LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Monday, December 16, 1991

 

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

 

PRAYERS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

TABLING OF REPORTS

 

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for 1990‑91 of the Department of Urban Affairs.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, I have several tablings, firstly, the Quarterly Financial Report for the year ended October 31, 1991, of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation.

      I would also like to table the Public Accounts, Volumes 1 and 2, Financial Statements for the Consolidated Fund, plus Supplementary Information, fiscal year 1990‑91.

      I would also like to table a report to the Legislature, pursuant to Section 56(3) of The Financial Administration Act relating to Supplementary Loan and Guarantee Authority.

      I am also making a report to the Legislature under Section 20 of The Public Officers Act, being Chapter P230 of the Continued Consolidation of the Statutes of Manitoba.  This deals with surety bond issues that I am required to table.

      Finally, I would like to table a report of the Provincial Auditor to the Legislative Assembly for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1991.

      Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to announce that the 1990‑91 Public Accounts, the 1991 Report of the Provincial Auditor and the Special Audit of the Provincial Auditor on the Taxation Division of the Department of Finance will be referred for consideration to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for the committee meeting previously announced for December 17.

 

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

       

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House, and I have copies for all honourable members today.

      Mr. Speaker, today I am asking Manitobans to pause and remember the victims of drunk drivers.  Earlier this morning, I launched the "ribbons for life" campaign, encouraging everyone, including members of this House, to display red ribbons on their vehicles and homes over the holiday season.  I urge everyone to exercise an extra degree of caution.

      Our Manitoba policing agencies will be enforcing the laws on impaired driving with particular care in the weeks to come.  We need to remind ourselves why these laws are in place.  It is not because we want to discourage people from enjoying themselves, but the simple truth is that drunk drivers kill innocent people.

      Let us remember those families whose holiday celebrations will be overshadowed by memories of loved ones struck down by drunk drivers.  Our laws are tough, the toughest in Canada, but they are necessary.  We are determined to get off our streets and highways those drivers who endanger others by disregarding the law, safety and common sense.

      Let us join others who have said no to drinking and driving, and attach one of these ribbons to the door handle of our cars, our radio antennas, our front doors, anywhere that it can be easily seen.  Let us all do our utmost to make sure that impaired drivers do not get behind the wheel, particularly during this holiday season.  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

* * *

* (1335)

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the New Democratic Party, I would like to commend the minister for recognizing the fact that there are victims of this senseless and tragic act and that we on this side of the House will do everything possible to try to prevent and try to assist the government in improving this situation and improving the regulations and the laws that are in effect to ensure that campaigns of this kind are not necessary now or in the future, particularly during the holiday season, during a period of time when individuals turn their attention to their loved ones and turn their attention to thoughts other than having to deal with the horrendous memory and the horrendous tragedy that it is associated with, this red ribbon campaign, and the fact that individuals have, particularly during the Christmas season, had to face the consequence of the loss of a loved one or a family member or a relative.

      I can assure you that we on this side of the House will do everything that we can to assist the minister in ensuring that the laws are enforced, ensuring regulations are enforced. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House will do everything possible to try to improve this situation in the province of Manitoba, not only the laws and regulations, but everything dealing around the whole concept of individuals who abuse the privilege of driving.  We will be offering, not only in this session but following the recess, positive suggestions in this regard to ensure that, as I said earlier in my comments, we do not have to have campaigns of this kind ever again in the province of Manitoba.

      With those brief comments, we commend the minister on taking this step, and we will be offering very positive solutions to a very difficult problem and a very difficult situation in our society.  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

* * *

Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James):  Mr. Speaker, on behalf of our party, I also want to join with the comments of the minister, join with his important words at this season in which many are out and about.  Some unfortunately are still abusing the privilege of driving and trying to combine it with the drinking of alcoholic beverages.  That indeed is a tragedy which is wrought on citizens around this province every year all too frequently.

