LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Friday, March 13, 1992

 

The House met at 10 a.m.

 

PRAYERS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

PRESENTING PETITIONS

 

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Bev Funk, Mike Poirier, Claudia McIvor and others requesting the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) to call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code to prevent the release of individuals where there is a substantial likelihood of further family violence.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Joan Lloyd, Grace Parson, Elaine Shenback and others requesting the Minister of Justice call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code to prevent the release of individuals where there is a substantial likelihood of further family violence.

Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Winelda N. Gardner, Fatima Costa Soares, Rieta Hildebrand and others requesting the Minister of Justice to call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code to prevent the release of individuals where there is a substantial likelihood of further family violence.

 

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

 

Hon. James McCrae (Minister responsible for Constitutional Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House.

       Mr. Speaker, for the information of honourable members, I would like to table copies of a summary of the multilateral constitutional review process which federal and provincial ministers agreed to in Ottawa yesterday.

       The agreement provides for, first, a time frame for discussion which aims at a consensus by the end of May.  This is not much time, but it is twice as much or more as an April 15 deadline would have meant.

       Second, a commitment that no government will take unilateral actions during this period.  This means the federal government will not be tabling its own response to the Dobbie‑Beaudoin report, at least for now.

* (1005)

       Third, a ground‑breaking step for First Nations.  While reserving the right to meet on a government‑to‑government basis, the ministers invited aboriginal representatives to be full participants in the agreed upon constitutional review process, and they have accepted.

       Fourth, a balanced mix of ministerial and official discussions and public reporting of progress to ensure that elected representatives keep a close eye on the process and the public is kept informed.

       Fifth, provisions for First Ministers' discussions later in the process when the needed groundwork has been done.

       The process agreement was supported unanimously by the Government of Canada, nine of the 10 provinces, both territories and all four national aboriginal organizations.  Quebec's observers were present for the entire discussion of the process agreement and, I am sure, will be briefing their cabinet on it and on the fact that the agreement encourages Quebec to participate fully in the process as well.

       I believe it is accurate to say there was complete agreement that a return to the table by our colleagues from Quebec would signal a dramatic improvement in our chances of achieving a mutually satisfactory agreement.

       Mr. Speaker, yesterday's ministers' meeting was also a useful forum for reminding the Government of Canada and the larger provinces that the aspirations of the smaller provinces need to be addressed as well.  The first question at yesterday's press conference was on the need to strengthen the equalization provisions in Section 36.  That too was a notable precedent and one which I hope will not be overlooked or forgotten in Ottawa.

       Thank you very much.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the ministerial statement made by the Minister responsible for Constitutional Affairs in the Province of Manitoba.

       First of all, all members of this Chamber want to work toward a renewed and united Canada in the months and years to come, and we hope that the meetings yesterday achieved some degree of success in moving toward that renewed Canada.

       We were a little concerned with the lack of progress at the meeting.  The meeting generally achieved a delay of a couple of weeks‑‑that is important, I would say, a couple of weeks‑‑and an important agreement on aboriginal participation, but apparently spent very little time talking about the substance and the content of our disagreements across this country.  Mr. Speaker, certainly substance is going to be very important as we move along on the issues that are facing Canadians in a renewed Canada.

       Looking at the points that have been raised by the Minister responsible for Constitutional Affairs (Mr. McCrae) in his statement today, his first point that the deadline has been moved from April 15 to the end of May‑‑that is only 10 weeks away, Mr. Speaker.  That is not a lot of time to deal with the various visions and to articulate the various proposals that have come forward from many public sessions and hearings across the country dealing with their sense of Canada.

       I know that people are happy to move the Prime Minister off his former deadline to a new deadline, but I suggest that the people of Canada will be very concerned that this deadline really is just a movement of a deadline toward the October referendum date and not necessarily a deadline dealing with all of the concerns of Canadians.

       On the second point, the minister's note that unilateral action should not be taken by any government and certainly the federal government should not be tabling a response, I would note again that the Quebec Assembly did table a response to the Dobbie‑Beaudoin report, and they have to some degree disagreed with many of the sections of that report formally in their Legislature.

* (1010)

       On the third point, of groundbreaking news for First Nations, we applaud the ministers responsible for that issue.  We noted that Premiers Rae and Ghiz and ministers of other provinces were working very hard to get aboriginal participation, and we applaud Manitoba's representative and all representatives for agreeing to that participation.

