LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Wednesday, March 25, 1992

 

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

 

PRAYERS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

PRESENTING PETITIONS

 

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Craig Gill, Vern Ducharme, Ramona Bias and others requesting the government show its strong commitment to dealing with child abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign.

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Cindy Rebillard, Judy Trout, Candace Saunders and others requesting the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code to prevent the release of individuals where there is substantial likelihood of further family violence.

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Judith Clayden, Margaret Church, Sandra Skeoch and others requesting the government show its strong commitment to dealing with child abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign.

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Karen Green, John Rempel, Herman Holschen and others requesting the government to show its strong commitment to dealing with child abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign.

 

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS

 

Mr. Speaker:  I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member.  It complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules (by leave).  Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

      The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth:

      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. (Ms. Barrett)

       * * *

      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 (by leave).  Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

      The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth:

      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 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 Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the government of Manitoba show a strong commitment to deal with Child Abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. (Ms. Friesen)

* (1335)

      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 sheweth:

      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 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 Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the government of Manitoba show a strong commitment to deal with Child Abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. (Ms. Barrett)

      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 sheweth:

      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 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 Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the government of Manitoba show a strong commitment to deal with Child Abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. (Ms. Cerilli)

* * *

      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 sheweth:

      THAT locally controlled public housing with elected and appointed board members encourages democratic and 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. Wowchuck)

 

PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES

 

Mrs. Louise Dacquay (Chairperson of Committees):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs.

Mr. Clerk (William Remnant):  Your Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs presents the following as its Second Report.

      Your committee met on Tuesday, March 24, 1992, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider the March 31, 1991, Annual Report of and matters pertaining to the North Portage Development Corporation.

      Dr. Arnold Naimark, Chairperson of the Board, and Mr. Kent Smith, General Manager, provided such information as was requested by members of the committee with respect to the annual report and business of the North Portage Development Corporation.

      Your committee reports that it has considered the March 31, 1991, Annual Report of and matters pertaining to the North Portage Development Corporation.

      All of which is respectfully submitted.

Mrs. Dacquay:  I move, seconded by the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the committee be received.

Motion agreed to.

 

TABLING OF REPORTS

 

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Subsection 43(1) of The Fatality Inquiries Act, I am tabling the Fatality Inquiries report for the year 1991.

* (1340)

 

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

 

Bill 70‑The Social Allowances Amendment

and Consequential Amendments Act

 

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 70, The Social Allowances Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'aide sociale et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.

      His Honour the Lieutenant‑Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House.  I would like to table the message.

Motion agreed to.

 

Bill 68‑The Public Trustee Amendment, Trustee Amendment

and Child and Family Services Amendment Act

 

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Bill 68, The Public Trustee Amendment, Trustee Amendment and Child and Family Services Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur le curateur public, la Loi sur les fiduciaires et la Loi sur les services a l'enfant a la famille), be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

 

Bill 71‑The Retirement Plan Beneficiaries Act

 

       Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik), that Bill 71, The Retirement Plan Beneficiaries Act (Loi sur les beneficiaires des regimes de retraite), be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

 

       ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

 

Department of Government Services

RCMP Investigation‑Leasing Branch

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, we have been raising questions about the leasing arrangements with 280 Broadway for a number of months now.  Today we have the information provided in the warrant made public by the RCMP.  The information confirms that it is indeed the director of leasing contract and expenditure control of the Manitoba Department of Government Services who is involved in the investigation by the RCMP.  We are very concerned about answers we received in this House from the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme) last week wherein the Minister of Government Services stated that the department had no relationship in terms of this investigation, no relation to the landlord.

      Mr. Speaker, information filed with the RCMP indicates that a million dollars was provided to the company 72398 of two partners, Mr. Shenkarow and Mr. Kozminski.  That money in turn was paid to Bachman and Associates, which in fact is a company that is owned partially by Mr. Bachman and also by Mr. Shenkarow.  So clearly there is a contradiction in the information that was provided by the government.

