LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Thursday, March 12, 1992

The House met at 1:30 p.m

PRAYERS

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

PRESENTING PETITIONS

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Joe Louis Michel, Walter Wastesicoot, Joanne Courchene and others requesting the government show its strong commitment to aboriginal self‑government by considering reversing its position on the AJI by supporting the recommendations within its jurisdiction and implementing a separate and parallel justice system.

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS

Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it complies 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 province of Manitoba humbly shewth that:

Locally controlled public housing with elected and appointed board members encourages democratic accountable decision making; and

Many housing authority boards included tenants on the board of directors; and

Volunteers serving on boards made worthwhile contributions to local housing authorities by serving their tenants, their community and in saving taxpayers' money; and

With no consultation, the provincial government fired 600 volunteer board members, abolished 98 local housing authorities, laid off staff and centralized purchasing and administration;

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the Minister of Housing (Mr. Ernst) consider reinstating local housing authorities with volunteer boards. (Ms. Wowchuk)

I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it complies 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 province of Manitoba humbly shewth that:

The bail review provisions in the Criminal Code of Canada currently set out that accused offenders, including those suspected of conjugal or family violence, be released unless it can be proven that the individual is a danger to society at large or it is likely that the accused person will not reappear in court; and

The problem of conjugal and family violence is a matter of grave concern for all Canadians and requires a multifaceted approach to ensure that those at risk, particularly women and children, be protected from further harm.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code of Canada to permit the courts to prevent the release of individuals where it is shown that there is a substantial likelihood of further conjugal or family violence being perpetrated. (Mr. Reid)

TABLING OF REPORTS

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Report and Recommendation of The Municipal Board Re Headingley/Winnipeg Boundary.

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

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for The Municipal Board.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

Bill 62‑The Business Practices Amendment Act (2)

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey), that Bill 62, The Business Practices Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant la Loi sur les pratiques commerciales, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

* (1335)

Bill 61‑The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (4)

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson), that Bill 61, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (4); Loi no 4 modifiant la Loi sur la protection du consommateur, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

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 Maples Collegiate, 30 students, and they are under the direction of Mr. Murray Goldenberg and Liisa Shell. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema).

Also this afternoon, from the University of Winnipeg, we have 20 sociology students, and they are under the direction of Dr. Federico Carrillo. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen).

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

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Economic Growth

National Average Statistics

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, five budgets ago, the government of the day said to Manitobans‑‑like their other counterparts stated‑‑that all we had to do in Manitoba was to give corporations tax breaks, and these tax breaks would trickle down and Manitoba's economy would improve.

Mr. Speaker, it is an economic theory that, I guess, was first started in North America by Ronald Reagan. This trickle‑down theory was called initially by George Bush to be voodoo economics. We thought it was voodoo economics then; we think it is voodoo economics now. The government also said last year that it would just step aside and let the economy pick up on its own. Of course, 12 months later, we have more unemployed, and worse prospects for the people who are unemployed and the people on social assistance.

The government, in its first page, stated in their budget and quoted selectively from the Conference Board stating that Manitoba's growth would exceed the national average. What they did not do, Mr. Speaker, is quote from their own budget forecast to show that Manitoba would perform below the national average, after five budgets.

I would ask the Minister of Finance why his economic policies, his voodoo economics, are providing Manitobans less than the national average in terms of economic performance in '92 and '93.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, that is a pretty weak preamble to a question. The member was all over the place.

Let me say, Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition wants to talk about last year, he will also notice that the Canadian average growth was negative 1.5 percent. Yes, we were negative also, but not at 1.5 percent. We were closer to 1 percent negative. Unfortunately, recession was in essence the law of the economic land last year. We did not lose 260,000 jobs in this province in the manufacturing area indeed like Ontario did. Nevertheless, this budget is attempting to lay the framework, indeed the foundation, for economic growth in the year to come.

Whether the member wants to accept the Conference Board forecast or whether he wants to accept the average, traditionally we put in the average of the four, five or six or seven independent forecasters. That has been the tradition in this province. We continue to subscribe to it. We are told, for instance, that Newfoundland, because of the Hibernia decision, will begin to drop significantly, putting us now into third position. We are told that there will be a major upgrade and that in spite of it all Manitoba, vis‑a‑vis almost any other province in the land, will be leading economically in the gross sector in 1992.

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, when the government does not even recognize the independent forecast that shows us performing below the national average, it is hard for a government to take corrective action so Manitoba can start getting above the national average where we have traditionally been.