       It was one of the weaknesses of the last process.  All of us who were in Ottawa know that the aboriginal participation took place in the lobby of the Chateau Laurier Hotel the last time to get some input, not in the conference rooms and the meeting rooms where the important decisions were being made.  It is a lot better to have aboriginal representatives and leaders at the table, not in the lobby and the outer rooms of the discussions.

       The mix of people, Mr. Speaker‑‑we applaud that process and the ultimate First Ministers' meeting, with the groundwork being done‑‑of course is important.

       Today we would also like to say that we have offered before and we will offer today our co‑operation with the government, with the government ministers, with all parties in this Chamber and all members in this Legislature.  We have not yet had a meeting of the all‑party task force since the Dobbie‑Beaudoin report has been tabled.  We have not yet met on the issue of even process which ultimately will be impacted on all of us in this Legislature potentially as the months and weeks tick away toward the date that the ministers have agreed to.

       I again offer to the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) our co‑operation with you and our ability to work in a consensus way with you, and the offer we made to you two weeks ago stands today.

       Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister responsible for Constitutional Affairs (Mr. McCrae) for presenting this report to us today and to indicate that I too share some concerns, as I think the government shares concerns, about the time frame that we have been squeezed into and the lack of time even by the end of May to perhaps come up with some kind of consensual position in that space of time.

       However, I am and remain concerned about the lack of presence of Quebec in a formal and full way at this table.  We have an agreement in the second stage which says that no government will take unilateral actions during this period.  Unfortunately, we do not have a commitment from the Province of Quebec that they will not take unilateral actions.  I think it is sad when the only province in the country that has come out and absolutely condemned in a legislative framework the one report that has been prepared at the national level is, unfortunately, the Province of Quebec.

       I am also concerned by early news reports, and I hope that the minister can clarify this, that some provinces were opposed to the full participation of our aboriginal peoples and that only Ontario, B.C. and P.E.I. were pressing for the participation of our aboriginal community, and I hope that in fact during that negotiation period our minister was also pushing for it and that he was not just at the end forced to agree on a consensual position.

       Finally, Mr. Speaker, I think we must realize and recognize that there cannot be a position that does not have the participation of the Province of Quebec.  I recognize that what the ministers and the Premiers in some instances did yesterday was to encourage Quebec to participate in the process, but the reality is that unless they are there, there will be no process.

* (1015)

 

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

 

Bill 54‑The Consumer Protection Amendment Act

 

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood):  Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer), that Bill 54, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Loi sur la protection du consommateur), be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Motion presented.

Mr. Maloway:  Mr. Speaker, this bill is designed to protect and limit security deposits on large items purchased in this province.  Over the past number of years, Manitobans have placed deposits on goods and never received these goods.  Approximately 16 Manitobans lost at least $53,000 when a Winnipeg sunroom firm reneged on its agreement to build sunrooms in their homes.

       The bill will only affect large purchases and require deposits of over $500 to be held in trust.  Sellers will be prohibited from requiring deposits of more than 20 percent, and holding deposits to 20 percent of the purchase price will limit the potential loss for the consumer while still providing small businesses with the protection that they require.

       In the case of the sunroom builder, consumers were enticed by offers of discounts to pay the entire amount up front in an effort to save 10 percent.  This bill would prevent that. Companies should not have to rely on consumers' deposits to operate their companies.  Businesses should have enough working capital through lines of credit at the bank and credits with their suppliers.

       Mr. Speaker, in addition, currently consumers have deposits held in trust when they buy houses in this province.  Why should they not have the same protection for large consumer items?

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 morning from the Red River Community College 60 students.  They are under the direction of Gayle Ross.  This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett).

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

 

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

       

Health Care System

Staff Layoffs

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, we have been raising the issue of our economy throughout the last number of weeks since the session has been called.  My question is to the minister responsible for the Economic Development Board of Cabinet, the Premier.

       Yesterday, after repeated questions in this Chamber and after repeated comments in the media, we had the head of the Health Sciences Centre confirm that they are looking at a staff reduction of between 300 and 500 employees, and not all these people can be picked out through reduction; therefore, there would be some layoffs.

       I would ask the Premier, can he articulate or outline to the people of Manitoba how many positions are going to be reduced in the health care field, how many specific positions are being reduced at the Health Sciences Centre, and what will be the impact on the Manitoba economy?