      I feel compelled to request yet again from the minister‑‑and I know he and I have joined comments on this on many occasions before.  The Christmas season is one in which we particularly think about drinking and driving, but indeed, it is a year‑round problem.  It is a year‑round problem which I believe can be addressed best through the information to people who may choose to drink and drive that they will be caught, because that is the thing which we learned from the studies that are done.  It is that those who are still drinking and driving are doing it in large part, not because they do not know the consequences will be horrendous if they are caught, but because they think they will not get caught.  That indeed is a fallacy.

      We need to get that message out.  This is part of getting that message out, and I appreciate that.  I simply want to pick up on the comment from the minister that the police will be enforcing the laws on impaired driving with particular care in the weeks to come.  I look forward to the day when we have the sort of ALERT programs year round in this province, which I believe will be necessary and will in time come.  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Introduction of Guests

       

Mr. Speaker:  Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from the Linden Meadows School, eighteen Grade 9 students.  They are under the direction of Cindy Tinsley.  This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

      On behalf of all honourable members, we welcome you here this afternoon.

* (1340)

 

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

       

Provincial Auditor's Report

Manitoba Data Services

       

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  My question is to the Minister of Finance.

      We have just had an opportunity to review some of the sections in the Auditor's report, Mr. Speaker, and some of these issues that are raised give us very direct concern about answers the Minister of Finance has provided to the House and people of Manitoba in past years.

      We have raised the issue of Manitoba Data Services in terms of its confidentiality of information, and the Minister of Finance has repeatedly said to people in this Chamber and the people of the province of Manitoba that the confidentiality is not an issue that we should be concerned about.  Yet the Auditor's report, which we just received, makes very direct statements about the confidentiality of information, and improvements are required to achieve adequate monitoring of controls in the Manitoba Data Services to ensure accurate and complete processing of information and appropriate safeguarding over confidential information and data.

      I ask the Minister of Finance why he told this Chamber last year that confidentiality was not a problem and why now the Auditor is telling us it is a problem for Manitobans?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, I got to give credit to the Leader of the NDP.  I mean, he had the document for a whole three or four minutes, and he took out of it, in that space of time, exactly what we wanted; yet what he did take out, he took completely out of context.

      The Provincial Auditor was asked to look at the divestiture process of Manitoba Data Services.  Indeed, I do not have time to quote chapter and verse what he says.  Indeed, everything was done open up, everything was done in a proper fashion, and indeed, if I wanted to read it out of context, I would say it was a model divestiture by the Provincial Auditor's work.

      Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge there was a sensitive area of maintaining secrecy of information.  We indicated that there had to be monitoring procedure in place, and indeed, as pointed out within the Auditor's report, page 17, Comments of Officials, the info office of the Department of Finance indicates that an audit is being scheduled for the second quarter of 1992, as we said would happen, as we said would go to safeguard all of the sensitive information that was held in the past by Manitoba Data Services, is held, but under the control then, as it is now, under the government of the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Doer:  Of course, the minister can talk all he wants about it, but it said, improvements are required to achieve adequate dealings of the confidentiality of information of Manitoba Data Services.  Those are not just obscure facts, Mr. Speaker.  These are the health care records of Manitobans.  These are other very‑‑licensing records, the Agricultural Credit Corporation records, so we would suggest these are very important issues.

 

Fiscal Stabilization Fund

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  A further question to the minister of divestiture, the Minister of Finance of the Province of Manitoba, we have raised repeatedly that the Auditor has stated that the $77 million in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund should not be placed in that fund, Mr. Speaker.  The Minister of Finance has repeatedly defended that decision.  Again, the Auditor has stated that it creates confusion on behalf of Manitobans reading that report.  We would note that every budget report has that money in the Fiscal Stabilization.  I would ask the Minister of Finance why he continues to place that fund in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund when, in fact, it is not an asset for purposes of the people of Manitoba?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, I will at another time, I suppose, address my comments or finish my comments with respect to the security aspect of Manitoba Data Services divestiture.