      Would the Deputy Premier now confirm that in fact the landlord was involved in receipt of money, was involved in the receipt of the contract and did in turn flow money that eventually is in investigation with the RCMP warrant that was tabled in the information today?

Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Minister of Government Services):  Mr. Speaker, I would take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme) to ensure that a full and complete answer is provided to the member for the question asked.

 

Internal Audit‑Leasing Branch

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, we are also very concerned on information contained within the audit that the date of cancellation of the original tender, according to the Premier (Mr. Filmon), was January 21, 1991.  The Premier stated in this House in April of 1991 that Treasury Board had nothing to do with the cancellation of the tendering.  It was the Department of Government Services that had cancelled the open‑tendering process and went ahead with the closed‑tendering process.

      The RCMP in their affidavit and information in the warrant today state that the dates under investigation for the director of leasing of Government Services include dates of January 1, 1991, to December 11, 1991.

      Given that the date of January 21 was the date on which the Premier alleges Government Services cancelled the open‑tendering process, can the government advise us of what steps they have taken in terms of the investigation of the leasing arrangement with the director and the two parties who received the lease from the government?

Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Minister of Government Services):  Mr. Speaker, again I will take the question as notice on behalf of the minister to provide the appropriate information.

* (1345)

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, again the government stated, in questions we had last week in the Legislature, that the irregularities, the so‑called irregularities which we had to raise in this House based on the RCMP raid two weeks ago, were not communicated publicly by the government.  The so‑called irregularities, the information they are looking at includes tendering documents and other documents pertaining to the original lease agreement.

      Could the government advise us how they could possibly say that that had nothing to do with the original landlords and the original decision on 280 Broadway?

Mr. Ernst:  Again, Mr. Speaker, I will take the question as notice.

 

North American Free Trade Agreement

Government Action

 

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, members of this Chamber and perhaps Manitobans were surprised to learn in 1988, when we were discussing the Free Trade Agreement with the United States, that the Leader of the Opposition had not read the agreement.

      Yesterday we found out that the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) has not read any of the documents relating to the North American free trade agreement.  In addition, yesterday, the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) added another condition to the list of six conditions he now has tabled publicly under which he would support a North American free trade agreement.

      My question to the Deputy Premier is:  If the government proceeds, as it is apparent it is intending to do, to sign this agreement before an election some time late in 1993, how is the opposition that this government says it will proclaim, if these conditions are met, to manifest itself?  What is the government going to do if the federal government continues to ignore the warnings of the Premier and members on this side?

Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier):  Mr. Speaker, as the member has made reference to me not having read the free trade agreement, it would be very difficult to read it when I in fact have not had a copy of it, which I indicated as well.

      The additional comments and questions that the member has raised deal with the further involvement in any free trade agreement.  We have clearly put our position forward as to the conditions that have to be met before there is any consideration of support by this government.

Mr. Storie:  Well, Mr. Speaker, mindlessly opposing something without laying out a concrete plan of action so the people of Manitoba can judge whether you are really opposing it or paying lip service to opposing it, trying to absolve yourself of any responsibility for getting into this agreement, that is nonsense.

Mr. Speaker:  Question, please.

 

Provincial Jurisdiction

 

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, my question is again to the Deputy Premier.

      Can the minister explain why he has not taken time to read the documents that the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) says are available to him, which explain the apparent giving away of provincial jurisdiction over trucking, energy policy, industrial development policy and health care? Can he explain why he has not read the document when those provincial jurisdictions are at risk under this agreement?

Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier):  Mr. Speaker, the member well knows that there are different ministerial responsibilities within government.  What I indicated to him is that I have not read the trade agreement that is being proposed because I have not seen a copy of it.  He makes reference to the fact that the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) has it. I am not debating that.  What I am telling him is that I have not read it because I have not seen it.

 

Election Call

       

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon):  Mr. Speaker, one final question to the Deputy Premier.

      Will the Deputy Premier undertake today for the people of Manitoba the premise that if this agreement proceeds as it is going to proceed with the federal government ramming it down our throat, despite the opposition supposedly expressed by the Premier (Mr. Filmon), we will demand an election be called before Canadians and Manitobans are subjected to the implications in this agreement?

Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier):  Mr. Speaker, it is the intention of this government to act responsibly as it relates to trade within Canada to break down some of the trade barriers that are internal in this country between provinces.  It is our responsibility as a government to make sure the people of this province are correctly and truly represented in their interest as it relates to any trade deal.  We are not going to in any way compromise those people who depend on us in a responsible way to represent them.

* (1350)

 

Judicial System

Court Transcription Service

 

Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James):  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.  On January 4, 1991, 14 months ago, a memo from the minister's department said with respect to the new court reporter machines being brought in, and I quote:  "Every new system requires a start‑up period.

      "We should have a smoother, more efficient system in place shortly.  It is clear that a new system could be developed that would lower overall costs while retaining the benefits of such advanced systems.  We will be striving to achieve this goal over the next year."

      I want to table a copy of that memo, Mr. Speaker.  It has now been more than a year since that memo and since the minister made that commitment.  Thanks to the minister's actions, it now takes weeks instead of days in northern Manitoba to get transcripts, even expedited ones which used to be available on an overnight basis, and while two court reporters in The Pas sit idle, the Crown is bringing in court reporters from Winnipeg to do local trials.

      My question, Mr. Speaker, is:  Will the minister today table evidence, if he has it, to substantiate his claim that court reporter machines instead of people in northern Manitoba are more accurate, more efficient or more cost effective in the delivery of justice?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General):  I will bring the specifics of the matter raised by the honourable member today to the attention of officials in my department and ascertain if there is any truth to the preamble of the honourable member's question, and if there is, deal with the matter, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Edwards:  Mr. Speaker, again for the Minister of Justice.

      Can the minister explain why on March 19, last Thursday, in Thompson, Judge Howell, when he asked to see a transcript of a preliminary hearing in a sexual assault case, had to be told that the machine had not been working in Lynn Lake during the preliminary hearing and that the victim in the case of that sexual assault would have to go through that hearing and face her assailant a second time needlessly because the machine was broken and nobody knew it during the entire course of the preliminary hearing?  Where was the smoother, more efficient system in that case?

Mr. McCrae:  I remind the honourable member that there were tape recordings of court trials in Manitoba prior to the changes announced last year.  Human error is an element in reporting no matter which system you use.  I would regret very much if an error occurred that caused somebody involved as a victim in an assault case or a sexual assault case to be inconvenienced.  As with the previous question, Mr. Speaker, I will bring this matter to the attention of my department and obtain a response for the honourable member.

Mr. Edwards:  The fact is that northerners are receiving, at the hands of this minister, second‑class justice.

      Mr. Speaker, can the minister further tell members why Judge Gregoire had to send a plane back to Thompson from Oxford House to get a new machine because the one they brought broke, and why two weeks ago at a trial on a charge of drunken driving, a matter dear to this minister's heart, not one but two monitors broke, meaning that one trial started at 4:30 p.m. and the other at 8:30 p.m., resulting in all staff getting overtime pay after sitting for a day while waiting for the third machine to arrive?

      Where was the smoother more efficient system, Mr. Speaker, and why is this minister unaware of the regular‑‑

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

Mr. McCrae:  I appreciate the honourable member is attempting to be helpful, Mr. Speaker, and help us to ensure that whatever wrinkles there are in the system are ironed out.  I am sure that the honourable member will also want to be helpful in asking his colleagues in the bar to co‑operate and not carry forward on threats to slow down the justice system.

 

Home Care Program

Privatization

 

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health.

      Each day we hear this government saying they are increasing spending in home care.  I find this statement very questionable in light of a letter that has been sent to a family of a client receiving home care, a letter which I would like to table.

      The letter states that household maintenance will be cut, and I quote:  "Would you then be able to help your mother find someone to hire privately to assist?"

      In light of this letter, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the minister:  Is he privatizing the home care service, thus those who have money will be able to have service and the poor will continue to suffer or end up in hospitals?

* (1355)

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

 

Service Reduction

 

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River):  Mr. Speaker, the letter goes on to say that changing beds and laundry will be cancelled.  These tasks need only be done once or twice a week.

