister would like me to, his answer has raised some other questions in this area, before we go on, if he is willing to continue on with this subject that we are into now, the community service orders.

Mr. Chairperson: The honourable member does not have a point of order.

* * *

Mr. Chairperson: The honourable minister, to continue with your response.

Mr. Toews: Well, and all I am saying is I want to accommodate the member. If there is something that has arisen as a result of my answer, I would prefer that he ask the questions in respect of that issue, and then we can proceed to the question of the police college that he raised earlier.

Mr. Kowalski: Okay, just to clarify, one of the questions I asked yesterday--and I am glad the minister came back because I had forgotten about it--was using the resource of the community resource centres. If that is possible, or if it is not, why it is impossible to feed in--like for our justice committee, it was 659 hours. What would be the impact on feeding that into the resource centre that covers the north end of Winnipeg?

Mr. Toews: I also have Bob Chamberlain here with me who is the director of Law Enforcement Services.

Just in respect of that particular question, I can indicate, if that is an alternative that the member thinks is a good one, we can look at that. It does however have fiscal implications. There are registration issues and there are other monetary issues. Traditionally, the community justice committees have wanted to be separate and apart from that process.

So one of my big concerns is I do not want to take away the freedom and the flexibility that some of these community members have in establishing their own program and having a sense of ownership over that program. One of the worst mistakes I think you can make sometimes is to let Big Brother take over a community organization, and so we have to be careful.

Now, the member does raise a good point. If the issue is simply fiscal, is there some other source that we can access and can we arrange it so that it is not government taking over these committees, because I think that would be a serious mistake. Then the new program in respect of safer communities and community mobilization, we would have government perhaps approving projects or co-ordinating projects without interfering in the community input and accessibility.

So I want to say that I spoke with my director of Public Safety yesterday about the administration of this federal justice program, and he has been very, very active already in inviting the federal government to share space with the provincial offices. We have some room. We would prefer to work together with the federal government in this area, so that we co-ordinate our activities, the province and federal government, minimize the amount of administration and make sure that the dollars get into the hands of community members where dollars are necessary. Again, in not all of these cases are dollars necessary, but sometimes they do need a little bit of operating money and perhaps supplies such as paint and other things. So there are possibilities that we can work on, and I think that that is something I certainly will ensure that my staff looks on.

Mr. Kowalski: In his previous answer, the minister mentioned he saw nothing wrong with community service work being done in a private business, especially if that business has been the victim, but I think that is getting into restitution. That is not totally community service; that is restitution.

But one of the concerns on committees is the liability question. If we send little Joey to work at Joe's autobody shop and a car falls on little Joey, can our committee be sued? Are we still covered? I believe if it is in the form of restitution, there would be no problem. But if we sent little Joey to do community service work with the idea that he is going to get some work experience skills, he is going to find out how to keep a schedule and that at Joe's meat market which was not a victim of a crime but just as counselling, what are the liability issues there?

My past understanding is as long as anything the justice committee does falls within the program guidelines, we are covered under liability. But I do not believe working for private businesses would be under those program guidelines, and so, in fact, justice committees would be putting themselves at risk of liability by sending kids to community service work orders in unauthorized places.

Mr. Toews: I understand that there is, in fact, an issue of liability and liability insurance in the scope of the guidelines that govern the activities of youth justice committees. It is a problem, though, that is not unique to that area. In many situations where people are looking for skills and private companies are willing to provide the opportunity for our young people to develop those skills, there have been, I understand, accommodations been made in the past.

I recall--and I cannot recall the specific context but when I was Minister of Labour--that there were certain arrangements made through the Workers Compensation Board to ensure that certain volunteers were covered. I think it was in the context of volunteer firefighters and those type of people. I appreciate they were doing a public service and putting themselves at risk and having no insurance, so it was felt that in the public good, in that type of a situation--I cannot recall specifically if it was volunteer firefighters but it was something like that. So, again, Workers Compensation was adjusted or amended, the act or the particular program, in order to accommodate those people.

Again, if the issue here is simply that the guidelines do not permit it, well, if the idea is a good one, why would we not want to review those guidelines to allow for that to occur, so that any disability policy or insurance policy does, in fact, protect the youth justice committees. So if the member and the youth justice committees raised that as an issue, I would be prepared to have my staff look at the legalities of that.

As one can appreciate, the program flows as a result of the authority of the Young Offenders Act, and there may be federal guidelines that are beyond my ability to change, but there may well be opportunity for me or my department to make recommendations that those guidelines, in fact, change.

I recall meeting with a particular youth justice committee over a year ago now, and they were also concerned that they were operating outside of the context of the Young Offenders Act and the guidelines. When I inquired what the actual problem was, they indicated to me that some of their youth were not that youthful, and when I inquired further, I found out that some of them were as youthful as 55. So, again, if youth justice committees are performing an important function like this, it should be the role of government, indeed, my department and the federal government, to facilitate that kind of thing rather than to say that is beyond the scope of what you should be doing. So we need to address issues like that.

