LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday,
February 27, 1992
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
Mr. Clerk (William
Remnant): I must inform the House of the unavoidable
absence of Mr. Speaker and, in accordance with the Statutes, call upon the Deputy
Speaker to take the Chair.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
Madam Deputy Speaker
(Louise Dacquay): I have reviewed the petition, and it conforms
with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read?
The petition of the undersigned citizens
of the
THAT child abuse is a crime abhorred by
all good citizens of our society, but nonetheless it exists in today's world;
and
It is the responsibility of the government
to recognize and deal with this most vicious of crimes; and
Programs like the Fight Back Against Child
Abuse campaign raise public awareness and necessary funds to deal with the
crime; and
The decision to terminate the Fight Back
Against Child Abuse campaign will hamper the efforts of all good citizens to
help abused children.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray
that the Legislature of the
I have reviewed the petition, and it
conforms with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the
rules. Is it the will of the House to
have the petition read?
The petition of the undersigned citizens
of the
THAT child abuse is a crime abhorred by
all good citizens of our society, but nonetheless it exists in today's world;
and
It is the responsibility of the government
to recognize and deal with this most vicious of crimes; and
Programs like the Fight Back Against Child
Abuse campaign raise public awareness and necessary funds to deal with the crime;
and
The decision to terminate the Fight Back
Against Child Abuse campaign will hamper the efforts of all good citizens to
help abused children.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray
that the Legislature of the
I have reviewed the petition, and it conforms
with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the
rules. Is it the will of the House to
have the petition read?
The petition of the undersigned citizens
of the
THAT child abuse is a crime abhorred by
all good citizens of our society, but nonetheless it exists in today's world;
and
It is the responsibility of the government
to recognize and deal with this most vicious of crimes; and
Programs like the Fight Back Against Child
Abuse campaign raise public awareness and necessary funds to deal with the
crime; and
The decision to terminate the Fight Back
Against Child Abuse campaign will hamper the efforts of all good citizens to
help abused children.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray
that the Legislature of the
* (1335)
TABLING OF
REPORTS
Hon. Gerald Ducharme
(Minister of Government Services): Madam
Deputy Speaker, I would like to table the '90‑91 Annual Report for the
Department of Government Services.
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
I would just like to table the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation Quarterly Report,
Nine Months, April to December, 1991.
Introduction
of Guests
Madam Deputy Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to
inform the House, there are twenty‑four Grade 5 students from
On behalf of all honourable members, I
welcome you this afternoon.
ORAL
QUESTION PERIOD
Repap
Manitoba Inc.
Renegotiations
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): For the last two and a half years, Madam
Deputy Speaker, we have been raising a number of concerns on the negotiated
agreement between the government of the
Members opposite and other members in this
Chamber attacked us right through the election for the concerns that we had
raised on behalf of Manitobans, yet today, the Minister of Finance states‑‑and
the logic of the government falls like a house of cards when he states that we
will negotiate some of the conditions of the agreement that were not in the
best interests of
He has now agreed to negotiate specific
parts of the project, unfortunately for all the wrong reasons, reasons due to
the finances of the corporation in a letter that was given to the Minister of Finance
and responded to by the government one day later.
I would ask the minister responsible for
this divestiture, what assurances can he give the people of
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
what is obvious firstly is that the official opposition maintains and continues
their tirade against Repap. They have
been against Repap from Day One. They
never wanted an outside corporation to come to this province. They wanted the government to continue to own
Manfor. They wanted a massive pollution
to continue at that site and they had‑‑and then $30‑million
annual losses. That is what the members
opposite wanted.
When the company approached us to begin to
consider sitting down and restructuring the agreement, given the incredible
economic losses, financial losses within that industry, totalling $2 billion in
the calendar year 1991, given significant large numbers of plant closures
throughout the forest products industry across
Those conditions have been laid out within
the press release. I dare say they have
nothing to do with the fact that the NDP may have raised those issues. Four years later, since we have done the
deal, the world changes, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it is right and proper to
include those elements of which chlorine bleaching is certainly one significant
aspect in the restructuring process.