      The member asked a question dealing with the lodging of the value of shares through the divestiture of Manfor and the lodging of the value of those shares within the stabilization account. The Provincial Auditor and the government are at odds as to where the value of those shares should be lodged.  Indeed, as we have said on several occasions, where does one take extraordinary income or the value, and where do they do it?  Do they apply it against one year, one year in which it comes, or is it better to take the value, put it into account and share the receipts over a period of time?

      We have gone one step further.  We said not a dollar of that will be spent until it has materialized.  That is stated.  That is stated very clearly.  I have said that 20 times if I have said it once, and I will say it again.  To me it is an academic discussion.  Indeed, of the $77 million, not $1 will be spent until it materializes.

* (1345)

Mr. Doer:  Well, I guess that begs the question, Mr. Speaker, some Fiscal Stabilization Fund.  You have $77 million in a fund hat is worth not $1, as the Minister of Finance has just told us in this Chamber.

      Notwithstanding the fact that we have not the jobs in either one of these divestitures of Repap, we have not the jobs of the divestiture of Data Services, notwithstanding the job boasts from the government opposite, I would ask the Minister of Finance, would he end the confusion and take that fund, that asset that is not an asset, out of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund so all Manitobans will really know what is an asset in the fund and what is just a public relations gesture of the Minister of Finance in the budget?

Mr. Manness:  Two points Mr. Speaker.  At least, when we set up a fund, we put money into it.  We put in $200 million or $300 million, not like the Energy and Heritage Fund of the members opposite, where the glowing legislation came forward, and after four years, there was not $1 that went into it.

      Mr. Speaker, the Provincial Auditor never asked us to take the asset away.  He asked us to set up a liability, an allowance against that was equivalent to the asset.  We have said, as an offset against that, we will not in any way call upon a dollar of the value of those shares.  Indeed, we are not playing a shell game.  We are fully disclosing where the value is.  We are fully disclosing that indeed a dollar will not be spent until that value is realized.  That is an open way of accounting, and we defy any member to tell us opposite.

       

Impaired Drivers Reporting Delay

       

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for the Motor Vehicle Branch.

      We have confirmed that, in some cases, from the time a drunken driver is convicted until the conviction shows up at the Motor Vehicle Branch or on police records, a period of six weeks can pass, Mr. Speaker.  How can the minister, in the light of the Justice minister's announcement and constant press conferences on drunk drivers, allow drunk drivers to be on the road potentially for a period of six weeks?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I follow the honourable member's question, and perhaps in his supplementary, he will make that clear.  My understanding of Bill 3 is that, upon apprehension, an alleged drunk driver's licence is taken, a seven‑day permit given, and then, after seven days, the licence is no good.  The permit is then no good for a period of 90 days.

Mr. Chomiak:  Mr. Speaker, perhaps if the minister can check with his staff, they can confirm the fact‑‑in my supplementary, the minister can find out for us why, from a period of conviction on trial until the Motor Vehicle Branch puts it on its records, six weeks can pass and the individual can be out there driving before the police or anyone else will know that person is convicted.

Mr. McCrae:  I will check into that, but the honourable member should acknowledge, the accused knows he is suspended and ought not to be driving.  If he or she is apprehended driving suspended, the car will be impounded, and now, as a result of legislation in the last session, that impoundment will be doubled to 60 days impoundment on subsequent offences.  The point is, the accused knows.

      As I say, I will check on it.  If there is any delay in recording this kind of information, we will see what we can do about it.

Mr. Chomiak:  I can assure the minister there is a six‑week delay.

      I would like to ask my supplementary.  Why does the minister not know?  Why does the minister of the Motor Vehicle Branch not know that people can be on the road for six weeks when they are drunk drivers, and the police and no one else can find out about it?

Mr. McCrae:  I was not aware, Mr. Speaker, that they changed the procedure in court.  The driver's licence is suspended, if there is one, is relinquished at that time, if it has not been taken previously, which it is under Bill 3.  If more than 90 days have passed before a person gets to court, the judge takes a person's licence.