* (1020)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  Mr. Speaker, I would say firstly that this government has given a 5.7 percent increase to the health care budget in this province, a very substantial increase of over $100 million more than last year despite the difficult circumstances we face.  I believe that translates into more money for hospitals to the tune of about a 5 percent increase overall to hospital budgets.  That is three times the rate of inflation.

       I have given him comparisons to the havoc that has been wreaked in Ontario by an NDP government that raised health care funding to hospitals by 1 percent causing the layoff of thousands and thousands of people in the health care system.

       Today I would like to refer him to an article that indicates what British Columbia's New Democratic government is doing to their health care system.  It says, and I quote:  Almost 500 hospital workers rallied on the Legislative lawn this week to complain about slow progress in their contract talks because the government is not giving the hospitals enough money for them to offer a decent raise.  The workers actually booed Health Minister Elizabeth Cull, the first time in recent memory a New Democrat has been booed by labour unions in British Columbia.

       That, Mr. Speaker, is what happens when you get New Democratic policies wreaking havoc on the health care system. They closed beds in Brandon when they were in government, and these people have the audacity to stand and complain about over a 5 percent increase to our hospitals, a 5.7 percent increase to health care funding in Manitoba.  They should be ashamed of themselves.

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, I thank the Premier for again not answering the question in the Chamber.  If the Premier thinks that 300 to 500 positions being lost at one hospital is insignificant, well, just continue to trivialize the economic plight and plight of patients in this province.

       The Premier is now head of the Economic Board of Cabinet. Its secretariat now gets some close to $900,000 in this new budget.  We know the secretariat is very good at providing pool sound and pool lights and flags and public relations kinds of gimmicks for any announcement the government is going to make. What we want to know is does it have any analytical capacity at all in terms of the economic impact of decisions this government is making on the people of Manitoba.

       I would ask the Premier again a very simple question.  Given the fact that this secretariat answers to him‑‑this $850,000 secretariat now answers to him‑‑how many jobs are going to be lost in the health care field with the decisions that have been made by this government, and what is the economic impact on Manitobans?

Mr. Filmon:  Mr. Speaker, to begin with, we regard all areas of employment in this province as being important to us.  That is why we increased expenditures in health care by 5.7 percent, three times the rate of inflation which should allow hospitals and health care units in this province to employ the people that they ought to in order to do their job.

       The fact of the matter is this Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) talks about pool sound and pool light.  He is so concerned with his 10‑second clip that he is a better expert on the media than the people sitting up there.  He is the one who in the 1990 election campaign debate was out there throwing off his jacket and showing people around him how tough he is.  He is the one who is so concerned with his image and his media presentation that he hires experts from outside the province to coach him on how he should deliver his lines in a debate, how he should dress and all of those things.

       Mr. Speaker, this Leader of the Opposition is a disgrace.  He is knocking an attempt to bring together all of the resources of government to put them behind the most important thing that we do in government, and that is to attract investment and job creation, a co‑ordinating function that is being provided by the Economic Development Board that has been lauded by people such as Apotex and many others, saying that we are doing a better job than most provinces in the country in attracting investment right now.

Mr. Doer:  If I thought taking off my jacket was going to bother the Premier so much, I may have thought twice.  He is still worried about it two years later.

       With all those Tory youth outside picketing away in front of the debate site, it was tough to get through those people, I remember.

       Mr. Speaker, for the second time in a row, the Premier did not answer the question on how many jobs will be lost in the health care field‑‑a very simple question.

       Mr. Speaker, a further question to the First Minister:  In Brandon today, and the chief of medical staff probably put it more accurately than anyone in this Chamber could, Dr. William Meyer said, the provincial government is not being honest with the people.  He went on to say, the people and public of Manitoba are being sold a bill of goods by this government.

       I ask the Premier:  Will he just put the facts on the table about how many jobs will be lost, and what will the impact be on patients so that we could have a debate on the basis of the facts, not on the basis of the Premier foaming away at the mouth instead of talking about any facts in terms of the people of Manitoba?

Mr. Filmon:  The fact of the matter is that our budget will provide for a number of increases of jobs in health care because it provides for construction of new facilities such as personal care homes, large increases to home care which will provide employment for more people in those areas that are providing service to the people of Manitoba.  That is what will happen as a result of our budget.

       Mr. Speaker, what I object to from the Leader of the Opposition is not the fact that he took his jacket off in the debate, it is the fact that he is always such a phony, Mr. Speaker.  He‑‑

Some Honourable Members:  Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

 

Point of Order

       

. Jerry Storie (Acting Opposition House Leader):  I think the people of Manitoba understand that the more desperate the Premier is, the more he hurls insults.