* (1510)

Again, the issue with under 12s that the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has been so actively involved in a pilot project, and I understand that that project is going along very, very well. It is almost at a point--I received some communication from a particular inspector from the Winnipeg Police Service that they are prepared to make that a routine order, and they have the paperwork done and the forms, and it looks like an excellent program.

Again, should we concern ourselves with the fact that the Young Offenders Act only applies to people 12 years and older? I think that is shortsighted. I think we need to take advantage of every resource that will assist our young people, no matter what age they are. So, in this area where the member for Inkster brought the idea to my attention and worked very closely with Mr. Greg Graceffo of our department and with the chief constable in the city of Winnipeg, again, another indication of how government can facilitate ideas whose time has come. I think that is very accurate there.

So we can look at some of those guidelines, see if there is something that we can change, and I would ask my staff to attend to that issue.

Mr. Kowalski: Just as a point of clarification, it is no longer chief constable. They did away with that. It is now chief of police. It is a technicality in the police department.

In regard to the provincial council, one of my pet peeves is, in fact, when the provincial council was first formed that there was no one on the council who had been on a justice committee. I believe the present chair has never been on a justice committee. Now, I realize that their focus is not just on justice committees, but I understand that a major part of their work is to be a resource to advise justice committees, to be a research component. The question I have is: is there anybody on that provincial council now that has been on a justice committee?

Mr. Toews: I think that whether or not any of these people have been on youth justice committees, I know some of those members have been very actively involved in community volunteer organizations and are very familiar with what it means to work with volunteer members. I need only point to the mayor of Portage la Prairie, whom I appointed as the chair, I believe, about a year ago now, perhaps not quite that long ago. He has been involved, virtually, in every facet of volunteer organizations in his community. I believe he is quite aware of family group conferencing which is one aspect that many youth justice committees get involved in. I know we have had discussions about youth justice committees. So, whether or not he has actually been a member, he is very familiar with these types of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, including youth justice committees, family group conferencing and other matters.

I know we are presently looking at appointing three other individuals to that committee. I am not sure whether any of them have experience with youth justice committees. I do not want to give their names right now because they have not been appointed, but one is a police officer from outside of the Winnipeg city police and RCMP, one is a First Nations person, and the third is a resident of the city of Winnipeg, but all come very, very highly recommended.

So while there may not be--and I do not have that information. The member may well be right. I know that the chair is very, very familiar with youth justice committees. I have talked to him about the issue--but if the member is suggesting that he knows of somebody else who should also be there, maybe that is something I can consider.

Mr. Kowalski: Yes, I am not denigrating the quality of anybody who has been on the provincial council. I have known people and they are highly qualified people, but also there is a morale issue, a recognition issue for those people who have been volunteers in Community and Youth Corrections for 10 years or longer.

Gerry Maghera from the central justice committee, I think he has been there since '84 when it started off. Then you have the chairs of the justice committees of Winnipeg, and by not having any of them forward there, what message does it send to them, that what you have been doing for 15 years is not of value, is not to be recognized, when someone who has never been on a justice committee, and you form a provincial council to advise them, and no one amongst them is chosen, it sends a message.

Again, I say I think there have been some very qualified quality people on the provincial council, but every time you appoint someone to that and ignore all those people who have done this work for years and years and years and can bring that experience to that provincial council, I think you are sending the wrong message.

Mr. Toews: Well, it is certainly not my intent to send the wrong message. One of the things that I think my department prides itself in is being inclusive, in ensuring that not only is there appropriate gender representation but, in fact, that people from all walks of life are available. One of the things that one has to remember is that people on youth justice committees spend an awful lot of time volunteering, and then to put the extra burden of participating on a Provincial Council on Youth Crime may be an additional burden that they may not want to shoulder.

Again, I can only speak very highly of both the police officers, Winnipeg City Police and RCMP who are on the committee and some of the other people on that committee, very, very acquainted with youth and youth crime issues. Dr. Henry Janzen is on that committee, again a very positive influence. I do not have all the names here, and maybe it is not appropriate for me to mention all these names, but I found a very good, balanced representation on that Provincial Council on Youth Crime.

Again, I do not believe there is any limitation that is there in terms of numbers. We want to make sure that the group is a good working group and can deal quickly with problems, but I think that the message I have been sending out to youth justice committees over the past year is that, in fact, I do value very much their involvement and work. They are at the forefront of a strong movement for community involvement in dealing with offenders. They provide a means to increase victim and community satisfaction.

* (1520)

The work of the Provincial Council on Youth Crime, along with the financial support that this government has given to justice committees for training, incidental expenses, and for the publication of the justice committee rapport is critical and necessary to the development of justice committees as skilled and informed partners within the system. So the alternative measures for adults and family group conferencing are, as I have indicated, emergent program areas in which justice committees are, in fact, beginning to take an outside role.