My further question to the Minister of Finance. He is asking Manitobans to take a "leap of faith" with the future economy of Manitoba in the '93‑94 fiscal year, yet again, the numbers in his own budget forecast from his own independent sources indicate that '93 and '94 will again have Manitoba performing below the national average.

I would ask: Why are the economic policies of the Conservative government leading Manitoba to a path below the national average? Why is that good enough for the members opposite to say this is a good news budget for Manitobans?

* (1340)

Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I totally reject the assertion of the Leader opposite. We are sharing with him independent forecasts, as has been done. The member always, of course, chooses to focus in on the negative side. That is his approach. I would say to him that I thought he might be interested to know how the financial markets were looking at Manitoba's management in the government sense.

I thought he might be interested to know how it is that under our leadership, the debt of this province has grown only an insignificant portion as compared to the former administration. Mr. Speaker, I would think the member would want to focus on that, but the point is that the member just wants to dwell out now into two years hence.

It says to me, Mr. Speaker, that the member obviously has nothing to criticize with respect to this budget. It says to me that he still is ashamed about the tremendous, incredible tax increases levied by the Pawley administration in the past. He recognizes how they have hurt the economy of this province and indeed he wants to move now, not into 1992, he wants to move already to 1994. I say to the member, he has nothing to criticize in this budget.

Mr. Doer: If the Finance minister thinks that performing below the national average is nothing to criticize, he is wrong. We are criticizing the government.

We are criticizing them for 8,000 people dropping out of the labour market. We are criticizing them for 52,000 unemployed. We are criticizing them for the largest increase in social assistance in any urban centre in Canada, and he says that is good news. Well, shame on you, Mr. Speaker. I have a further question to the Minister of Finance.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Doer: If that is unparliamentary, I will retract it. [interjection] Mr. Speaker, the member for Pembina (Mr. Orchard) says, we did not do anything. That is exactly right. That is the problem with this budget.

Public Capital Investment Decline

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I have a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) often sounds like Franklin Delano Roosevelt going down to Ottawa talking about capital reconstruction of our country to get our country working again. It sounds very great when we look at his statements, Mr. Speaker, yet when he gets back to Manitoba, he looks more like Sterling Lyon in terms of his actual economic performance and budget attempt.

According to the Manitoba Bureau of Statistics, in terms of 1992, investment in public capital is predicted to go down 5.4 percent in this next fiscal year. I would ask the Minister of Finance how that squares with the Premier's comments and statements to the Prime Minister of the country that we need capital spending and capital infrastructure development in this province. How come we are declining 5.4 percent when we are asking Ottawa and other governments to start building jobs by building our country back together again?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Public capital investment obviously includes other jurisdictions other than the province of Manitoba. It includes municipal governments. It includes the City of Winnipeg. It includes various other jurisdictions. The fact of the matter is this budget earmarks, between the direct capital of government departments and Crown corporations, some $1.1 billion in investment.

The fact of the matter is that direct government capital investment this year is within $1 million of last year, and both years are higher than any previous year in the history of this province. Yes, Mr. Speaker, and those are our commitments to job creation.

I might say that his shadow group, the NDP give‑me group that masquerades under the name of Choices, suggested that we reduce the capital expenditure investment in our economy in favour of short‑term, make‑work jobs such as the NDP did in the mid‑1980s when they did grass cutting, sign painting and all those wonderful things that did not leave one permanent long‑term job. We are not doing that. We are leaving permanent assets for the people of Manitoba by capital investment where it is needed for the long‑term benefit of this economy.

Canada-U.S. Trade Deficit Impact

Labour Force

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, yesterday in his Budget Address, the Minister of Finance told this House that Manitoba depended on trade to create many of its jobs. In the latest forecast report from the Manitoba Bureau of Statistics on international trade, the bureau reports that Manitoba had a $1‑billion trade deficit with the United States in the last year, in the year 1990, the last year for which statistics are available.

I ask the Minister of Finance to tell this House how many jobs that $1‑billion trade deficit has meant in lost jobs to the province of Manitoba.

* (1345)

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Without accepting any of the preamble of the member opposite, I do know the nation as a whole has a $35‑billion, not current account, but total trade deficit with the United States, $35 billion, Mr. Speaker, $25 billion of that as a result of governments like Manitoba having to go borrow money in areas outside of our country because of the incredible deficit and debts left as a legacy by governments previous like the members opposite. That is $25 billion of it in dividends and indeed interest rates that has to flow out of this country in support of the debt that has been left provinces such as Manitoba.