Mr. Speaker:  What is the point, please?

Mr. Storie:  Mr. Speaker, our rules prohibit that kind of personal attack.  The First Minister is engaging in a kind of personal warfare to avoid answering very serious questions.  What the people of Manitoba want from this government is some honesty, and we want it from the First Minister.

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member does not have a point of order.

* * *

* (1025)

Mr. Filmon:  Mr Speaker, I will apologize to the Leader of Opposition (Mr. Doer) for calling him a phony.  The fact of the matter is that the shallowness of his approach to this budget and to government in general is not unnoticed by the public, and when it comes to honesty, the public still remember the NDP shredding files so that the public could not really know what was going on at MPIC, could not judge whether or not honest answers were being given by their ministers.  The public has not forgotten.  The fact of the matter is that‑‑

Mr. Storie:  Would the First Minister quit lying?

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  I would ask the honourable member for Flin Flon to withdraw those comments.  The honourable member for Flin Flon has the floor.

Mr. Storie:  Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of principle.  The First Minister put on record something that clearly‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  I have asked the honourable member for Flin Flon to withdraw his remarks.

Mr. Storie:  Mr. Speaker, I am asking for some fairness.

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  I am asking the honourable member for Flin Flon to withdraw his comments, please.

Mr. Storie:  Mr Speaker, I am prepared to withdraw those remarks‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  I would like to thank the honourable member for Flin Flon.  Unqualified.

 

Point of Order

       

Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader):  Mr Speaker, I did not hear the withdrawal from the member.  It was a conditional withdrawal.  To a government House leader, it is a very serious matter.  I ask the member to provide an unqualified withdrawal of the remarks that he made.  He has offended the responsibility, indeed the rights and the dignity of all members of this House, and I have not heard an unconditional withdrawal from that member.  I ask you to call for that.

Mr. Speaker:  On the same point of order.

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker is the arbiter of these decisions.  Mr. Speaker has accepted the statement from the member from Flin Flon.  The matter is closed; we should proceed with Question Period.

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  On the point of order raised, the honourable member for Flin Flon did withdraw, and I did accept the honourable member's withdrawal.

* (1030)

* * *

Mr. Filmon:  The fact of the matter is, this government, in this budget, has increased health care funding by 5.7 percent, has passed along to the hospitals of this province more than a 5 percent increase, and that includes increases to Brandon General Hospital and every other hospital in this province.

       No matter how the New Democrats want to portray that, that is a record that far exceeds any other New Democratic administration, and I have already read what they are doing in Ontario under New Democrats and what they are doing in British Columbia.  That is what is going to ensure that Manitobans continue to get high quality health care in this province.

 

Health Sciences Centre

Operating Room Closure

 

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns):  Mr. Speaker, while we are on the topic of honesty, let us ask about this government's record and the fact that we have doctors and health care professionals in this province now saying this government is not honest with the people of Manitoba.  Manitobans, as we know, have grave concerns about our health care system, facing some of the longest waiting lists anywhere in the country.  We know that not from the Fraser Institute, but from real patients who are calling us every day with fear and worry and concerns.

       Mr. Speaker, we have learned from the Health Sciences Centre that the facility cannot meet the 160‑bed target imposed by this government without looking at closing one or more of its eight operating rooms.  I want to ask:  Is the minister prepared to accept the likely outcome at the Health Sciences Centre of closed operating rooms, and will he tell all Manitobans how much longer they will have to wait for necessary surgery?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend and, indeed, the Health Sciences Centre are going to be dealing with a budget increase of 5 percent this year, below what they requested, but significantly above the inflation rate, as has been indicated by the Premier (Mr. Filmon) this morning.

       Let us put a little context into the issue, since my honourable friend wants to, from the comfortable position of opposition, suggest more spending, but in the reality of government where New Democrats are in government, they ask for more management, as is happening in Ontario, British Columbia and as soon as we find out about Saskatchewan, we will find out there.  They will not have 5 percent increases to hospital budgets in those provinces.

       More importantly, let us put into context what New Democrats do when they are in office in this province.  Let us revisit 1987‑88, the infamous year when my honourable friends, the critic, the Leader, ordered the closing, unilaterally without consultation and discussion, of hospital beds in Manitoba.  What was the financial situation of the province in those days?  Was it less than 2 percent inflation as it is today?  No, Mr. Speaker.  Was it less than 2 percent revenue growth for the Province of Manitoba as it is today?  No.  Was it a 5 percent increase in funding as it is today from this government in those economic circumstances?  No.