One of my staff members pointed out to me, of course, that recognition and meaning takes many forms. I know that, just recently in the Carman area, there was a meeting of all the youth justice committee heads and members, in fact, where they were giving recognition for their long-serving status. Indeed, one of the reasons I come out to see other youth justice committees, including the youth justice committee that the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) is a chairperson of--indeed, I have gone to see the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) and his youth justice committee--is to let these people know, these volunteers, these community workers, know that I value their work very, very much. I had the pleasure of handing out some certificates to these participants. I believe that they appreciated my attendance there.

Indeed, there was a particular individual who I think the member for The Maples presented with a very special certificate, Lloyd Gyles. I heard of all the wonderful things this individual has done, the participation, his workload. I know that his wife expressed some concern about the fact that he was rarely home because of the involvement in these youth justice committees. I commiserated a little with her on that. I know that my wife often feels the same about my involvement, but I think that that individual certainly was a very, very positive contribution to the Maples Youth Justice Committee, and in my small way, I try to recognize that.

I know that we as government cannot always recognize everyone's involvement as much as we should. Alvin Toll, who is the probation officer over there in Maples, this is an individual who spent a lot of time, and I think his efforts are very much appreciated. I think he has expressed his appreciation to the youth justice workers.

What I am trying to say is that many of these people who are involved in these youth justice committees are not looking for a lot of outside glory. What they are looking to do is to serve their community. Their recognition, their satisfaction comes from serving their community. I certainly felt that at The Maples, and I believe that that has been a consistent message that I have heard from other youth justice committee members. So whether or not we have specifically appointed somebody onto the Provincial Council on Youth Crime from a youth justice committee, I think that we are, in fact, recognizing them financially, administratively and during the course of social gatherings, that their contribution is necessary and important to the well-being of the community and the efficient running of the justice system.

Mr. Kowalski: I will give a compliment to the Minister of Justice. In the 10 years that I have been involved with the youth justice committees, I have never seen so much support for the justice committees as we have in the past year. It has really made a difference, both financial and in a number of other ways that, yes, I think the justice committees are feeling like they are important and are part of the system more so than ever before.

But we have that meeting of chairs of justice committees of Winnipeg. Years ago, it used to be a monthly event. Now, it is just on the call of the chair, and there you have the chairs of the committees that cover half of the population of Manitoba. There is a vehicle, and you would think that one of them would be on this provincial council. I know what you are saying, that there are other forms of appreciation, and they are not the ones, but that is a resource. There are people with experience. As I said, there are people there who have been doing this justice committee work since the Young Offenders Act was passed. I think since '84 or '86 they have been on it, and they are a resource. Maybe they are not looking for it, and maybe they would even have to leave some of the work they are doing on justice committees to be on the provincial council, yes, but it would be nice to be asked.

So I think we could leave it there. I hope that will be taken into consideration on future appointments, that people who have been on justice committees for a long time, that they will be taken into consideration.

So the question I have now is: is there anything being done to look at a provincial police college in Manitoba? Has there been any studies or comparisons to see the benefit between the Maritimes Police College, the B.C. Criminal Justice Institute, and what are some of the impediments to doing it, some of the advantages and disadvantages?

Mr. Toews: I think that in the past there may well have been done a study on a police training academy. I am not familiar with that document. I believe it was done prior to the dissolution of the Manitoba Police Commission. That study was done at some time prior to that, and I have never seen that study.

I can indicate to the member, an establishment of a police college has never been one of my priorities. Not that it is not important, but perhaps the importance of that issue has never been brought home to me. So I am not saying that I have made a conscious evaluation and said this is something I will not do. I sometimes feel I have enough problems to fix without looking for other issues to raise, and even proactive initiatives take time of my department. I know that they are very hard-working. They work very hard for the people of Manitoba, and I do not want to raise issues before these issues are--that we can move in a specific direction.

The point is, though, that this government has looked at the whole idea of training in the area of emergency services, as opposed to police services specifically, and that, of course, is the so-called fire college out of Brandon. That has been, even when I was the Minister of Labour, quite a challenge in terms of making that the institution that all provincial firefighters would utilize in their training agenda.

The fire college, I think it is--maybe it is not called the Brandon Fire College anymore, it is called maybe Brandon Emergency Services College or something like that, is a very, very impressive college. They attract people from right across Canada, and indeed, they, as an SOA, a special operating agency, are trying to attract people from as far away as South America. They, in fact, were working on a contract to train Cuban firefighters, but I understand that the American government was upset about that because of the Helms-Burton law and said that if any Cubans came to train in Manitoba--and it was also in Alberta--that the people who were at the training college would be barred from entering the United States. That is just an aside. We did not get the contract anyway, but it was a curious little situation. But they have been marketing their product right across Canada and the United States.