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Madam Deputy Speaker, let not the record show
for one moment the words the Minister of Finance put on the record.
We have always been in favour of an
agreement with the Repap corporation. We
have been opposed to the rotten deal the Minister of Finance negotiated with
that agreement from Day One, along with thousands of Manitobans.
* (1340)
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
The honourable Leader to put a question.
Mr. Doer: Madam Deputy Speaker, anybody who had any
understanding of future jobs would have to predict future markets. That did not include chlorine production.
My question is to the Minister of
Finance. The relationship this
government has with
I would ask the Minister of Finance: How does he expect to have a partnership with
the aboriginal people in the
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
courts ultimately will decide whose claims are relevant or accurate or indeed
justified. Let not the Leader of the NDP
rewrite history. We provided an access
to cutting rights, an area configured many years ago. Indeed it was Manfor's; for the most part, it
was Manfor's old cutting area‑‑[interjection] Yes, it was, and the
area of which the member asks was always part of the Manfor cutting area.
Let not him try to give the appearance
that somebody's rights were trampled on because they were owned, indeed they
were accessed by Manfor previously, and they were more or less provided in the
same configuration as provided to Repap, so I would insist that the member
acknowledge that fact.
Cutting
Area
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not point out the
difference between publicly owned corporations with publicly owned land and
private corporations. The Minister of Finance would not understand that.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I have a further
question to the Minister of Finance. He
has not answered the question of partnership with aboriginal people, and
judging from the AJI, I think we are in real difficulty with members opposite.
Madam Deputy Speaker, we did ask the
Minister of Finance in August of‑‑[interjection]
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
The honourable Leader of the Opposition to put his question now, please.
Mr. Doer: Madam Deputy Speaker, my question is to the
Minister of Finance.
On a number of occasions, we asked the
Minister of Finance whether he would change the forest cut area to go into the
Why did the Minister of Finance not
include in his conditions of negotiations with Repap the whole area of the
forest cut area, within the
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy
Speaker, I am kind of perplexed at the question because indeed, if the member
has seen the transfer of letters back and forth, he would know that indeed we
have saved for ourselves the right to either include or exclude the southern
cutting area. I mean, that is one of the
issues that will be brought to the restructuring process. There always will be a balance. If this is going to be a world‑size
investment, obviously, it has to have economics associated with that.
Members opposite will know that sometimes
requires a larger area of which to draw fibre than otherwise might be the case.
Our last deal, of course, involved the southern wood area of the
* (1345)
Repap
Manitoba Inc.
Employment
Creation Strategy
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The
Pas): Madam Deputy Speaker, my questions are also
directed to the Minister of Finance.
Well, once more Repap has told this
government to jump and they have made the big jump. In view of the fact that the promised best
efforts at jobs of the original deal which has fallen flat, what job guarantees
will this minister be negotiating now, now that the deal has totally unravelled
for citizens of The Pas and the surrounding area?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
I would remind the member opposite, this is what has happened in the last year
within the forest products industry. Abitibi‑Price, Thunder Bay‑‑closed;
Cascade,
Madam Deputy Speaker, the old Manfor
plant, which represented such a tremendous economic benefit to The Pas and
district and, indeed, to many of the members of The Pas Indian band and
environs is open today. The work force,
although down somewhat, still is being productively utilized. I can say to the member, this plant is still
operating, and it is not costing the taxpayers of this province $30 million a
year. I would think the member would be
thankful for that fact.
Employment
Protection
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The
Pas): Madam Deputy Speaker, my question is again to
the Minister of Finance.
What contingency plan does this minister
have to protect the jobs of The Pas and surrounding communities if the
financial problems of Repap continue or worsen?
Hon.
Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am not going to speculate as to the future
viability of Repap. I say one thing,
though. I am thankful that it is Repap,
because what you have in that organization, you have a forest product concern that
has the most state‑of‑the‑art technology and plant in
Budget
Impact on The Pas,
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The
Pas): Since northern
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
I kind of resent the question because I know we have made a commitment of $50
million plus. I wonder whether or not,
in concert, the member wrote that question from the member for Flin Flon (Mr.