       What it was, Mr. Speaker‑‑and I want to tell you what the figures were‑‑inflation was 4.2 percent; revenue growth was 19.2 percent; and they gave 7 percent to the Health‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

 

Bed Closures

       

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns):  This government is giving‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  Is the 160‑bed reduction at the Health Sciences Centre based on rated beds, which would mean about a 15 percent reduction, or is it in addition to the 61 summer bed closings that were extended to March 31 of this year, which would mean a total of 221 beds being cut or about 20 percent of all set‑up beds at the Health Sciences Centre?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, over the next budget year and the next budget year, over a two‑year program, those answers will emerge.  There is no question that as in Brandon, there will be consolidation of wards in hospitals which are not used to capacity because outpatient services have been developed, like the substantive increase in funding to outpatient surgery in Brandon that my honourable friend does not talk about, like the more than doubling of home care in the city of Brandon that my honourable friend does not talk about which led to wards being occupied at 67 percent and 51 percent, which the management collapsed into, three wards into two, which resulted in appropriate occupancy rates so they can staff full wards, not empty wards and empty beds.

       That kind of reform process is exactly what my honourable friend advocates.  That will be part of the reform system that is ongoing in Manitoba, but the patient will be at the centre of reform and receive appropriate care in an appropriate location.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  Mr. Speaker, if all of these bed cuts and budget reduction targets are part of a thought‑out long‑term health care reform plan, why is the whole process shrouded in such secrecy?  Why is it so hard to get straight answers from this minister?  Why can you not‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

Mr. Orchard:  Mr. Speaker, I want to deal with secrecy, lack of consultation, underhanded tactics in government, because my honourable friend in cabinet knew all about them.  That is exactly what they did when they unilaterally, without consultation for budgetary reasons, ordered the closure of some 119 beds in the health care system without consultation in Brandon, and then the guru for Brandon East, the lead cabinet minister, went underground and disappeared for the next eight weeks so he did not have to answer for the decisions of that government.

       Mr. Speaker, that happened, and I want to give some figures to my honourable friend for Brandon East.  While he, as minister, was cutting beds in Brandon, they increased the budget a scant 5 percent while the provincial revenues were growing by 19 percent.  Today, we are providing a 5 percent funding increase to Brandon when revenues are less than 2 percent.

       Who is treating health care appropriately, the member for Brandon East who disappeared, went underground and AWOL, or this government?

Some Honourable Members:  Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable Minister of Health, the honourable member for Brandon East‑‑if the honourable members want to carry on this conversation, you can do so outside the Chamber.  The rest of us want to carry on with Question Period. The honourable member for Osborne has the floor.  Order, please. Are we going to get on with this or not?

 

Seven Oaks Centre for Youth

Closure

 

Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne):  Mr. Speaker, for the four years that I have been in this Chamber, I have been calling on the government to close the Seven Oaks Centre for Youth.  The concerns I felt about that facility, as someone who ran it for two years some years ago, are best expressed by Ms. Colleen Suche in her report on the independent review of reporting procedures in children's residential care facilities, in which she states that children with destructive, violent behaviour who have a history of gang or cult involvement and known sexual offenders are placed with some of the most vulnerable children in the system.

       Now, I would ask the Minister of Family Services if he has done as Ms. Suche has recommended and created an independent board to immediately take over the management of that facility and begin work to close it.

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, the member will recall, I am sure, that the Ombudsman has recently done a review of Seven Oaks Centre and has brought some recommendations to government, which government is acting upon.  We also have the Suche report which was brought before us in recent weeks, and at the present time, we are dealing with that within our department.

Mr. Alcock:  Mr. Speaker, can the minister explain why his consultant says about his new system that the system seems to have lost sight of the fact that it exists to protect children?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  I want to assure the member‑‑and he did reference the fact that he was a part of the system during the 1980s, and I dare say, probably no employee of government during the 1980s had a greater opportunity to make an impact on the child welfare system in Manitoba.  The member was certainly responsible for Seven Oaks, was responsible for child welfare. We are making some reforms.