One of the real challenges though was that Winnipeg, who has its own fire training facilities here in Winnipeg through the Winnipeg Fire Department, was not very keen on utilizing that Manitoba fire college. In fact, they would hire people who had been through the Brandon Fire College and then make them go through the training at Winnipeg again, and I was told by some people that the training of the Brandon firefighters was, in fact, in some ways superior, in other ways different from the training that the Winnipeg firefighters had. So that caused some tension.

I think that does not speak so much for saying that we should not have a province-wide fire college. That speaks more to trying to standardize training procedures in order that there is mobility throughout the province and that when firefighters come together to help each other at a particular fire people know what the other person is going to do or is doing.

* (1530)

Mr. Kowalski: If I could just interject at that point, in the Maritimes, when they set it up, how they covered that resistance by municipal police forces who did not want to get on board was they made it a requirement under their provincial police act that they had to be a graduate of that Maritimes Police College or an equivalent.

Whether those municipal police forces wanted to get on board or not, if they were going to hire any new recruits, they were required to go through that Maritimes Police College or an equivalent and their internal training would not have been considered an equivalent. As far as the fire department, I understand they are now on board and they are hiring people from there now.

Mr. Toews: All I am trying to point out is that this is a process that has literally taken years and years. I know ministers before me and perhaps ministers after me in the Department of Labour will have to deal with that issue of the fire college and the sensitivities and the vested interests. I do not use that word in the negative sense. It is just simply that the way business has been done in the past is changing and so you have people who are resistant to that kind of change.

The suggestion that the member makes in respect of legislation is one that I would be very, very cautious with. I think that when you create a legislative requirement like that, one wants to be careful that you do not create a monopoly. Monopolies, in my opinion, do not necessarily lend themselves to the best in training. One wants the best in training and so just in the same way that we offer various types of similar programs in different universities throughout Manitoba for certain types of courses, I do not think it is a bad thing that various different training facilities might offer similar courses.

I think the member has also indicated that in the Maritime situation they recognize equivalent colleges. I am just saying that I would be hesitant to mandate any particular college as being the one that an employer should recognize.

The other issue is, again, in the Maritimes, as I understand it, I think the college is in--is it Nova Scotia or P.E.I.? P.E.I. Again, I recognize that there is not a separate college in each province. There is a regional college. What we have done in areas, for example, like the veterinary school, we do not have a veterinary school here in Manitoba, but we have an agreement with Saskatchewan where we pay for certain positions. I believe at least 12 Manitobans can go to the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon every year. Also, I think we might have a similar agreement but with lesser numbers to Guelph at the veterinary school there. I think it is in Guelph. But I think we have to look at efficiencies like that.

Is it feasible that every province sets up a police college? I think not. The argument then that has been put to me when I have raised the issue of a police college here in Manitoba, say, is: look, we are already sending firefighters to Manitoba to be trained. It would only be fair then to have the police college in one of the other prairie provinces. So that is again something that we need to work out, if that is, in fact, something that is considered advisable. I know that right now the Winnipeg Police Service does its own training. Brandon, which is internationally accredited, as I understand, does its own training. Winnipeg is internationally accredited as well, and they then provide the training to Altona, Winkler, Morden. Indeed the police chief in Winkler is a Brandon city police officer, a graduate of that police force, and I know that there is a very close connection between those smaller police forces.

The member raised the issue of the people leaving the Brandon city police force. Now, I understand that there were just recently five constables with a total years in training of about 20 years, so they are, in my opinion, relatively junior, three- or four-year constables who left Brandon city police. Those are the numbers I received, in any event. Four of them went to Calgary as a result of a big sweep that the Calgary Police Service did in terms of attracting people to Calgary, and one I believe went to Saskatoon or Regina.

The issue was not so much one of training. Obviously provinces and police forces outside of Manitoba recognize that the training that officers are receiving in Manitoba is of a good, if not superior, quality and that they want those police officers. I do not think a police college here is going to necessarily change that. It might standardize some of the training practices. That might be good, that might be not as good. I do not know. I am not an expert in that area, but what I am trying to say is that there has been no reluctance by other police forces to hire graduates of the Winnipeg Police Service or the Brandon Police Service. One of the things I know that the police forces, especially the smaller ones, say is, if we send our officers to be trained in Brandon, there has to be an understanding that Brandon then is not going to raid those police forces as a resource for employees.

I would not say that there is a restrictive covenant in that respect, but there is a gentleman's understanding that you do not take a small community's entire police force overnight and leave the citizens defenceless there. So they been working that out on a fairly acceptable basis.

Mr. Kowalski: I do not know if I did not make my point or it was not clear, but the point is that for six months, or whatever the training period is, the Winnipeg Police Service or the Brandon Police Service is paying a constable a salary to be trained, put in that investment plus the training costs only for it to have that investment lost by that person going to another police force. By the province taking a leadership role and setting up a police college where the student pays the tuition, the police force is not paying that person a salary for six months. If it is set up as a special operating agency, it is no cost to the province. We could standardize. There could be a benefit. To me it is a win-win position.