Storie) when we put $50 million toward a refurbishment of the smelter at Flin
Flon. I wonder if his statement then is
specifically directed for The Pas when he says northern
I would say to the member opposite that
the greatest protection his constituents have is obviously the continuing
development with respect to the fibre source and indeed the forest products
industry in and around The Pas. I would
think the member opposite would be encouraging us to restructure this deal in
the best way to protect the interests of his constituents and indeed the
economy of our province. I would think
that would be the No. 1 issue in the mind of the member for The Pas.
* (1350)
Repap
Manitoba Inc.
Benefits
to
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Madam
Deputy Speaker, I would like to take this House back a couple of years when we
heard the glowing forecast of what was going to happen as a result of the sale
of Manfor to Repap.
One of the issues that I raised over and
over again was the issue of whether we were, at any point in time, going to
receive any cash benefit. The Minister
of Finance said, and I quote: She was talking nonsense. We are going to get $132 million over several
years. He said: To say otherwise, is to say I am lying.
Will the Minister of Finance tell the
House today just how much of that $132 million the Treasury of Manitoba has
received?
Hon.
Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker, one of the great ironies
of this continuing serial, I suppose one could use, is that it is because‑‑
An Honourable Member: It is a nightmare.
Mr. Manness: Well, the member says a nightmare. I do not know how it is a nightmare when
Manfor is employing people and production is being maintained.
Specific to the question, Madam Deputy
Speaker, it is because the original deal was so well structured, in my view,
and because today, in my view, we could approach the courts if we wanted to and
realize a significant portion of the sum of money of which the member
uses. Because the deal is so hard
structured is the reason why Repap is asking us to restructure it.
I would say to the member, if she wants us
basically as a province to realize, on the incredible covenants that we have in
the contract, to guarantee in large measure the amount of money she is talking
about, then she has to tell us also how it is that we are going to maintain the
operation at Manfor if Repap is then forced into insolvency because of that action. That then rests on her shoulders, because
that is what is at issue here.
Renegotiation
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): The
answer is, we have not received one of those $132 million.
Let me go on to quote again from this
minister. In a response to a statement
that I had made that the sale agreement leaves many questions, the Minister of
Finance said he could not understand his opponents' reactions, quote: I can understand why Mrs. Carstairs is
confused. It is a complicated deal, and
she has a limited understanding of how a divestiture is carried out, but there
is no excuse for Mr. Storie.
Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, sexism aside,
can the Minister of Finance tell us how this wonderful divestiture needs to be
renegotiated today in light of the disaster negotiation that he negotiated the
first time, and will he back away from doing the renegotiations and resign?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
I found out early on, when I came into public life, one should not take those
types of statements so personally. They
come and go with the flow of debate‑‑[interjection] Yes,
particularly when this new cabinet was being sworn in. I can remember some of the complimentary
remarks that were made at that time by the member for
If the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) so
wishes to delegate the responsibility to somebody else to restructure the deal,
I will certainly abide by that request.
My feelings will not be hurt in the least.
I say to the member opposite, when we
structured the agreement, we realized at the time that expediency was necessary
because pulp prices were at an all‑time high. They were at $700 a tonne, reaching to $800,
ultimately to $850 a tonne. We realized
that, as most commodity prices do cycle, it would only be a matter of time that
those pulp prices would begin to drop, and we hoped that construction would be
well along before that event occurred.
That did not happen. The member
knows why that did not happen. She knows
that there were environmental processes that took longer than expected but,
nevertheless, were very necessary.
* (1355)
She also knows that in some cases there
were points brought forward by the members opposite that may or may not have
helped the delay, contributed to the delay, but the net result was Repap got
caught in the time when pulp prices dropped to $500 a tonne. If the members are
saying that we should have known what the forest product industry was going to
do as far as commitment towards bottom lines, I say to her, for that, I
apologize. We did not know that, but
hindsight is perfect, is it not?
Mrs. Carstairs: Foresight helps. The minister tells us that he has some
performance guarantees. This company has
defaulted on every single one of its performance guarantees in the contract
signed by this minister in March of 1989.