If the member wants to look at the root cause of the number he presents, all he has to do is look in a mirror and ask about his contribution when he was part of the Pawley government when they ran up $600‑million deficits three years in a row, Mr. Speaker. He is the cause of that.

Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, that is balderdash, and the Minister of Finance knows it. The imports from the United States have increased every year since the Free Trade Agreement was signed, to the point where we have a $1‑billion trade surplus.

Free Trade Agreement

Softwood Lumber Duty

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): When the Free Trade Agreement was approved, we were told it was going to protect Manitoba exports. It was going to protect Canadian exports from harassment from the U.S. A 14.5 percent duty has been put on softwood lumber, and today we learned that lumber wholesalers are going to have to move their operations to the United States.

Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism or the Minister of Finance: What is he going to do, what is the government going to do, to prevent the continued erosion of our economy because of the Free Trade Agreement?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, in terms of the issue of the duty being charged now through the United States on softwood lumber, firstly, there needs to be some clarification. This morning I phoned Michael Wilson's office. Our department is working with federal officials because the confusion is this: There has been an interpretation that the duty is going to be charged on the selling price of the wholesalers out of Manitoba, which is causing the concern in that particular industry, whereas the previous duty that was in place was charged on the mill price. It makes a fundamental difference.

At this particular point in time, people have been giving their responses on the basis of some information coming from Customs officials, so that has to be clarified initially. If it comes to be that it is in fact being charged on the price being sold by the wholesalers, we will be encouraging the federal government to take the strongest action, obviously, to oppose that. It is detrimental to the economy, not only of Manitoba, but across Canada. We will be communicating that with the federal government today, with Michael Wilson and in writing, Mr. Speaker.

Free Trade Agreement

Softwood Lumber Duty

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, we want the government to act. Can the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson), or perhaps more appropriately the minister responsible for Repap, explain today the consequences of this decision, this 14.5 percent duty on the operations of Repap? Given that yesterday they announced a 450‑person layoff in Repap, what is the long term for the lumber division and Repap as a result of this 14.5 percent duty?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that when the duty was relieved about a year ago, it represented a benefit to Repap of a million or a million and a half dollars. The announcement yesterday, I am led to believe, had absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with the imposition by the Americans of a tax.

I would indicate to the member that there was a cause for an emergency shutdown of the pulp and paper mill as a result of an event the week previous, internally, and that is the reason for some of the announcements that have been made recently.

* (1350)

Budget

Fiscal Stabilization Fund

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, for a number of years, we have heard about this Fiscal Stabilization Fund, but I think it is important to take a look at the history of that fund.

In the budget ending March 31, 1990, we were told by this government that they would take $50 million from the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. They did not. Instead we saw cuts to Agriculture, Family Services and Health. In 1991 year end, March 31, they said they would transfer $100 million. Well, they did not, Mr. Speaker, and meanwhile, we saw cuts in Agriculture and Health. This year we were told they would take $125 million. Yesterday it was confirmed that they will not take any, but the nine‑month statement shows cuts to Agriculture, Education, Family Services and Health.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Finance tell us why he has any believability with regard to the Fiscal Stabilization Fund when what is really happening is cuts to programming all tied up in the fiscal stabilization gift package?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, at least the NDP, when we brought in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, because they were in government, understood why it was that government should have a fiscal shock absorber. They understood that. The Liberals, never having been in government, of course, would never understand. Their theory is: spend every dollar and then more.

The Liberals have been in this House long enough to know that when we pass certain resolutions as required through the Estimates process, they would know under the democratic system that is the maximum amount we can expend. We cannot spend more.

Can the members tell us, when we have a budget, for instance, in Health of $1.65 billion, how it is we can be expected to spend right to the dollar? We cannot spend more because the resolutions that we vote in this House will not allow us to spend more, yet she is demanding we spend right to the dollar. We cannot do it. Every government in Canada has set up lapses, because indeed you cannot hit the number always, and sometimes you miss it by a half a percent. That is what the Liberal Party totally neglects in their understanding, either on purpose or indeed by accident, Mr. Speaker. They do not understand the system. They have not attempted to learn the system.

Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, what the Liberal Party in Manitoba is opposed to is a fraud fund.