No, it is not going to stop other police forces from being interested in our well-trained officers. The department would not have invested so much into that person, and it will not be a financial loss to that department, whether that be the Winkler police department or the Brandon police department. They are paying a salary for that constable while he is there.

Someone could correct me. I am told recently the RCMP have changed their policy. When I went through the RCMP training I was receiving a salary, and I understand now it is under a different status, that they do not get a full salary while they are going through Regina.

Maybe that is another way of solving the problem, but, right now, for those five Brandon officers, what Brandon paid, six months salary for those officers plus investment in training, they are out of pocket.

* (1540)

Mr. Toews: I mean, that is a good point and that is exactly the rationale behind the fire college, that the training is done on the trainee's own ticket, not on the taxpayers' back. That is exactly why the fire college, I think, has been having a measure of success now as city governments are looking around saying: how do we save money in certain areas without compromising the quality of the service?

If one wants to become a doctor or a lawyer or a plumber, you pay for it yourself. There has been this apprenticeship program really in the police forces and in the fire departments that has, in fact, given these people a salary while they are being trained. What was pointed out to me, and I do not know enough about the issue to say anything more than--what has been pointed out to me is that when you spend this much money on a particular person, even if that person might not be entirely satisfactory, you almost feel compelled to hire that person because of the investment that you have put into him or her. That was a point that was made to me in support of compelling everybody to go to the Manitoba fire college.

I prefer to move in that direction in a more incremental way. I recognize that there are issues of collective agreements or issues of existing training programs, and, ultimately, it is a decision for the taxpayers in these municipalities to say: is this something that we will continue to pay for? In the area of the fire college, I think more and more the elected officials in the municipal governments are saying: you know, the province is providing this fire college through this SOA. Why should the taxpayer be funding this training program by hiring people as cadets on full salary? That is the issue.

I think that in time it may well evolve that way. I can indicate to the member that I recognize his problem and the seriousness of some of the issues of manpower or person power or whatever we call that now. I am just trying to be inclusive here. All I am trying to say is that we, in fact, know that in the next number of years with the RCMP, the RCMP, in terms of their training at Depot, is not going to be able to keep up to the amount of people that they need in the RCMP.

Over the next five years, there will be about 5,000 people eligible to retire, active, serving RCMP members. [interjection] The member suggests perhaps I could go to the RCMP.

An Honourable Member: Another career.

Mr. Toews: I do not think Canada's national police force is that desperate for personnel that they would hire me.

An Honourable Member: You could ride a horse.

Mr. Toews: Careful. But in any event, I think that there are going to be additional pressures and in the next little while, we know that with the Winnipeg police force there are going to be at least 120 people in the next year eligible for retirement. That is one-tenth of their police force. We have seen that to a lesser degree in the provincial government. We will see that more and more happening now as people, who have spent an entire career in the public service, are now, when they reach an age of 45, 50, 55, either retire or look at other alternatives before retiring.

I know the police forces have quite a challenge, and they are going to have to meet that. I want to say that my department is available to consult with them to see if there are ways in which the provincial government should be involved in that task. Traditionally, we have not been involved in the training of police officers. At a time when our resources are scarce and colleges and police training centres are already doing a very good job, one has to think very carefully before the province moves in that direction.

Mr. Kowalski: So the message I am getting is that it is not a bad idea. Maybe some day it would be, but someone else is going to bring it forward. The provincial Justice department, if it is approached by municipalities and others, might consider it, but it will not be taking a leadership role in this, and I think that is a shame. I think a portion of the provincial budget goes to transfer payments to the city of Winnipeg. I do not know if any goes to the city of Brandon. It would be a savings in Winnipeg; the biggest police force is a large portion of their training budget. As I said, it is a win-win proposition.

If you look into the history of the Brandon Fire College, and contrary to popular belief, I am not looking to dean of the police college, even though I have made jokes about that. I think there are many people much more qualified than I to do that, so I am not looking for a job for myself or anyone else. I honestly believe it has merit. I would like to see the province show a leadership role, as they did with the fire college. Before the municipalities were onboard, it was in existence. It was doing the job and gradually municipalities are seeing the benefit and are seeing a cost saving. Basically I am not getting a strong signal here that there is a lot of interest in the provincial Justice department in this, and someone else is going to have to come forward with a proposal, whether it is a municipality or an individual.

I know there are private business colleges that are offering police training now. I think that might be fine in some areas, but I think when it comes to police work, this is one where government has a role in training police officers, and it should not be up to private industry. I think here is an opportunity. I think it should be looked at. I think there should be leadership, not just waiting for a proposal to come forward from municipalities or others. It is a win-win position. The province gains, the cities gain, the police forces.