* (1350)

 

Economic Growth

Government Initiatives

 

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, the First Minister has staked his entire political reputation upon his ability to manage the economy.  Those are his words.  All Manitobans have seen so far is a strange two‑step dance around Manitobans.  There seems to be some disagreement as to who is doing the leading.  Is it the Premier or is it the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness)?  For example, we have a Minister of Finance saying that he has to, in fact, control social programs, and we have a denial from the Premier that that is the thrust to the economic initiative of this government.

      Mr. Speaker, will the First Minister sit down with his Finance minister and establish an economic agenda so that they will stop this two‑step dance around each other without any knowledge of who is doing the leading?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  Mr. Speaker, I am entirely unaware of what the Leader of the Liberal Party is getting at.  Perhaps by her second question, I will have a better indication of what she is after.

 

First Ministers' Conference

Government Agenda

 

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, not only do they disagree about the thrust, one given by the Minister of Finance and denied by the Premier of the province, but we had the spectre of the Premier calling for a First Ministers' conference and, on television on Friday night, the Finance minister, in fact, suggesting that this could be a very negative process.

      Can the First Minister tell this House today, since his Finance minister did not have any to share with the other Finance ministers, what new, innovative ideas he will be taking to Thursday's meeting?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  Mr. Speaker, I am firstly very pleased that the federal government, in response to the letter that I sent on December 9 to the Prime Minister, has agreed to the holding of a First Ministers' conference on the economy.  I am also informed that, as a result of urgings by our Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and indeed all Ministers of Finance across the country, the federal Minister of Finance, Mr. Mazankowski, in the midst of his discussions with the Finance ministers, left to meet with the Prime Minister and had discussions with him that resulted in ultimately the federal government making that decision.

      It seems to me that everybody was on board.  Everybody was working in the same direction, and everybody was asking for the First Ministers' conference on the economy.  As a result of the combined efforts of various First Ministers in the country, who urged the federal government and the Finance ministers, that decision was made.

      I might say that in my letter on December 9 to the Prime Minister, I laid out what I thought were several suggestions for agenda topics.  I said firstly that we ought to discuss a national industrial and economic strategy aimed at diversifying all regions, including adjustment measures for all regions, not just Quebec.

      I said that fiscal and economic co‑ordination, including monetary policy, deficits and fiscal arrangements such as equalization and EPF ought to be an agenda topic for this First Ministers' meeting.

      I said that joint budget guidelines or targets might be another matter that we ought to discuss.  I said agriculture, including the GATT round, which is coming very close, as we understand it, to a very critical point, ought to be discussed. I had said that other trade issues, including interprovincial trade barrier reduction agreements and indeed the involvement of the provinces‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

 

Point of Order

       

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader):  On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, we certainly have no objection to the minister outlining what economic plans, if any, this government has, but we are limited in Question Period time.  I would suggest perhaps the First Minister could table the letter, as is according to our rules, and perhaps might consider having a ministerial statement on the position of the government, at which time, we could have a more detailed analysis here in Question Period.

Mr. Speaker:  On the point of order raised, I would like to remind the honourable minister that answers to questions should be as brief as possible.

* (1355)

 

Education and Training Initiative

       

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, with a final supplementary question.  What we are looking for are new, innovative ideas.  We have not heard any yet.  Will the First Minister tell us if he will be supporting the position taken by the Premier of New Brunswick that there must be a national education and training initiative, or will he be supporting his federal Tory cousins who are suggesting this should be a decentralized initiative and totally offloaded to the provinces?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I did say on Friday evening, in my Journal interview, that I agreed with the Premier of New Brunswick that indeed that was an area in which we ought to be working together in a co‑ordinated fashion. I said that our human resource capital was a very important part of our national and international competitiveness, and one that we ought to work on in a co‑ordinated fashion.