* (1040)

       When I made some announcements last June, we were the only people, I think, who were talking about reform.  We are bringing in a Child Advocate.  We have legislation that is going to be tabled in this House in the near future.  We have put in place a process to have a management system, an automated system.  We are bringing in other legislation as well to improve the service that vulnerable children in Manitoba have.  I would ask the honourable member to be patient.  We will soon be debating some of that legislation, and we have reforms on the way.

 

Child Advocate

Reporting Process

 

Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne):  I am glad the minister referenced the Child Advocate.  We have been concerned that the minister wants to have the Child Advocate reporting to the minister.  Will he implement the recommendation by Ms. Suche that the children's advocate report directly to the Legislature, not to the minister?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, the legislation that I refer to is on the Order Paper today.  We will be tabling it in the Legislature next week and look forward to the debate and the member's input on that legislation.

 

Economic Growth

Employment Creation Strategy

 

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, in the government news release dated March 11, issued with the budget, the Minister of Finance said the budget calls for renewal of optimism. Several days before the budget was released, 32 jobs at Catelli moved because of free trade and other reasons.  The day the budget was delivered, 450 jobs in The Pas were being lost, people were being laid off.  The day after, lumber merchants said there were 50 jobs at stake in the province of Manitoba because of U.S. duties.  Today, Inland Cement says that 35 jobs are going to be lost to the province.

       Mr. Speaker, when is the Minister of Finance and when is this government going to get beyond PR exercises and public relations efforts and get to work in creating employment for the 52,000 people who are unemployed and the hundreds of people whose jobs are still in jeopardy because of the inaction of this government?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the member's preamble.  I reject most of it, particularly one element where he says that 250 jobs were lost in The Pas region. [interjection] At where?

An Honourable Member:  Layoffs.

Mr. Manness:  Layoffs.  Mr. Speaker, I cannot help the fact that there was an explosion in the pulp mill last week.  I would say that this was an act of God, and I was told by Repap that there are quick attempts to try and rectify that situation.

       I am certain there is a difference in philosophical approach to the way we go to government.  I can tell you that tax increases during the former administration totalled $820 million; increased retail sales tax from 5 percent to 7 percent by the government previously; they introduced an increased payroll tax, 2.25 percent of payroll, $230 million attack on the disposable income of businesses and indeed of individuals; personal net income tax and surtax of $230 million, an attack on disposable income of individuals; increased corporation income tax from 15 percent to 17 percent.

       Mr. Speaker, if the member, as I said yesterday, wants to look at some of the reasons and the problems as to why there is a slowdown in the economy not only in Manitoba, but indeed across Canada through these very difficult times, they can look at themselves and the actions they took when they were in government.  Our businesses are trying hard to become competitive.  Every action that we have brought down in five budgets has tried to help that along by way of not increasing taxes, decreasing them where possible to try and make our businesses more competitive.

       We have done the right thing.  We are following the right path.  The members opposite, their path would lead to ruin.

 

Government Strategy

       

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  If the government is following the right path, why are businesses failing?  Why do we have the highest unemployment‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Question.

Mr. Storie:  Mr. Speaker, the same budget is being called a failure by business and industry, economists at the University of Winnipeg and University of Manitoba.

       Can the minister indicate whether he is prepared to change or revamp some of the programs he claims are being put in place to spur a recovery when the economists at the University of Manitoba and University of Winnipeg say that this is doomed to failure, when business and industry say the same thing?  Will he revamp those programs and try and get on the right track?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, I will take my lead as to the reaction certainly not from the opposition in this House and certainly not from economists, particularly at the University of Manitoba, University of Winnipeg or elsewhere.

       Mr. Speaker, I too am trained.  My discipline is in economics.  I listen to the feedback coming from others and I can tell you and members opposite that in the five years that I have brought down budgets, my office has had the least number of calls this time around as far as negative reaction.  I can count the negative reaction on one hand.

       It says to me, given the muted attempts by members opposite in their questions and indeed their representation on the Budget Debate, that this budget, given the circumstances, given the lack of revenue growth that the province has, given the fact that we have tried to increase spending in the manner we have within the social envelopes, Mr. Speaker, that this budget was balanced and fair under the circumstances and has been well received by Manitobans.

 

Small Business

Government Initiatives

 

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism or the Minister of Finance explain why after cutting some $700,000 from the Manitoba Research Council and after learning that the federal government is about to change the mandate of the National Research Centre and eliminate support for particularly the manufacturing sector but small business as well, can the minister explain why the government has made no moves to either support small businesses through its own initiatives or urge the federal government not to abandon the manufacturing sector in the province of Manitoba?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism):  I have to clarify some of the things that the honourable member mentioned.