      I want to ask the minister:  Does he feel that cleanliness is not part of staying healthy?  How can he allow his staff to take away services, such vital services, from our seniors, particularly people‑‑

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

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated to my honourable friend when she raised this issue some month ago, and last week and probably next week and probably the week after, there is a process of reassessment in the Continuing Care Program.  That process of reassessment has been part of the program since 1974 through successive governments that have administered the program.  That reassessment is undertaken by professionals.  They make the judgment as to whether services are appropriate, need to be increased or can be decreased.

      Based on that professional assessment, services are either maintained, increased or decreased.  In the areas where they are decreased, my honourable friends receive letters.  In the areas where they are increased or maintained, my honourable friend does not receive any letters.

      Mr. Speaker, the application of reassessment of the principles and policies of the program have remained consistent through four successive governments since 1974.

Ms. Wowchuk:  Mr. Speaker, the letter says‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member has tabled the letter.  The honourable member, kindly put your question, please.

Ms. Wowchuk:  To the same minister:  Has he changed the mandate for delivery of home care services?  Has housekeeping service, which was an essential part of the health care environment up until now, been removed, and has the mandate of his department been changed for the delivery of home care service?

Mr. Orchard:  Again, Mr. Speaker, no.  That is what I told my honourable friend in conversation last week.  That is identically the policy that my honourable friend had since 1974.  Let me even further explain for my honourable friend because my honourable friend fails to understand the policies put in place in 1974.  I do not need to remind you who was government in 1974.

      Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, in 1985 the government in power, and I need not remind you who that was, established a program called Support Services to Seniors which funded in the communities the salaried cost of a volunteer co‑ordinator.  That volunteer co‑ordinator was to work with community organizations, groups and volunteers to establish housecleaning services, home maintenance services, laundry services that the individuals in the community could access rather than have those services always provided by the taxpayers, a policy of the NDP that we happen to agree with.

 

Endangered Spaces

Tall Grass Prairie Program

 

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson):  Mr. Speaker, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) made a promise in the last election to spend some $250,000 to protect Manitoba's tall grass prairie.  They also made a commitment to the Endangered Spaces Program.  In the report from the last year in the Endangered Spaces Program, there was a further commitment to purchase 640 acres of tall grass prairie by May 1992.

      My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.  Is the 20‑hectare site near Regent and Bradley Street part of this tall grass prairie program?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources):  Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the site that the honourable member refers to.  It is being actively considered as part of the overall acquisition of tall grass prairie sites in our Endangered Spaces Program, and hopefully, something can be arranged.  I understand that there are still some negotiations that have to take place with the city administration with respect to proceeding with that at this time.

Ms. Cerilli:  I thank the minister for that answer.

      Considering this program to purchase 640 acres when there is only a month left, can the minister inform the House how much of this area has been set aside to be purchased?

Mr. Enns:  I am assuming that she is now talking about the overall commitment of 640 acres.

      Mr. Speaker, I think the honourable members would appreciate that it is difficult to be precise.  We are working with organizations such as the Manitoba Naturalists Society.  We were able to acquire some substantial acreage in the southeast portion of the province, in that of my honourable friend from Emerson.

      It is my hope and certainly my commitment and that of this government that we live up to the commitments made.  Whether we will be able to do that categorically on calendar dates is not entirely in my hands.  It also calls upon the co‑operation of nongovernmental agencies, landowners and/or other jurisdictions, as is the specific site that she mentioned in the Transcona region.

* (1400)

 

Endangered Spaces

Tall Grass Prairie Program

       

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson):  My final supplementary on the same issue is for the Minister of Environment.

      Will the Minister of Environment make a commitment to have the Clean Environment Commission, not another body, conduct a full environment assessment on any construction by the city to put a thoroughfare through the Regent and Bradley Street prairie site?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment):  Mr. Speaker, I am aware of that site and aware of the issue that surrounds the protection of that historic prairie grass, but I do not believe that at this juncture I am convinced that bringing the Clean Environment Commission in would be beneficial to the process.  I am not eliminating any possibilities, but at this point, that is not my intent.