* (1355)

Economic Growth Forecast

Justification

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance yesterday spoke about growth. He talked about the fact that there was in fact going to be some growth in the Manitoba economy. I would like to know from the Minister of Finance why he believes there is going to be growth when he shows all of the revenue sides which indicate growth down. For example, he shows retail sales tax revenues are going to be down. He shows motive fuel taxes are going to be down, parimutuel, tobacco, gasoline, corporation, health and education levy, all down. The only levy he shows as going up are increases in income tax which quite frankly flies in the face of the fact that all the stats show that the growth in income in this province is running about .7 percent.

Can the minister tell us where he gets this growth forecast from?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the question is a good one, and I will try and help the member. We do not determine our own rates of growth. They are determined, as has been the tradition in Manitoba for many, many years, long before we came to government and long before the NDP came to government before us, it comes from independent forecasters, so that governments are not tempted to play around with economic growth numbers as they put them in the budget. We do not do it. [interjection]

Well, Mr. Speaker, the member wants to know. Using the long‑tried and proven practice, we take a simple average of the seven independent forecasters, the same practice that has been in vogue for a number of years now. That is the basis on which 2.4 percent growth is forecasted for 1992.

Maybe the member then should put that question to the independent forecasters. I have, and they tell me they are impressed with what they see as the potential with respect to the goods producing area, agriculture, in the utilities and indeed some mild recovery within the retail sector also.

Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, there is an expression, you know, that nobody is as blind as those who will not see. What we see in this government is that they put blinkers on so they deliberately will not see.

Another factor of growth is sales in housing and housing starts. This government shows two indications to the contrary. They show land transfer tax revenues as being down, they show land title fees as being down, both indications that they do not believe that there will be an increase in housing starts and an increase in housing sales.

Can the minister tell us how these revenue decreases indicate that our economy is going to have a growth factor?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I will try and help the member.

We have built in moderate revenue‑growth projections because ultimately there is a lag. Everybody knows there is a lag coming out of economic growth. Anybody who has studied the past and tried to relate government revenues to economic growth knows there is almost always a year lag, sometimes in corporate income tax areas, a two‑year lag.

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to the member, as I have several times in the past, one cannot directly correlate economic growth with revenue growth to government in the same year. Certainly, we have taken a very modest approach to our Estimates. I am hoping that we are proven wrong. I hope indeed they are surpassed by revenue growth to government.

Employment Resource

Regional Offices Closure

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Family Services.

Unemployment remains at intolerably high levels in this province, and government, in our opinion, has a responsibility to help unemployed Manitobans find suitable jobs. For some years now, this province has had a network of nine employment resource regional offices in rural Manitoba that have administered youth job programs, the Community Places programs and other programs to help the unemployed and stimulate the economy.

My question to the minister is: Why has the government decided to close the entire network of nine regional offices, including Steinbach, Winkler, Teulon, Brandon, Dauphin, Killarney, The Pas, Thompson and Churchill? How does the minister explain this move, which is totally contrary to the government's professed objective of decentralization?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, the member has asked a number of questions within there. I will try and answer all of them.

There are those who are closely connected with our colleagues across the floor who portray themselves as social activists and who want to indicate from time to time the increases that departments such as Family Services should have and, in their most recent proclamation, indicated that there should be increased expenditures of some 5 percent in Family Services. I am very proud to tell you that this government is cognizant of the needs of people in this province and that we are spending almost 9 percent‑‑

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister, to finish his response.

* (1400)

Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, this department will be accessing increased revenues of almost 9 percent to address a number of the issues that the honourable member has indicated.

The programs that were facilitated by those employment offices that are run by this department are basically the CareerStart Program, and I am pleased to indicate that the CareerStart Program will be offered again this year to employers and nonprofits in Manitoba. In fact, the literature has been out now for some three weeks to people who want to access that program. That program will be maintained, and we are now taking applications for it. [interjection] Perhaps, I can give a further answer.

Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, I gather that the government has indeed closed nine regional resource‑‑

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

CareerStart Program

Centralized Administration

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Does this mean that all programs such as CareerStart will now be administered out of Winnipeg? How does the minister expect the people of rural Manitoba to be adequately serviced by centralized operation in the city of Winnipeg?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): The member is correct that the CareerStart Program will be offered again this year, and as I have indicated, at the same levels as last year. In fact, with some adjustments to the program, I believe we will be able to serve even more employers and be able to have more youth employed through the CareerStart Program.

That part of our department also deals with the Youth Employment offices and, I think, 34 centres in Manitoba. They, too, will be open again this year to work with local community groups to identify those jobs and provide that employment throughout Manitoba.