       When this issue in terms of the institute for medical biodiagnostics first surfaced, we received some concern, certainly from the opposition parties‑‑the Liberal Party issued a press release at the time‑‑and we indicated that all of the indications were that in fact it was going to be located here in Winnipeg, and I understand an announcement is officially indicating that this morning, Mr. Speaker, bringing some 50 to 70 jobs in the medical community, highly supported by our medical community, and I thought at the time requested and supported by all members of this House in terms of what it can do for our economy.

       I would hope that most of the members, certainly the honourable member for Flin Flon, should realize that there is an existing facility at the building on Ellice Avenue, and we have been working with the National Research Council, we have been working with the federal ministers in terms of retaining most of those facilities right here in Winnipeg at our facility on Niakwa Road.

       If the honourable member has taken the time to read the budget, which I hope he has, he will notice that the Manitoba Research Council funding is going from some $2 million to some $2.75 million to meet the very needs of our manufacturing and business community here in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, to meet the needs of the '90s, so clearly we are taking the steps that are required to meet the changes and doing what is best for the manufacturing community here in Manitoba.

 

Inner-City Renewal

Government Commitment

 

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley):  Mr. Speaker, this evening we are going to see the last graduating class in the Core Area Initiative, one of the most important and successful of all Core Area Initiative programs which provided training, jobs and indeed new hope to many thousands of families in the city of Winnipeg.

       I would like to ask the Minister of Urban Affairs to explain to the House why, when the City of Winnipeg has put its money on the table, when the federal ministers are prepared to take a proposal to cabinet, this minister is not prepared to make any further commitment to inner‑city renewal?

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, the member for Wolseley is incorrect in her preamble.  We have for the past number of months been attempting to negotiate an agreement with the City of Winnipeg and with the federal government.  We are quite close, I believe, in reaching that conclusion, but we are not yet satisfied that we have been able to obtain all that we can obtain in terms of a new agreement for Winnipeg.  I might also say that there is a commitment contained in the budget of Urban Affairs toward a new initiative for Winnipeg.

       We hope that within the next little while that we are able to conclude a satisfactory agreement, one that is satisfactory to us and to our two partners.

 

Core Area Initiative

Education Programs

 

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley):  Mr. Speaker, in view of the absence of any program now, I would like to ask the Minister of Education who is advising the displaced core area families to apply to community colleges, whether she is directing Red River Community College, for example, to expand its affirmative action, its youth pre‑employment programs, the life skills and the language programs which were crucial to the success of the Core Area Initiative programs.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training):  Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that my colleague the honourable member in charge of Urban Affairs will be looking forward to negotiating where possible a new agreement, and then I will be happy to deal with the community colleges and their programming.

* (1050)

 

Core Area Initiative

Education Programs

 

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley):  Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Education then, will she tell the House what she is prepared to do now at community colleges for students who no longer have the Core Area Initiative, who no longer can get into community college programs?  What is she going to do for those displaced people in the inner city now?

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, the question of education for disadvantaged people in the inner city has been well treated through this government's tenure and the tenure of the previous government through the two Core Area Initiative programs.

       Most Core Area Initiative programs were not mutually exclusive to any government.  It was started under the Sterling Lyon government; it was continued under the former Howard Pawley government‑‑unlike like some of the statements that have been coming from the members opposite of recent times, that they were the soul saviours of the inner city.

       Mr. Speaker, in terms of a new agreement, we are I believe very close to reaching a new agreement.  In addition to that, we have taken existing core funds in order to extend the Core Area Initiative training program for another two months until we can finalize this current agreement.  No one is going to be left in the lurch.

 

Clean Environment Commission

Funding

 

Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Environment.  The Minister of Environment himself has said on many occasions, sustainable development is a philosophy that is supposed to permeate all levels of governmental activity and governmental decision making.

       Unfortunately, we have seen a fact that has been recognized by the Chamber of Commerce recently, that this government appears to believe that sustainable development is a term that can be assigned to an institute, a cabinet committee and then forgotten.  The hallmark of sustainable development is assessing the environmental impact.

       My question for the Minister of Environment is:  Can he explain the cuts to the CEC, the Clean Environment Commission, given the major water diversion plan supported by this Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) that is going to be coming before that commission?  Can he explain how the cuts to the CEC have anything to do with sustainable development?