They were to have commenced conversion of the unbleached pulp mill by
December 31, 1989; they defaulted. They
were to have commenced the chipping facility at
Exactly what performance guarantees is
this minister going to renegotiate?
Mr. Manness: Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish the member would
be completely honest when she tries to lay out that chronology.
Point of
Order
Mrs. Carstairs: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Finance
has questioned my honesty in this House.
I would ask him to retract that statement immediately.
Madam Deputy Speaker: On the point of order, I would recommend that
all members of the House use discretion in the choice of their words.
* * *
Mr. Manness: Madam Deputy Speaker, I apologize if the member
is insulted.
I will say, though, that what really
happened, with respect to the delay, occurred not as a result of our
environmental process, because Repap did have a Phase 1 licence to proceed, but
they also had sought advice from
If the member would only put that on the
record also, then I think she would state her case somewhat more clearly.
Madam Deputy Speaker, she can try to
malign Repap, but this is what Repap has done in the last two or three
years. They put together the new, sound
bulk fuel unloading and storage facilities constructed to replace facilities
which led to mill site ground water contamination by Manfor. They have a new domestic sewage system
installed, a new sanitary landfill facility constructed costing $5
million. They have also totally suspended
solids from the pulps, and paper mills' effluent have been reduced by 46 percent
from 1988 levels, reduced particulate emissions from the mills recovery boiler
by 66 percent.
They committed to reforestation of 100
percent of harvested areas, a greater commitment to reforestation than was
required of Manfor at that time. In '91
they planted 7.25 million trees. In 1988
Manfor planted 2.9 million trees. I
could go on and on as to what Repap has done under the agreement and the
commitment to the province.
* (1400)
They have lived up to significant numbers
of the covenants under the agreement.
For the member to try and malign that company, who has come forward and
cleaned up such a dismal mess, I think is shameful, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Repap
Manitoba Inc.
Employment
Creation Strategy
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Thompson): The Repap saga: The Minister of Finance, two and a half years
ago, walking out of committee meetings on the eve of the signing of the
agreement; the Liberal Party which
opposed renegotiation of the agreement the last election; and now we see the
Minister of Finance who‑‑[interjection] Well, we have the
advertisements for the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs). We have the ads.
My question is to the Minister of Finance
who still does not seem to understand.
He still seems to be the major cheerleader for Repap in this
province. Just this week, northern
residents have received further notice in terms of employment. Repap employees in Thompson‑Wabowden
have been told that all conventional skidding operations will cease. They will be laid off and be replaced by an
in‑bush chipping operation which will require them to come up with a
quarter of a million dollars to save their jobs.
I would like to ask the Minister of
Finance: Is this his version of
maintaining employment in northern
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): The company last
fiscal year lost $180 million. I am not
terribly familiar with the letter that has gone out and probably specific
questions as to why or how come or why the letter should be directed towards
the company, but I would have to think a $180‑million loss in fiscal 1991
probably is part of the rationale for the letter, at least the part referenced
by the member opposite.
As far as changing techniques of
harvesting or indeed bringing forward wood supply, I would think, given that
structural change is in our midst, is everywhere in the new globalized economy,
I would have to think that no business in
The commitment that this government will
make in restructuring the six‑month window is to try to ensure that the
same number of jobs will still be there as a result of Repap coming and doing
what it can in support of the new facility, indeed of the major economic
contribution that it plans to make to this province in the years to come.
Mr. Ashton: How can this minister talk in his letter to
the vice‑chairman of Repap Enterprises about maintaining employment‑‑
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Is the honourable member for Thompson phrasing
his question?
Mr. Ashton: Yes, Madam Deputy Speaker, I asked how can
this minister‑‑perhaps if members opposite would listen‑‑talk
about maintaining levels of employment in his letter to Repap when, at this
very moment, employment is being cut back through mechanization, when
employment is being cut back in Thompson‑Wabowden and in the
Mr. Manness: This government is not going to force a company
that is prepared to invest $1 billion plus to maintain the harvesting systems
that have been in place for virtually decades.
Change is a fact of life. Every
one of us adopts it in our livelihoods, indeed our lifestyles, from day to day.