Mr. Leonard Evans: Obviously, the answer is yes. The entire CareerStart‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Funding

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Why is this CareerStart Program only funded at $3.5 million this year when two years ago it was over $7 million when youth unemployment was not nearly as high as it is today? How can we explain this? We have more unemployment today, and we have half‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, the program will be able to service more employers and hire more students this coming year than it did the previous year. As well, we have indicated in the Budget Address yesterday that there will be new programs announced in the near future, our Partners with Youth program which will be offered by this department and a number of other departments, and we will provide additional dollars for youth programming and are very aware of the number of students who will be looking for work this summer. Through a number of other programs, we will be able to fund more youth employment this summer than we did the previous year.

Health Care System

Underspending

Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (St. Johns): The duplicitous, dishonest, devious nature of this latest Conservative budget is nowhere more apparent than in the health care area.

The Conservatives, Mr. Speaker, say they are increasing their health care budget by 5.7 percent, yet over the last several years, they have underspent the health care budget by over $100 million, all the while letting patients stand in line for longer and longer times, then beds close and services cut.

How can the patients and the caregivers in Manitoba's health care system trust this government and this Minister of Health, that they will spend what they have promised and that they will put those dollars towards quality patient care?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I will simply comment briefly that the only time my honourable friend brings the issue up of underspending is in Question Period in the hopes of bringing some new reporters into thinking this is a tremendously great and new issue. Never once has my honourable friend dared to ask the question in Estimates where she knows the answer will debunk all of her false accusations, false premises, because my honourable friend knows that in the hospital budgets where those surgeries are performed, every single dollar has been spent as budgeted every single year for the last five and, we expect, will do so again this year.

The myth that she tries to perpetrate of lapsed money in health care coming out of hospital budgets is absolutely wrong, and she knows it, but she hopes that she can suck in some new reporter into carrying it as news item. She is false in her accusation; she is improper in her delivery of the question, and she knows better, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: That is the kind of verbal diatribe‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns, kindly put your question.

Health Sciences Centre

Operating Budget

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns): If hospitals are supposedly getting the 6 percent increase as this budget purports, why then is Manitoba's largest hospital, the Health Sciences Centre, going into a retreat next Wednesday and Thursday to figure out how to cope with a government‑directed $10‑million reduction in their operating budget and how to do without 160 beds, many of them in the acute‑care service area?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): A $10‑million reduction in budget at the Health Sciences Centre when they are going to share in a $53‑million increase to the hospital again proves the rather lack of directness and honesty in my honourable friend's question.

Mr. Speaker‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Point of Order

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, indeed some of us on this side might question whether this minister should be questioning anybody's honesty‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The point.

Mr. Ashton: ‑‑and indeed it is against our rules. I would ask you to have him withdraw his comment.

Mr. Speaker: I would like to caution honourable members, they are toying with parliamentary words and also indeed unparliamentary‑‑they show up on both lists. I would caution all honourable members, for the viewing public, pick and choose your words very carefully.

* * *

Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I fully concur with your admonition of all members of the House in choosing their language more appropriately. If I have offended anyone in the health care system from reacting to the wild rhetoric of my honourable friend the critic, I apologize to the members of the health care system.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell my honourable friend that in Manitoba, hospitals will receive approximately a 5 percent increase in their budget this year over last. That is not as much as they requested, so they are attempting, as they are in other provinces, to come to grips with programming within the institutions to assure that the patient care levels are able to be maintained.

I will put my honourable friend to the test of comparison in Manitoba with a 5 percent increase in hospital budgets compared to the rigorous exercise going on immediately to the east of us in the province of Ontario, where they have had a 1 percent increase in hospital funding to deal with this year.

* (1410)

Health Care Facilities

Funding

Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister could just tell us, given the dilemma hospitals are faced with right today, and expected to report back to the minister by the end of the month, which hospital will get an increase of 5 percent or 6 percent in real terms so that they will not have to cut any services, cut any operating rooms and drive out any more patients from elective surgery?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I think that our inflation rate is projected to be something under 2 percent. I believe the funding, globally, to the ministry of Health is a 5.7 percent increase, almost three times the rate of inflation. Hospitals will receive approximately a 5 percent increase this year over last. At a rate of inflation, which is generally what drives your costs, that would mean the real increase was 3 percent this year to carry on the operations within our health care system.