      I have also talked openly about the need for the federal government to take the greater responsibility in the area of education and that I disagree with provinces such as Quebec that we ought to just simply decentralize all of these various powers and authorities to Ottawa, that this was one area in which Ottawa ought to have a greater role in the policy with respect to education and national training initiatives.

 

Depo-Provera

Licence Approval

 

Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (St. Johns):  Mr. Speaker, there is grave concern in our community that approval of Depo‑Provera as an injectable contraceptive is back on the federal agenda and that approval of this contraceptive is imminent.  In fact, in just a few short moments, the Canadian Coalition of Depo‑Provera will be holding a press conference here in Winnipeg because of this information and because of the clear links between this drug and high instance of osteoporosis and breast cancer.

      I would like to ask the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), what information does he have regarding federal government intentions to give in to Upjohn's aggressive campaign and to have Depo‑Provera approved as an injectable long‑lasting contraceptive.

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, the issue of Depo‑Provera is one that concerns us a great deal, and we have attempted to seek information from the federal government as to whether some of the rumours which my honourable friend refers to are in fact accurate, as to whether there are recent requests, once again, to have the drug licensed, particularly for contraceptive purposes.

      Mr. Speaker, we have been unable to confirm the accuracy or inaccuracy of that rumour.  We do share concerns with those who are opposed to the licensing of Depo‑Provera for purposes that are being currently under investigation in other nations.  We simply have made the case with the federal government that we do not believe there should be any licensing for any purposes for which Depo‑Provera may be used until there is sufficient and very excellent research documentation to assure its safety to women who may use the pharmaceutical.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  That information is certainly appreciated.

      I am wondering if the Minister of Health, given the uncertainty about whether or not Depo‑Provera will be approved, would today write or call his federal counterpart and request once again that Depo‑Provera not be approved at this time as an injectable contraceptive.

Mr. Orchard:  I think it is fair to say that we have already done that, because we heard the same rumours some time ago that there was yet another attempt at licensing.  In our discussions and departmental discussions with the federal government, as I said in my first answer, we are unable to confirm the accuracy or the inaccuracy of that rumour.

      Mr. Speaker, we have made the position and taken the position consistently with the federal government and the licensing agency that no such licence should be granted until adequate assurance of safety of the product is met.  That position has been communicated to the federal government in the very recent past.

* (1400)

 

Breast Cancer

Government Initiatives

 

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns):  I am wondering what steps are being undertaken by this minister and this government to reduce the very high incidence of death among women attributable to breast cancer.  By the minister's own statistics, for the most recent year, there were 157 deaths and 655 diagnosed cases of breast cancer.  What steps are being taken while this government awaits for the national study on the breast screening mammogram?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, a number of initiatives, not the least of which is a working group of experts from the province of Manitoba to provide guidance and counsel to the ministry in terms of a breast cancer screening mammography program.

      It will be probably in January that I will release to my honourable friend the recommendations of that working group.  We have the same level of concern that has been expressed in recent articles about the incidence of and the seriousness of breast cancer as a killing disease entity of women.

      We are committed in the province to do whatever we can within the resources available and within the appropriate technologies available to assure the best possible protection against the incidence of breast cancer in women.  That can take a number of events, a number of issues that I no doubt will share with you at a future date.

 

Workers Compensation

Long-term Benefits

 

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona):  Mr. Speaker, I have a brief quote: A number of long‑term claims have been identified, and it is unknown whether the claimants have been given an adequate opportunity to become independent of the compensation system, in other words, to force these injured workers off benefits to which they are entitled.  The quote comes from Board Talk.

      Can the minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board explain the reasons why there has been a marked increase in the numbers of long‑term injured workers who have received termination of benefits letters, when it is clear that they are unfit to return to active duties?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act):  I can tell the House that, as part of their review of long‑term cases, the board undertakes on a regular basis to review whether people are able to return to the work force.  I am aware of a number of cases, as the member for Transcona is, where that is questionable, in which case, we ask those people to use the appeal process to determine whether or not that in fact is the case.