This idea that there may be collective agreements, being a former member on the board of the police association and be involved. I cannot see them having any major concern about those people until they become their members. It is not going to reflect on their number of members, the amount that do so, so there is going to be no concern there. If the city could save the money that they pay for salaries while they are training, they would. If the province could then maybe look at how much they are giving to the city, if the city is in a better financial position because of that savings, it helps the province, so everyone wins. So I am disappointed that there is not more interest from the province on this matter.

Mr. Toews: I am sorry that the member is disappointed. I think this is not to say that we have not been very proactive in respect of police training. In fact, the province pays the RCMP $3,500 per officer contracted as provincial police officers for recruitment training. We have traditionally met our responsibility in that respect financially. I think that what the member is saying is that there is a better way of doing what we are already doing. As I can indicate, it has not been on my agenda as one of the burning issues, because, generally speaking, I have been very pleased with the quality of the police.

In fact, there might be other training areas that I would consider priorities before I would address that, and so I am not giving the member the brushoff here. I know that he is legitimately looking at this issue. What I can undertake for the member is that there was a study done on that. I believe there was a positive recommendation done, so maybe our government should be looking at that issue. I will look at that report to see whether or not I should be changing my mind, or not even changing my mind, but reclassifying this in terms of priorities.

* (1550)

Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair

Mr. Kowalski: This might be the wrong place to bring it forward because it might be under a different department, but the Winnipeg police commission--one time there was one in existence, okay. There is no longer a Winnipeg police commission. One of the benefits of having a police commission in Winnipeg is it keeps the police force at arm's length away from politicians. I think when politicians get too close to the police chief and the police department, it is a dangerous situation. Before, when we had a board of commission between the police chief and the elected officials, there was not maybe as much of a need of a requirement.

Now, with the change to The City of Winnipeg Act and doing away with the Cuff report and with the elimination of the board of commissioners, we have the elected officials a lot closer to the police chief and the police chief being required to be a lot more responsive to those elected officials. That is a concern.

Is this something that the Department of Justice--can we see legal ramifications to this? It is a concern of mine that, for example, if community policing is one of the most popular things, I think sometimes it is only because it has the name community in it. A lot of people do not even understand what it is, but if scientifically and academically it is proven to be an ineffective way of policing because it was politicly popular, would the police chief be forced to carry on in that vein, for example? You know, that is just a hypothetical example, but that is the danger of having a police chief responding to elected officials as opposed to the police commission. Have you looked at that?

Mr. Toews: Well, the issue of police governance is a very, very important issue. When we get into the Winnipeg city police situation, we are talking about a very sophisticated police organization, well-trained individuals, and other statutory instruments that come to play in respect of governing the activities and conduct of those police officers, one of which is the Law Enforcement Review Agency.

I am somewhat sceptical of the effectiveness of arm's-length commissions in some cases. I do not know whether the Winnipeg police commission was, in fact, fulfilling its obligation or the task that it was set out originally to do. I am not that familiar with that issue, perhaps, because I am not that directly involved in that relationship.

I want to assure Manitobans that there are appropriate standards that people comply with, but decisions in respect to policing in any community ultimately come down to the elected officials, the mayor and council. The way in which the actual policing conduct occurs is a different issue which is governed by legal statutes such as the Law Enforcement Review Agency, and indeed others that I cannot think of right now.

When I spoke with the MKO in Thompson--I believe it was last year at their conference; indeed, the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) was there--one of the issues that was raised at that time was the issue of governance. To me, when one sets up a new police force where the community may not be that sophisticated in policing matters in terms of a modern police force, the first thing I think that needs to be established is the governance model. We have seen in the past with certain stand-alone police agencies, whether here in Manitoba or otherwise, problems when that governance issue has not been properly addressed. I think one of the greatest challenges to aboriginal policing is to find that appropriate governance mechanism. Certainly Grand Chief Flett recognized that concern.

Now there was a proposal that he and the chiefs at that meeting made in respect of governance. They did not see that that governance model should be a matter that should be imposed immediately. In fact, we signed a memorandum of understanding that we would work together towards the RCMP First Nations Community Policing program which then would bring in the RCMP governance model. So I am not aware of any particular situations that would cause concern for me that the present governance situation related to the Winnipeg city police is inappropriate.

I am certainly satisfied, generally speaking, with the RCMP governance model, although I have some concern that it is our provincial police force, and yet we cannot have as direct a control over the statutory framework or regulatory framework which governs that process. But that is one of the disadvantages of living in a federal government or in a federal system. There are many advantages, but there are some disadvantages, and one of them is the problem that provinces have when they contract with a federal police agency.