What the member seems to be saying is,
government, do not renegotiate or restructure this deal unless there is a
commitment to every job as it exists today, not the total number but in the
manner, in the condition and in the form in which it exists today. I would say to him, that would put a yoke on
Repap, indeed, that I do not think they could accept.
Mr. Ashton: Madam Deputy Speaker, will the minister at
least take the time to sit down with Repap, do something he has never done
since this agreement was signed, and find exactly what their plans have been in
terms of northern
Mr. Manness: Madam Deputy Speaker, I guess that is what
makes the philosophical difference between the member opposite and myself. He wants to deal in politics, the heavy hand
of government forcing, not numbers of jobs now, but the form of jobs, whereas
we on our side say, leave that to the corporate decision of that company
working toward hopefully a profit.
I am saying, I said employment. I said the same level of employment, and that
is a condition in which we will try to work toward. The member opposite is saying that they
should not change the method in which they harvest fibre. I am saying that is not a precondition. The total number of work force is a condition
that we will attempt to achieve if indeed we can restructure. I remind you, Madam Deputy Speaker, if we
cannot restructure this, we fall back to the old agreement.
Consumer
Warning
Odometer
Tampering
Mr. Jim Maloway
(Elmwood): Madam Deputy Speaker, my question is to the
Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.
Despite being repeatedly asked to investigate reports of odometer
tampering on Monday and Tuesday, this minister refuses to do anything.
Yesterday, she contradicted the RCMP and said there was no problem.
My question is straightforward. Who should Manitobans believe, the minister
or the RCMP?
Hon. Linda McIntosh
(Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not believe I
contradicted the RCMP. I understand the
member's interpretation. The RCMP are taking
the situation very seriously indeed in that they have discovered a case in
which‑‑and perhaps more than one case‑‑they have had
odometers rolled back. From our
department's experience, we have received no calls on the issue, so in that
sense there is no widespread outcry from consumers to the government. There is, however, a serious concern on the
part of the RCMP, which we share.
I indicated, when the member raised this
issue several days ago, prior to the RCMP having the opportunity to release the
facts to the public, that once the RCMP had made their public statement, I
would be prepared to make comment.
Yesterday they released their statements, and I am today prepared to
make comment.
My department works, as you know, Madam
Deputy Speaker, in close contact with the law enforcement agencies in a number
of areas. This morning my investigative
unit of the Consumers' Bureau has been in touch with the RCMP Customs and
Excise, the two officers in charge of this case, to offer our support should
they feel that it would be helpful. They
have not requested this support at this time, but that contact has been made,
our support offered, and we will be‑‑
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
I believe the answer to the first question has been put.
* (1410)
Mr. Maloway: It was that attitude that cost the last
consumer minister his seat at the cabinet table.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Would the honourable member for Elmwood please put his supplementary
question now.
Mr. Maloway: Is this minister now prepared to issue a
public warning and to work with the RCMP to protect consumers in this province?
Mrs. McIntosh: Perhaps the member did not hear my answer
when I said that my investigative officers have already contacted the RCMP to
offer our support and that we will take our lead from the RCMP as to what is
the appropriate form of support to offer so that we do not jeopardize but
rather enhance the work that they are doing.
Mr. Maloway: That was no answer to the question‑‑
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I would like to take this opportunity to
remind all honourable members that supplementary questions should be very
explicit and very direct, and there is to be no preamble.
Mr. Maloway: Madam Deputy Speaker, we have consistently
asked for a public warning. Will the
Minister of Consumer Affairs issue a public warning with a telephone number so
that people who have used cars in this province can bring them forward to check
for tampering of the odometers? That is
what we are asking.
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Deputy Speaker, I repeat, we have
contacted the RCMP to offer that kind of support, and if, in the opinion of the
RCMP, they feel that us issuing a statement would be of assistance to them,
then of course, we are prepared to do it.
We will take our lead from the RCMP who are the ones who are handling
this investigation. My officials are in
communication with the RCMP to seek direction from them on this issue. They will indicate to us precisely what they
need us to do if they wish us to do anything, and we will pleased to oblige in
that regard.