Mr. Reid:  Can the minister explain why the benefits are being terminated for these individuals on long‑term disability, why they should have to appeal the process instead of having them go through the process of having advice from the medical practitioners in the province to ascertain whether or not they are able to return to active employment?

Mr. Praznik:  Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that, in those cases where benefits are terminated, they are done on the basis of some assessment that the person is able to go back to work.  I say this to the member for Transcona, the concern that he raised is certainly a valid one and certainly one that I share with him.  I give him the assurance, as minister, that I raised this with the board.  I want to ensure that process is one that is done fairly and, if there are cases where it is not done fairly, that certainly they are brought to my attention and we will raise them with the board.

 

Medical Advice

       

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona):  Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary to the same minister:  Can the minister explain why some doctors on the payroll of the WCB are overruling the advice given to injured workers by the many renowned medical specialists we are fortunate to have in this province?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act):  Mr. Speaker, I share the concerns of the member for Transcona.  One of the matters in terms of internal use of doctors at the board that I have raised with administration is to ensure that doctors there are in fact producing medical information that is current with specialists in the profession.  If that is not the case, if there are from time to time doctors who are making statements that are resulting in appeals that are being won by the claimants, then those practitioners' statuses with the board will have to be looked at.

     

Court of Queen's Bench

Appeal Screening Court

 

Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James):  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

      The minister has consistently‑‑and as early on in his tenure as Minister of Justice, the first time he has spoken publicly‑‑been committed to putting a very high priority on access to justice.  To that end, he has put forward, and we have supported on occasion, amendments to the small claims practices act in this province, a very important system of adjudication for claims under $5,000.

      Mr. Speaker, now, however, we have learned that starting April 10, 1992, it is the intention of the Court of Queen's Bench to operate a screening court for appeals from Small Claims, weeding out those that they determine are not worthy of having a second look.

      Mr. Speaker, can the minister indicate to the House why this quite drastic curtailment of appeal rights for small claims litigants is necessary and how it accords with his stated intention to increase access to the courts?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, we have made improvements to the handling of small claims cases in the province of Manitoba.  The screening that has worked very well in regard to the backlog reduction program in criminal courts has been also looked at by representatives of the Court of Queen's Bench.  These matters that are to go forward, go forward after discussion amongst the judiciary and the department.

      We in Manitoba are the only province to have the judiciary involved in the administration of the justice system in the way that we do here in Manitoba through our courts administration board.  That kind of a decision would flow from that kind of judicial input.  The judiciary has quite a role, as the honourable member would know, in the administration of justice in Manitoba.  If the honourable member thinks that somehow somebody's rights are going to be infringed, I would like to know how.  If he has any examples that he would like to bring to my attention, I would be pleased to deal with them.

Mr. Edwards:  Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question to the minister is:  Does the minister support this new, untested restriction of appeal rights which heretofore in this province has not been a part of our system?  Does he support that restriction which was not put forward as a potential consequence of the last amendment act we put forward and which will result in litigants with claims under $5,000 never having their claim heard by a legally trained judge?

Mr. McCrae:  We have been operating small claims without using legally trained judges for some time.  The honourable member, if he is against handling cases in our Small Claims Court or in any of our court systems, if he is against a fairness and an efficiency that goes with certain changes, then he should say so.  If the honourable member is against reform of our judicial institutions, then let him say so.

      I say that there are problems in the justice system that require correction.  There are some people in the legal community who would want to stand in the way of improvements in our justice system.  I have seen it before, and I hope I am not seeing it again from the honourable member for St. James.

Mr. Edwards:  Mr. Speaker, if indeed a small claims hearing is going to now be a matter‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  Question, please.

Mr. Edwards:  Mr. Speaker, the minister has talked about justice for the masses.  Let us see him do it.  Will he at least commit today to moving toward legally trained judges in this province, seeing as we are one of the only provinces left in the country in which you cannot get before a legally trained judge?  Why are litigants for under $5,000 not worthy of that kind of treatment?