I want to say, however, that the co-operation and conduct of the RCMP, certainly the past assistant commissioner, Commissioner Moodie, has just been excellent, and I look forward to working with the new assistant commissioner, Tom Egglestone, who was just installed during a change of command ceremony on last Friday afternoon, just a week ago. So, if the member has specific concerns about the Winnipeg police governance situation that he thinks should be addressed, I would have my staff look at those. I am not satisfied at this point that there is any kind of an egregious problem that needs to be addressed.

Mr. Kowalski: I think there has been a change in how the City of Winnipeg is run by eliminating the board of commissioners; I think, if nothing else, that merits the minister to keep an eye on how that affects police service. That covers half the population of Manitoba, so I know occasionally the minister meets with the chief of police, and that might be something he might want to ask the chief of police: has this change in reporting affected his ability to enforce the law of Manitoba and Canada?

I think it should be a question that should be asked of him because I know of other officers in small-town police forces where you did not give a ticket to the mayor's son. That is to the extreme. It does happen. So, when there is not that arm's length, if whoever the new mayor is wants Chief David Cassels to focus all his attention on one particular area and if David Cassels believed in his best police judgment that that is not the best use of resource and that, can the mayor fire the chief? Or, even more important, in hiring a chief, should it be an independent police commission that finds someone who does not have political ties, who is independent?

We want our judiciary to be independent; we want our Crowns to be fair; and I think we want our chief of police to have a fair amount of independence and not tied too closely to the politicians. I think earlier in these Estimates the minister talked about how, when a survey was done on the public perception of the judicial system, the place where the public had the most confidence in was the police. I think by allowing the politicians too easy, too quick access to the decisions of the policing, could taint that perception. I think it is something that the minister should discuss with the chief of police not only of Winnipeg but anywhere else, if that is an issue for them.

* (1600)

Mr. Toews: It is a good point, but it leads back, I think, to--maybe there is a fundamental difference in philosophy between the member and me in respect to the role of the Legislature and the role of legislation. I have always been a believer that one has to be flexible enough in legislation to allow professional people to exercise their professional opinion. I can only refer to one specific situation which might give the member some guidance as to how I think about the situation, but I know that I was counsel to the government of Manitoba in a particular case where various professionals--and I will not get into any details--opposed a new act and wanted the old act to continue. They were very upset about a new act that had already been passed but not proclaimed. A constitutional challenge was brought to that act, and the old act was struck down. The new act was then proclaimed in force.

In speaking to one of these professional people, when we were met with the constitutional challenge on this new act now as to whether it was constitutional, I said to him how was the administration of the act going. The person said, very well, I like this act a lot. I said, well, that is quite a switch from six months ago. I said why do you like this act so much. He says I can basically do whatever I want under this act because there are so many criteria and checklists. I just go down the checklists and just check a number of things. I do not have to exercise any professional discretion if I did not want to.

I thought to myself is that not interesting. We legislate so much that we take professional judgment and common sense out of the decision maker. So we want to be very careful that our governance of professionals, including police or the police chief, does not hamstring the exercise of common sense. I know, for example, in the area of my own department I do not get involved in any particular prosecution; it is improper for me to do so, I think.

In Great Britain, the attorney general is outside of cabinet, does not even participate in cabinet. They are outside of cabinet. That has been the rule in Great Britain. Here in Canada what we do is, in fact, have the Attorney General, the minister of Justice in cabinet, but issues relating to prosecutions are not discussed in cabinet. I think that is generally the practice. Prosecutions and the reasons why people are prosecuted is an issue that remains at the deputy level and no higher. Now, I am not saying that the deputy does not brief the minister on these matters, but he briefs the minister with only a view of informing the minister rather than actually asking for advice.

Under our Criminal Code, a Minister of Justice can sign a direct indictment, or the Attorney General can sign a direct indictment, that is, to by-pass a preliminary hearing. In this province, the Attorney General does not sign direct indictments. Those direct indictments are signed by the Deputy Attorney General. The reason is that we want to keep political influence out of the prosecution's process. Constitutionally, legally, I have the authority to do that, but what you do is you set up certain--I guess, they are called Chinese walls. I take the expression from a case that the Supreme Court of Canada talked about in terms of conflict of interest, a case that arose out of Winnipeg, in fact, dealing with law firms. But you create certain processes and procedures by which you have an understanding, not to say that that line is not crossed from time to time, because it is not illegal. I think it is best that these responsibilities be clarified on an administrative basis so that political influence is, in fact, minimized.

In the same way, I would hate to see the governance of police and the police chief and the relationship between the police chief and their political taskmasters be overly restricted by legislation. That would concern me, because I think the more legislation you bring into this area, the greater the likelihood of diminishing a person's capacity or, indeed, even willingness to exercise common sense.