 

Rent Regulations

Enforcement

 

Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples):  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

      A few weeks ago we raised the issue of tenants paying higher rent than normally allowed by the law.  The minister said that she could do nothing because the illegal increase was implemented under the former landlord.  There are two parties who have been victimized, the new tenants and the new landlord.  Can the minister tell this House why she sides with the previous landlord, why she is abandoning the tenants and also the new landlord, and why is she not upholding her own law?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for The Maples for the question.  As the member knows, and we have discussed this before, the problem with this particular situation is the interpretation of a section of the act which indicates that for a two‑year period prior to a change in ownership, the new owner can be held responsible for actions taken, but prior to that period, he cannot.

      Legal opinion that we have obtained on this issue indicates that there is nothing further that can be done.

 

Legal Opinion Request

 

Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples):  Mr. Speaker, can the minister table the legal opinion in this House, please?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, I do not have that legal opinion here with me, but I do believe that the individual who contacted my department on this issue has been sent a copy of the legal opinion.

Mr. Cheema:  Mr. Speaker, can the minister tell this House why she would not table the legal opinion?  The minister has known the issue for four weeks.  Why will we not have that report so that we can make a judgment call also?

Mrs. McIntosh:  I have not been asked until this point for the actual legal opinion wording.  I have given the legal opinion; I have explained the legal opinion.  I understand that the individual whom the member is raising the issue for has a copy of the legal opinion and in fact is a lawyer himself.

 

Home Care Program

Service Reduction

 

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns):  Mr. Speaker, I would like to pursue the issue of home care with the Minister of Health since he has failed to recognize the importance of this letter that has been tabled by my colleague the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk).

      Clearly this letter marks a change in policy, the end to universal access to quality home care services.  Mr. Speaker, that is the beginning of the end of universal medicare services, something that this minister says he supports, and he is not supporting, a clear indication of this government's true feelings about medicare.

      Why, Mr. Speaker, has this government suddenly denied people whose medical circumstances have not changed, who are well on in their years, 80 and 90 years old, who were dependent upon homemaking services, to stay in their homes and out of costly institutional care?  Why has this government changed that policy, taken away that vital service and told them to go‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, at the risk of my honourable friend's‑‑what is the phraseology?‑‑shouting and yelling about an issue, my honourable friend might want to revisit (a) the policy which founded and underpinned the Continuing Care Program in 1974.  My honourable friend will find out, should she choose to read that policy, two things:  that it has not changed since 1974; and secondly, that the policies around the application of the home care rules, procedures, have not changed since 1974 through four successive governments.

      Secondly, my honourable friend might want to research the cabinet papers that were passed, establishing the program called Support Services to Seniors, while my honourable friend, I believe, was in the Howard Pawley cabinet making those kinds of decisions.  My honourable friend will find that the Support Services to Seniors program was established through, as I explained in an earlier answer, funding for the retention of a volunteer co‑ordinator so that services such as homemaking and other nonmedical services could be provided through not‑for‑profit service delivery in the community to help as an additional instrument of independent living for seniors, established under good policy by my NDP friend, consistently applied today.

-s. Wasylycia-Leis:  I would simply like this Minister of Health to account for this dramatic shift in health care policy where they have now ended a universally accessible program and expect senior citizens who need this service to turn to private entrepreneurs to purchase those necessary health care services.

* (1410)

Mr. Orchard:  Mr. Speaker, at the risk of raising my voice and delivering an inappropriate and alarmist‑motivated answer, I will be calm as my honourable friend shrilly denounces and announces the end of universal medicare‑‑such silliness, such abject silliness.

      Mr. Speaker, the medical services that my honourable friend refers to are house cleaning, the very services that in 1984, 1985, when she sat in government, supported a program called Support Services to Seniors to undertake at not‑for‑profit in the communities.  Charging the people who used the program in 1985, when she was in government, for house cleaning has been maintained.  We believe that policy initiative of the NDP in 1984‑85 was a good one, and in fact, we are building on it again this year.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  Mr. Speaker, there is nothing in this letter to say‑‑

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

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  Is the minister now saying that homemaking services, once considered an essential part of our home care program, universally accessible to all regardless of income, or geography, or status in life, is he now saying that this is the end of that important part of home care and our health care system and that in fact seniors must turn to private entrepreneurs and, if they cannot afford it, either will do without, or end up in expensive, costly institutional care?

Mr. Orchard:  Mr. Speaker, one of the strangest phenomenons that I have witnessed in the four years I have been Minister of Health is the convoluted twisting‑and‑turning‑around policy initiatives that the NDP, when in government, brought in, introduced an alternate mechanism for home cleaning services, so that the program as supplied by the taxpayers would not be called on to provide house cleaning services‑‑a perfectly common‑sense approach to policy development by Howard Pawley, the NDP and assisted by this member.

      Now when the wisdom of their action in government is being questioned by the critic in opposition, where is the NDP coming from?  I mean, that program of Support Services to Seniors that is introduced after being researched and recommended by very, very competent individuals in the ministry of Health, who are still there‑‑and that policy is one of the best ones in Canada; other provinces are emulating it.

      Now my honourable friends want to turn their back on good public policy that even they had the common sense to bring in.  I find that shameful.

 

North American Free Trade Agreement

Impact Agricultural Industry

 

Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin):  Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) for Manitoba has been at best lukewarm in his support for supply management commodities in this province and production under supply management in any GATT agreement.  He refused to sign an agreement that was put forward by the dairy producers of Canada.

      At the same time the federal government is mouthing lukewarm support, their actions shine through insofar as the North American free trade agreement when they use the tariffication proposal, which would be so harmful to Canadian farmers, as the basis for their position on agriculture.  They say tariff equivalents, and I quote:  resulting from the conversion of nontariff barriers into customs tariff rates shall be reduced in accordance with the schedules relating to each party, incorporated into the general agreement on tariffs and trade Uruguay round.

      That is the position they put forward in that agreement. That means the end of orderly marketing.

      I ask this Deputy Premier what representation he has made or he intends to make to stop this damaging position by Canada with regard to the North American free trade agreement.

Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier):  Mr. Speaker, I am confident that the provincial Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) and this government have represented the farm community responsibly as it relates to the issue which the member raises and will continue to do so.

      I can tell you there is constant contact and consultation with the agricultural community, with the farm community, which I believe is truly reflecting the interests of Manitoba farmers.

Mr. Plohman:  He puts his confidence in Mulroney, Mr. Speaker.

      Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that Mexico has asked for specific provisions in the North American free trade agreement, specific provisions to protect their producers, will this Deputy Premier now insist that the federal government abandon its tariffication proposal, which is an American proposal harmful to Canada, and do the same thing that Mexico is doing with regard to any North American agreement and ensure that Canadian producers can be protected under the North American free trade agreement, not reject it as they are doing?

Mr. Downey:  Mr. Speaker, again let me reiterate for the members opposite.  This government is continuing to carry out policies and put forward our position in the interests of the farmers of Manitoba as it relates to GATT, as it relates to the North American free trade agreement.  We have listed our conditions and will not support it unless the interests of those producers are protected.

Mr. Plohman:  Mr. Speaker, since the Deputy Premier does not understand this agreement‑‑he has not read it, by his own admission‑‑will he just use good common sense and call upon the federal government to end this damaging process which will do irreparable harm to Canada and Manitoba's farmers?

Mr. Downey:  Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that the best interests of Manitobans will continue to be put forward, unlike the track record of him and his government when he was in office that devastated this province, that devastated the agricultural community and devastated the ability for this province to compete in the international marketplace.

 

Education System

Transportation Report

 

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Education.

      Manitoba has long been recognized as having one of the best bus transportation systems on the North American continent. Despite the attempts of the former minister to try to privatize portions of that system, it still remains one of the best.

      Can the minister advise whether or not the bus transportation privatization study, undertaken by the former minister at a cost of half a million dollars, has been submitted to her?  It was scheduled to be submitted by