Mr. McCrae:  If the honourable member has a complaint that someone has brought to his attention, I would be very happy to look at it, Mr. Speaker.  I have not received any complaints about the system that we have.  If the honourable member wants to bring to my attention any specific complaints from individual Manitobans, that is what I am here for.  We try to deal with those things very expeditiously as well.

      I am disturbed by the attitude that I see in the honourable member of standing in the way of change because, you see, the way improvements happen is through change.

 

Point of Order

     

Mr. Edwards:  Mr. Speaker, I am disturbed by the superfluous comments of the Minister of Justice attacking my motives in asking that question, when after three attempts, he still has not‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member does not have a point of order.  It is a dispute over the facts.

* (1410)

 

Domtar Site

Cleanup

 

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson):  Mr. Speaker, this government's involvement in the Domtar hazardous waste contamination in Radisson reeks of political interference and negligence.  I am going to table and read from a memo from the regional supervisor for dangerous goods when he said that he would have a difficult time justifying the situation in a public forum.  I find it incomprehensible that the government can allow the public to be inconvenienced and threatened, all the while letting Domtar stall with the cleanup.

      My question is for the Minister of Environment.  What was the basis in allowing the delays in the clean‑up proposal or the cleanup of this site when we know that there have been donations from Domtar to both political parties, and we know of the Premier's errors?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment):  Mr. Speaker, I find it quite surprising that the member is now only catching up on what the Free Press was talking about a number of weeks ago. It is obvious that we have had some considerable concern about the process that Domtar has been involved in, but I think there is one thing that the community needs to be made perfectly aware of, that the technology has evolved so that we can today do a much better cleanup than was proposed under the previous administration.  The agreement that they struck was to cap it and walk away.

Ms. Cerilli:  Mr. Speaker, any time anyone wants some information from his department‑‑was it merely another public relations exercise to issue the work orders, there were six work orders, to be done by December 15, or has there been any action with regard especially to the removal of the containers on the site and the‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

Mr. Cummings:  Mr. Speaker, it has long been our concern as to the willingness of the corporation to live up to direct orders. They have accepted the orders as they were written, and it is our expectation that they will be completed.  If they are not, we will take appropriate action to make sure that they are.

Ms. Cerilli:  Mr. Speaker, it is past the deadline.  What is it going to take for this minister to begin to enforce the environmental legislations that are in place?  They have talked about getting tough‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

Mr. Cummings:  Mr. Speaker, the Domtar site was left in limbo for 10 years, primarily under the administration and in the constituency of the previous ministry of Environment.  They neglected to get on with the cleanup.  The reason that there has been some activity on the last three sites was started by the member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Connery), so we can get on with a proper and complete cleanup.

 

School of Psychiatric Nursing

Reopening

 

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk):  Mr. Speaker, in the April budget, the Minister of Health closed the Selkirk School of Psychiatric Nursing.  The closure took millions of dollars out of the Selkirk economy and put the education of mental health care workers in this province in complete disarray.  The nine months that have passed since the closure of the school have given the minister the opportunity to reflect upon his bad decision.

      I would ask the minister now to rescind the closure of the school.

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, I believe this issue was dealt with in quite a lot of detail during the last session.  I note with interest though that my honourable friend did not take the time during Health Estimates to come in and pose questions about the school at Selkirk closing.  I know he did not do that because he would have a tough time getting the issue by the member for Brandon East (Mr. Evans) whose constituency in the city of Brandon is benefitting greatly from the consolidation and improvement of the School of Psychiatric Nursing in Brandon.

 

Selkirk Mental Health Centre

Forensic Unit

 

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk):  Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm the information that I received that the forensic unit being negotiated for the Selkirk Mental Health Centre is not going to be built?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  No, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Dewar:  Can this minister provide the House and the people of Selkirk the reason why it is not going to be there?

Mr. Orchard:  No, Mr. Speaker.