Mr. Kowalski: I think I will save the remainder of my comments and questions for, what is it called, concurrence.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 4.1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $442,300.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): We will be pursuing our questions on the department in concurrence this year in the main, but just for the minister's assistance, if you will, or information, three things we will be seeking at concurrence: the first is we understand that there has been an audit or some review of the need for minimum standards for security guards in Manitoba. There was some audit of needs with the security guard companies, and we will be asking for a copy of that report. Second of all, a copy of the report done regarding the administration of the Chief Medical Examiner's office. The third is a particular statistic--and I know the minister will not have staff at hand in the House--and it is simply an update of the Maintenance Enforcement office's 1997 active accounts and, second of all, total arrears.

Mr. Toews: All right, if we will leave that then for concurrence, I will have that material. I also understand that the member wanted some material in respect to The Corrections Act for bills. I will just indicate that my staff will provide the appropriate spreadsheet on The Corrections Act for the member, and whatever material I can give in respect of these three issues I will give. There might be some issues that I need to discuss with my department.

Mr. Mackintosh: I thank the minister for that. I know staff has been reviewing The Corrections Act and The Correctional Services Act and looking at changes. I know they are having a challenge there. So if whatever document is available could be provided at the earliest opportunity, I know staff, for one, would appreciate it as I would as well.

Mr. Toews: I will have that available as quickly as possible. I know that they prepared certain material for me, but I looked it over and I do not see any problem giving it you.

* (1610)

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 4.1.(b) Executive Support (l) Salaries and Employee Benefits $442,300--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $81,000--pass.

4.1.(c) Policy, Planning and Special Projects (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $276,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $139,800--pass.

4.1.(d) Financial and Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $803,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $245,600--pass.

4.1.(e) Human Resource Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $623,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $156,900--pass.

4.1.(f) Computer Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $589,300--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $309,300--pass.

Item 4.2. Criminal Justice (a) Administration (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $352,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $95,800--pass.

Item 4.2.(b) Prosecutions (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $6,176,400--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,293,200--pass; (3) Witness Programs $582,000--pass.

Item 4.2.(c) Provincial Policing $54,642,300--pass.

Item 4.2.(d) Law Enforcement Administration (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $310,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $130,700--pass.

Item 4.2.(e) Public Safety (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,443,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $425,300--pass; (3) Grants $1,041,400--pass.

Item 4.2.(f) Criminal Injuries Compensation (1) Other Expenditures $2,780,000--pass; (2) Less: Reduction in Actuarial Liability ($100,000)--pass.

Item 4.2.(g) Aboriginal Policing (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $113,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $39,400--pass.

Item 4.2.(h) Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $425,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,098,800--pass; (3) Pediatric Cardiac Unit Inquest $500,000--pass.

Resolution 4.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $71,350,100 for Justice, Criminal Justice, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.

Item 4.3. Civil Justice (a) Executive Administration (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $144,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $21,100--pass.

Item 4.3.(b) Manitoba Human Rights Commission (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,039,200--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $375,600--pass.

Item 4.3.(c) Legislative Counsel (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,290,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $370,600--pass.

Item 4.3.(d) Manitoba Law Reform Commission (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits - zero; (2) Other Expenditures - zero; (3) Grant $50,000--pass.

Item 4.3.(e) Family Law (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $587,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $115,400--pass.

Item 4.3.(f) Constitutional Law (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $659,200--pass (2) Other Expenditures $120,300--pass.

Item 4.3.(g) Legal Aid Manitoba (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $6,166,200--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $6,742,600--pass.

Resolution 4.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $17,683,400, (for Justice, Civil Justice, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.)

Item 4.4. Corrections (a) Administration (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $571,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $269,400--pass.

Item 4.4.(b) Adult Corrections (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $29,678,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $5,593,600--pass; (3) External Agencies and Halfway Houses $336,800--pass; (4) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($80,000).

Item 4.4.(c) Correctional Youth Centres (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $10,431,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,170,500--pass.

Item 4.4.(d) Community Corrections (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $8,080,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,787,900--pass; (3) Program Development $2,039,000--pass.

Resolution 4.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $59,878,900 for the Department of Justice, Corrections, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.

4.5 Courts (a) Court Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,807,200--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $995,900--pass.

4.5.(b) Winnipeg Courts (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $7,879,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,702,600--pass.

4.5.(c) Regional Courts (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $4,573,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $2,447,900--pass.

4.5.(d) Judicial Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $7,617,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $999,000--pass.

Resolution 4.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $29,023,800 for the Department of Justice, Courts, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.

* (1620)

The last item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Justice is the Minister's Salary. I wonder do we need to have the minister's staff leave the table at this time for the consideration of this item. Item 4.1. Administration and Finance (a) Minister's Salary $26,300--pass.

Resolution 4.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,693,900 for the Department of Justice, Administration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1999.

This completes the Estimates of the Department of Justice.

The next set of Estimates that we will be considered by this section of the Committee of Supply are the Estimates of the Department of Justice Initiatives. Should we briefly recess and allow the minister and the critics an opportunity to prepare for the commencement of the next set of Estimates? Is that what you want to do, or do you want to continue right through? No, okay, then let us continue.