I will invite my honourable friend's analysis of the relative position of our funding in Manitoba compared to any other provincial budget which will come down in the next six weeks, be they governed by New Democrats, Liberals or Progressive Conservatives across the province, because at a time when our revenues are projected to grow in the province less than 2 percent, we are providing 5.7 percent to support health care for the betterment of Manitobans, Mr. Speaker.

Post-Secondary Education

Funding

Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, a couple of weeks ago, I asked the Finance minister about the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) commitment to post‑secondary education and to labour force training. At that time, I was told to wait for the budget, and yesterday we see a $2.5‑million commitment to new programs at our colleges. Unfortunately, in the Estimates we only see $1.1 million in increased funds, and that is still half a million dollars less than they were receiving two years ago.

Can the Finance minister explain to us where his $2.5 million in new programs to the colleges is being funded from?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I ask the member to bring that question to Education Estimates. It will be fully explained at that time. I can assure the member that there is a $2.5‑million commitment to new college programming.

Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, that is a line we have heard before.

Post‑Secondary Education

Tuition Fee Increases

Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Why, Mr. Speaker, when the funding for student assistance is still lower than it was two years ago, how are students going to accommodate the 20 percent increase in fees that they faced last year and the nearly 20 percent increase in fees that they will incur this year?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I would like to make sure that the member understands that this government has in fact increased our support to student aid by over $600,000, and that we do not know yet what the tuition fees are going to be. I will also remind him it is a very difficult time, but universities in this province also benefitted from a 3 percent increase.

I would like to remind him that universities in Ontario, post‑secondary education at universities in Ontario received a 1 percent increase, and in Saskatchewan, universities received 0 percent. We have increased student aid, and we have increased our support in post‑secondary education.

Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, when a 3 percent increase in support to the universities produced a 20 percent increase in fees last year, I would ask the Minister of Education what she is predicting the increase in university fees to be this year.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable member's question seeks an opinion, therefore is out of order. The honourable member, kindly rephrase your question, please.

Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister this then. Has she received any information from the universities that advises her as to what they expect the increase to be?

Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the member that formally I have not received any communication. I will be meeting next week, however, both with the presidents of the student unions from the universities and also with the presidents of the universities.

Budget

Civil Service Layoffs

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, this Finance minister described his budget as a good news budget‑‑good news for the 52,000 unemployed, good news for the hundreds of dedicated Manitoba civil servants who received notices that they are being laid off, indeed, good news for people who have worked for such departments and organizations as the Human Resources Opportunity Centre in Selkirk cut by this government, people who work in Natural Resources cut by this government, in Education. The list goes on and on. What is worse is the way in which the uncertainty continues as to who will be laid off as a part of this government's budget.

I would like to ask the Minister of Finance: Of the 300 people whom he has said will be directly impacted by his budget, how many have received their pink slips currently, because everyone holding one of those positions will receive a pink slip? How many more will be receiving pink slips over the next year of the upcoming fiscal year?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat surprised at the question from the member for Thompson, who prides himself on being a representative of labour, of unions and representing that point of view. He should be very well aware that the termination of positions, the layoffs in government, are governed by provisions of our collective agreement. He should be aware, as well, that although certain positions‑‑as we indicated, some 300 positions were identified for elimination in this budget. In consultation with the MGEA some months ago, pursuant to our announcement, we have been working on matching with VISP.

As I indicated in this House yesterday, if the member had been paying attention to the answer to the question, there were some 131 people affected by this budget. The matching processing is underway, and the collective agreement is being followed.

Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, what assurances can the Minister of Labour or the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) give to civil servants who are under a cloud of fear at the current point of time because they do not know if they will be receiving pink slips, many of them, in the upcoming year? What assurances can they give as to how many more people‑‑these are people, not positions‑‑will be receiving pink slips from this government in the upcoming fiscal year?

Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, the comments of the member for Thompson are quite interesting. If his party would join with us in passing this budget in the next few days, where we have budgeted for money for expenditure, then no one will have to worry about layoffs over the next year, because the money will be there.

We indicated very clearly at the beginning of the year that we had identified some 300 positions affected by this budget. Those positions are in the process of being identified. Matching is underway. We intend to limit that amount. If the member for Thompson is asking if there are other planned cuts, et cetera, through the year, this is why we pass a budget with positions in it, Mr. Speaker, a budget that I am sure his party will vote against.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET DEBATE

Mr. Speaker: Adjourned debate, second day of debate, on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government, standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, it is