Repap
Manitoba Inc.
Expenditures
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): In
response to my earlier question, the Minister of Finance indicated a number of expenditures
that have been made by Repap in The Pas complex.
Can the Minister of Finance tell the House
today how much money above the $12.5 million left in the Treasury by Manfor has
been expended by Repap in The Pas complex?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy
Speaker, to this point, we have paid billings, and I may have to correct this,
it seems to me between $3 million and $4 million to Repap in support of
asbestos clean‑up in the plant and also for some ground water remedial
work. I can indicate to the member, some
of the estimates coming back in support of trying to clean up the bunker oil in
the ground water supply, and this is the key point, could be well in excess of
the cash amount kept by the province.
That was the degree of pollution that existed at that site.
Mrs. Carstairs: I think the minister misunderstood. I was not asking about the government's
expenditures. I was asking about the
monies which were left in the Manfor account and transferred to Repap, which
amounted to $12.5 million.
Have the expenditures of the Repap
corporation in The Pas forest complex exceeded, and by how much, the $12.5
million? In other words, how much have
they spent of their own money?
Mr. Manness: Madam Deputy Speaker, the day that the deal
was consummated, I received a cheque from Repap for $42 million, as I recall,
and I wrote a cheque to them for $30 million.
The reason I remember that is I deposited it personally in a branch of
the Royal Bank in The Pas.
When the member wants to focus on this so‑called
$10 million cash, we entered into an agreement.
We were paid that much and more for that cash.
Mrs. Carstairs: Madam Deputy Speaker, I will ask the minister
to reread his agreement about the $12.5 million left in the hands of Repap and
Manfor.
Employment
Creation Strategy
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): My final
question to the minister is: When he
states he is going to maintain comparable levels of employment in this
renegotiated settlement, is he committed to the 650 jobs, sometimes less, at
Manfor at the present time or the 1,200 they promised us in 1989?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Madam Deputy Speaker,
I am not going to negotiate on the floor of the Legislature. I can say to the member opposite, certainly
the goal and the objective is to try and drive the restructuring up to the
1,200 number that was contemplated within the first agreement.
Seafood
Enterprises Associates
Agreement
Mr. Edward Connery (
When the NDP were in power, they lent out
money foolishly in the sense of job creation.
We saw what they did in the Jobs Fund, the hundreds of millions of
dollars that were wasted and no long‑term jobs created. In opposition, they are still encouraging
this government to spend money foolishly, as he is wanting the government to
entertain an agreement with SEA.
Could the Minister of Industry, Trade and
Tourism explain to this House why it would not have been in the best interests
of the taxpayers and the money if we went into that agreement?
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Deputy Speaker, I appreciate the
question from the honourable member, primarily because I have a great deal of
concern about the news release that was issued today by the member for Flin
Flon (Mr. Storie). All it can tell me is
that not ample enough research was done on his behalf in terms of reviewing
this issue, and that is not doing justice to this Chamber or to the citizens of
I will do something that we normally do
not do. We attempt to negotiate in good
faith with companies. We attempt to do
it on the basis of confidentiality, but I feel because of the announcement that
they put forth today, the members of the opposition, that I should at least
give some of the parameters of the final request from this particular company
that has been referred to, Seafood Enterprises Associates.
The nature of the request, Madam Deputy
Speaker, was for guarantees‑‑
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Point of
Order
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Opposition House Leader): Yes, on a point of
order, Madam Deputy Speaker, the rules in Beauchesne are very clear in terms of
answers to questions, that they should be brief. If the minister wishes to get into the detail
of this matter, he should more appropriately use the opportunity of ministerial
statements to bring that forward to the Legislature. Otherwise, I would suggest
you call him to order and ask him to remain brief in his answers as is required
by our rules.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
On the point of order, I would just once again caution all honourable
members, in issuing questions, demanding responses and issuing responses, to
keep them as brief as possible.
* * *
Mr. Stefanson: Madam Deputy Speaker, the question was about
the details of these negotiations, and that is exactly what I am outlining,
related to two areas in terms of a request from our provincial government for
guarantees as they relate to operating capital, guarantees as they relate to
investments by the individuals and the companies associated.
The annual guarantees would be in the
vicinity of $20 million. Over 10 years,
accumulated guarantees of $155 million for the creation in year 1 of
approximately 100 jobs and by the end of year 4, potentially increasing to 186
jobs. I should point out that part of
our normal practices are to take back security.
The original book value of the fixed assets would be a maximum of
approximately $14 million.
In closing, we are working hand in glove
with Western Diversification. We have
replied to the company, we have put forth a reasonable offer, and we will
continue to work with the company. I
look forward to a supplementary question.
(1420)
Madam Deputy Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.
NONPOLITICAL
STATEMENTS
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Madam Deputy Speaker, might I have leave to
make a nonpolitical statement?
Madam Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Kildonan has
requested leave to make a nonpolitical statement. Does the honourable member for Kildonan have
leave to make a nonpolitical statement?
Leave has been granted.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Deputy Speaker, members of the
House. I had the honour yesterday of
attending the second annual "Yes, I Can Awards" sponsored by the
Manitoba Council for Exceptional Children.
The awards were presented to exceptional children and youth in the
categories of Academics, Arts, Athletics, Community Services, Employment,
Extracurricular Activities and Independent Living Skills.
Winners of the awards included Michael
Storozuk for Employment. Michael is
extremely proud of being able to hold a job.
Paul Gosselin for Academics; Paul is happy to participate in classroom
discussions and finish his work. Trevor
Snippe for Academics; Trevor enjoys using the computer to work independently in
his classroom. Monique Couture for
Academics; Monique excels in her academic learning and consistently gets good
grades. Myron Barten for Extracurricular; Myron is very proud when he learns
something new; Adam Wakeman for Academics.
Adam is self motivated to succeed.
John Rokosh for Independent Living Skills;
John has taken the initiative and learned many independent living skills. Shirley Kanak for Academics; Shirley
perseveres and gets good grades. Michelle Baker for Independent Living Skills;
Michelle is pleased that she is able to get around independently. Janet Murdoch for Independent Living Skills;
Janet is thrilled that she is able to communicate and actively participate in
school. Emery
Jeffery Parkes for Athletics; Jeffery's
outstanding performance in sports is commendable. Rebecca Brownlee for Athletics; Becky enjoys
golfing with family and friends. Kristi
Brownlee for Athletics; Kristi's determination has enabled her to golf
competitively. Ashlee Beyak for
Independent Living Skills; Ashlee's communication using sign language has
enabled her to participate in all aspects of school life. Chris Nicolas for Academics; Chris takes
pride in his achievements in public speaking.
Danny Regnier for Independent Living Skills; Danny is enjoying his newly
found independence in the community and at school.
Peter Lebetzis for Employment; Peter is
proud of the responsibility he has while working in the community. Charlene Graff for Employment; Charlene likes the friendships she has made
while working and volunteering in the community. Connie LaBossiere for Arts; Connie has been
recognized for her abilities in poetry writing.
Patricia Duffy for Employment; Patricia was a valued member of the
W.O.W. Summer Program. Kiley Robin for Independent
Living Skills; Kiley is very proud of his accomplishments especially in his
drivers licence. Gimmi Vaccaro for
Employment; Gimmi is proud to be an independent, contributing member of the
work force. Hazel‑Lynn Carganilla
for Academics; Hazel works diligently and has accepted more responsibility for
her learning.
I also would like to recognize the fact
that outstanding achievement awards were presented to persons or a group of
persons in contribution for CEC by the CEC and these included Marion Robisong
from
I am sure all members of the House will
join me in congratulating these outstanding individuals, their teachers,
schools, school divisions and all involved with Exceptional Children, Madam
Deputy Speaker.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): May I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement?
Madam Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Transcona have
leave to make a nonpolitical statement?
Leave?
Some Honourable Members:
Leave.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Leave has been granted.
Mr. Reid: Madam Deputy Speaker, last evening the Manitoba Council for Exceptional Children held their "Yes, I Can" Awards night in conjunction with the 26th annual conference. The MCEC "Yes