 

Snow Lake, Manitoba

Labour Adjustment Committee

 

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for Energy and Mines.  The community of Snow Lake is reeling under the closure of a couple of mines, one in July and another one for February, the loss of some 110 jobs out of employment of some 330 at HBM&S.

      My question to the minister is:  Has the minister, through the Labour Adjustment Committee, finally agreed to support the relocation monies that should be available to the people who left Snow Lake for jobs in Flin Flon and Leaf Rapids?

Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines):  Mr. Speaker, of course, I am not responsible for the Labour Adjustment Committee, but I understand that anyone who has been relocated or is about to be relocated will benefit from the Labour Adjustment Committee and the monies it has available for the benefit of those employees.

Mr. Storie:  Mr. Speaker, the Province of Manitoba has not contributed its share.

 

Mineral Exploration

       

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  My question to the minister is: Will the minister respond to requests from the LGD of Lynn Lake and the town of Snow Lake and commit, through Manitoba Mineral Resources, to double the exploration budget of MMR so that we can be assured that the communities of Snow Lake and Leaf Rapids are going to continue to exist beyond 1993‑94?

Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines):  Manitoba Mineral Resources have been directed and have indeed been carrying out, by themselves and also leaving other monies from private industry, to explore in the Snow Lake area.

      I should remind, and I am sure that the member for Flin Flon well knows that, in 20 years starting from about 1970, millions of dollars have been spent and no new mines were found.  The finding of mines is a difficult procedure, but we are making every effort and spending all monies we can spare to locate new deposits in that area.  The seven mines that were found in the Snow Lake area were found some years ago, and in spite of having spent many millions of dollars in that area, we have not found a new deposit in the last 20 years.

Mr. Storie:  Mr. Speaker, the money is available through the Manitoba Mineral Resources.  Can the minister explain to the city councillors in Snow Lake why their community is going to be allowed to shrivel and die while this minister sits on assets of MMR of some $20 million?

Mr. Neufeld:  Well, Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Mineral Resources have been spending money in that area.  The Manitoba Mineral Resources have been leaving money from the industry to spend money in that area.  The professionals who are in the area know where to look and know where they might find, but the ability to find is one that is‑‑we cannot direct the prospectors to a specific area.  We can tell them to try to locate some deposits in an area, but to find it is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

 

GATT Negotiations

Marketing Boards

 

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, at the recent concerned farmers' protest in Ottawa, a protest that this government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to attend, there was a GATT briefing.  In that GATT briefing, it was very clear to those farmers in attendance that the marketing boards were very much on the table of the GATT negotiations and that only Japan, Korea and Canada were the least interested in defending them.

      Can the Minister of Agriculture tell this House what recent discussions he has had with the appropriate federal ministers as to what will Canada's position be if it is a take‑it‑or‑leave‑it situation with respect to the marketing boards?

* (1420)

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture):  Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member that I have spoken with the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Grains and Oilseeds, both who have been in Europe to discuss this issue.  Our position that we put forward well over a year ago was that, first and foremost, we want the removal of export subsidies and, secondly, that strengthening the clarification of Article XI is still our official position.  There is no other position on the table at this time.

Mrs. Carstairs:  The sense of this meeting was clearly that they were going to be sacrificed.

      Has the minister had no discussions at all as to what will be the final and ultimate position of our government when they are given a take‑it‑or‑leave‑it contract?

Mr. Findlay:  Mr. Speaker, the member is creating a very hypothetical situation.  There is no take‑it‑or‑leave‑it position on the table at this time.  We are at the table negotiating at this very moment and continue to be there with our position intact from a year ago.

Mr. Speaker:  Time for Oral Questions has expired.

 

Nonpolitical Statements

       

Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway):  Mr. Speaker, I seek the leave of the House in order to make a nonpolitical statement.

Mr. Speaker:  Does the honourable member for Broadway have leave to make a nonpolitical statement?

Some Honourable Members:  Leave.

Mr. Speaker: