LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Monday, April 13, 1992

 

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

 

PRAYERS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

PRESENTING PETITIONS

 

Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (St. Johns):  I beg to present the petition of Cindy Le Blanc, Brenda T. Hemery, and Patricia Kerekesch 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 a substantial likelihood of further family violence.

 

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS

       

Mr. Speaker:  I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans), 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 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.

* * *

      I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett), 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.

* * *

      I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), 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.

* * *

      I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), 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.

* (1335)

 

TABLING OF REPORTS

 

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training):  Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review, 1992‑93, Departmental Expenditure Estimates for the Department of Education and Training.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am tabling today the annual report for

1990 of the Office of the Commissioner for the Law Enforcement Review Agency.

       

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

 

Bill 77‑The Liquor Control Amendment Act

 

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas):  Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis), that Bill 77, The Liquor Control Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur la reglementation des alcools), be introduced and the same be now received and read a first time.

Motion presented.

Mr. Hickes:  Mr. Speaker, in keeping with the rules, I would just like to make a very brief comment.

      As most honourable members are aware, it is believed that at least nine residents of Winnipeg alone have died in the past year due to the consumption of cooking wine.  This situation is approaching a major crisis in Winnipeg's inner city.  Although most people recognize the problem and its importance, to this point, there has been no legislative action to address the issue.

      The amendment I am proposing will lend a partial solution to a very serious problem.  This bill would amend the definition of liquor in The Liquor Control Act so that cooking wines or liquors with an alcohol content in excess of 19 percent would be under the control of the Liquor Control Commission.

      I look forward to the appropriate support from all members of this very important bill.

Motion agreed to.

 

Introduction of Guests

       

Mr. Speaker:  Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where have with us this afternoon, from the Grant Park High School, twenty‑eight Grade 9 students.  They are under the direction of Mr. Roseman.  This school is located in the constituency of Crescentwood.

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

 

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

 

Abitibi-Price ‑ Pine Falls

Financial Status

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, on March 27, I raised a number of questions with the Premier dealing with the financial situation of Abitibi‑Price in that it was owned by the Olympia & York corporation, a corporation at that time, a couple of weeks ago, that was going through a lot of financial difficulties through overexpansion in London, United States, real estate in Canada and New York, a company that has owned the Abitibi‑Price Corporation that has made profits for 50‑60 years and now is in jeopardy through the statements of the holding company Olympia & York to close the plant down.

      The Premier at the time, in Hansard, stated that there were negotiations going on for the takeover of the operation, the community‑owned operation, but that he was at the First Ministers' meeting on the economy and he could not give us the details of the financial implications of the bankers meeting with Olympia & York today in downtown Toronto and the company operation in Manitoba.

      I wonder if the Premier could advise us on the financial situation at the Pine Falls operation relative to the Olympia & York developments of today.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  Mr. Speaker, the meetings continue to go on, as the Leader of the Opposition has indicated.  To my knowledge, nothing has changed.  Abitibi‑Price indicated close to a year ago that they would not continue in the ownership and operation of the plant at Pine Falls, that the pulp and paper mill would not be able to be carried on under the ownership of Abitibi‑Price, ultimately part of the Olympia & York empire.

      The efforts that our government have been putting forward‑‑and I met at least twice in Toronto with the CEO and senior vice‑president, Eileen Mercier, of Abitibi‑Price with respect to ensuring that they would provide for an orderly transition of sale of the corporation to a group led by the management, which included the work force as part of the ownership and operation.

      I know that there have been countless meetings involving people such as the member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik) in his capacity and interested in it, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson), other ministers of this administration, with the people trying to put together the package which would allow other people to acquire the control and continue the operations of the Pine Falls pulp and paper mill under different ownership.

* (1340)

 

De‑inking Plant

Feasibility Study

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, the Premier also took as notice, on the same day, the status of proposals before the Western Diversification committee of the federal cabinet dealing with a proposal to have a de‑inking plant operation as part of the divestiture and the takeover of the community‑based group, a de‑inking operation that could potentially deal with the recommendations that the government finds before it in dealing with the Clean Environment Commission and a substitute for the fibre that may be necessary if the government proceeds with those recommendations.

      I was wondering today, given the fact the Premier took this question as notice, what is the status of the de‑inking plant operation?  Will we receive any support from either the provincial or federal government, particularly the federal government because Western Diversification seems to us to be totally appropriate for this kind of change into the future? What is the status of that proposal?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  As I indicated in response to that question a couple of weeks ago, it is the responsibility of the proponents to go to Western Diversification and to ask for their support.  I understand that has been done.

      I might say that our caucus met last Monday, as I believe the opposition caucuses met last week with the principals of the Abitibi‑Price operation, including representatives of those who intend to be part of the takeover package.  We confirmed our continued support for the de‑inking facility as part of that takeover.

      I would just indicate that the information we have been given by those who plan to take over or are in the process of seeking financial support for a takeover, I would hope, is no different than the information they have provided to the opposition caucuses, and that is that basically the operations of the Pine Falls pulp and paper mill would be in jeopardy and in fact the economics would be likely unfeasible if the recommendations of the Clean Environment Commission were adopted by this administration, regardless of the availability of some recycled stock in terms of the de‑inking facility.  If that is different from what has been portrayed to the opposition caucuses, perhaps they could say so publicly.

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, we have a consultant's report, Bowell Consultants, which is well known by the government, a report that was commissioned by the band in the area dealing with the feasibility of the plant, a feasibility study that took place even before the recommendations were recommended to the government from the Clean Environment Commission, talking about that this plant would not be viable, notwithstanding any recommendations to the Clean Environment Commission, without a recycling proposal and a de‑inking proposal.

      The government has its own studies that it has commissioned dealing with this operation.  I was wondering, given the fact the government has had those consultant reports for a number of months, whether the government will make those reports public so that debate going on about the jobs and the environmental commission recommendations and all the issues that are at stake‑‑and they are very important‑‑could be debated in a full way, Mr. Speaker, by Manitobans dealing with these very important policy issues.

Mr. Filmon:  Mr. Speaker, I am not in possession of that report nor have I seen that report, but I do know from the briefings that I have had that the plant will require certainly equivalent availability of wood for the process to what it currently has. In fact, given the tremendous losses that were sustained in the forest fires of the 1980s, much of the previously committed timberland has been destroyed by fires, and therefore, it is questionable as to whether or not the existing stock is sufficient for its viability.

      That is why we have indicated for quite some time now, certainly more than a year, that we are very supportive of and very receptive to having a de‑inking plant as part of the overall takeover and restructuring of that operation so that they will have sufficient recycled stock to supplement what appears to be a shortage of new wood stock to the operation.

 

Shoal Lake Protection

Minister's Communication

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, I have a new question to the Premier.

      The Premier and I had, again, a debate on March 23‑‑or not a debate but a discussion about the Shoal Lake proposal for the mining proposal at Shoal Lake.  The Premier indicated at that time that the government was pursuing a two‑track strategy with Shoal Lake:  one, the strategy of having a basin management system in negotiations with all the stakeholders, a strategy that certainly we support on this side‑‑I am sure all Manitobans support it; and a second strategy of monitoring the environmental processes that are taking place in Ontario that were announced by the previous government and are being maintained by the existing government in Ontario.  We had been advised that Consolidated is changing its proposal to the province of Ontario, is looking at processing the ore offshore now as opposed to on shore.

      I was wondering whether the Premier (Mr. Filmon) has reviewed this proposal and whether he has communicated to the Province of Ontario on the impact of the change in that proposal from the mining company, and what impact it will have on Manitobans, particularly those who rely on that water supply and on that basin for our drinking supply.

* (1345)

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment):  Mr. Speaker, I would like the opportunity to bring the Leader of the Opposition up to date on the circumstances surrounding Shoal Lake.  We have not had any official communication from the Province of Ontario regarding this proposal that the member raises.  Until we see something a lot more substantive than a report in the paper or perhaps some verbal suggestions about what could occur, our position is, as it has been enunciated for some time, that we believe this should go through the most rigid evaluation for the long‑term protection of that water and that at the same time we wish to proceed in co‑operation with all of the stakeholders for a basin management plan.

      We have had discussions with some of the bands in the area. I personally spoke to the Ontario Minister of Environment not very long ago, and until we receive something more substantive, however, our position is unchanged.

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, before the newspaper stories and other communication on this issue, we had also heard informally that the mine was working with the mining industry in Ontario to change their proposal.  It is not a rumour.  It is something very specifically that they are looking at with the mining industry of Ontario.

      Mr. Speaker, has the minister, in his communication with the minister for Ontario, pointed out the precedent of the Montreal River flooding where mining ore taken from mines off the basic water supply was processed offshore, but through flooding and other means, those toxic materials‑‑and we certainly know that toxic materials could be involved in the mining of gold in the processing of gold‑‑did come into the water supply in the Montreal River?  Has he communicated our objections to the reconfiguration of that proposal?

Mr. Cummings:  Mr. Speaker, let me make it very clear, there is quite a significant difference between discussions in the industry and changes that they are putting forward, and I presume they will, or if they have not already, put some pressure on the Ontario government.  The Ontario government has not communicated to us.  Our position has been and continues to be that we want the highest possible protection for the area.

      I do not disagree with the basis of the Leader of the Opposition's comment, but I do not think he should be attempting to frighten the people of this province again by talking about possible leaching into the lake.  We are not talking about anything of that nature.  We have not had any official communication, and I want to tell you that we will be negotiating with Ontario for basin management, the strongest possible protection.  As a matter of fact, the regulations that we proposed and asked Ontario to consider as part of a basin plan are, I think, quite capable of providing the protection, but there is now issue on the Ontario side of the border as to how the management of a basin plan should be structured.  That is the position that we are in today.  Rather than ramrodding the Province of Ontario, we are waiting to work with them to devise a plan that I believe could well be visionary, Mr. Speaker.

* (1350)

 

Manitoba Regulations

       

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, our questions are only intended to have the earliest warning possible for Manitoba, which I think is obviously the most prudent course for all of us, no matter what side of the House we sit on.

      I have a further question to the minister, and he alluded to parts of it in his second question.  In September of 1990, the government talked about draft regulations that they were putting out on the dealing with the Shoal Lake watershed area. Eventually last year, 1991, the government did put out draft regulations for public consultation.  The regulations are still out for consultation.  The minister mentioned that Ontario is raising some concerns.

      Mr. Speaker, when will we have the regulations on the Manitoba side of the watershed that the government promised during the election and after the election so that we can have a consistent position in dealing with the Province of Manitoba? When will we have those regulations completed?  When will we make them public, and will the minister make public all the interventions from various groups on those regulations in terms of the public feedback that he has received dealing with this water supply which is a water supply for all of us?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment):  Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would be quite pleased to provide an update on the status of those regulations.  We are quite prepared to proceed with proclamation of those regulations and implement them on our side, which is the only area that we have jurisdiction on, but we have received presentation from two bands on the Ontario side of the border who are looking to a broader consultation and co‑management responsibilities in regard to discussions that they have had with their government.  They specifically ask that we delay the implementation of those regulations while broader discussion occurs.

      Mr. Speaker, I indicated to them, in the interests of being co‑operative and the best interests of working towards a larger management and agreement plan for that area, that we would not proclaim those regulations, but I have reserved the right to do so or to take the strongest possible action on our side of the border, if it is required, for protection of the water.

      I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, and anyone who is interested in this topic to remember that the only place we can regulate is on the Manitoba side of the border.  We have some negotiation capacity, but we have to rely very heavily on the co‑operation and the implementation of either a plan or regulations on the Ontario side.  We still have some considerable faith that Minister Grier will work with us.

      There seemed to be some confusion for a short period of time as to whether the ministry of Native Affairs was going to assume the main responsibility or whether it was the Minister of Environment.  I believe that is now back in the ministry of Environment's responsibility, and we are proceeding to work with them.

 

Health Care System

Public Accountability

 

Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples):  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

      We all know that health care is becoming more and more a serious challenge for all provincial Leaders.  Mr. Speaker, we must live in the real world and not the fantasy land of the New Democratic Party.  In Saskatchewan, the NDP think that the health premium will save medicare and reduce the deficit.  The lesson for Manitoba NDP is that the negative views on health care will lead to NDP premiums and taxes.  Innovation and reform will save the health care, not the premium on health care.

      Mr. Speaker, the recent reports of overbilling by doctors have added to the doubts of the public mind whether the government is able to exercise any effective accountability and any effective control in the way we spend $1.8 billion for 1.3 million people.

      Can the minister tell this House what the government is going to do to help the taxpayers of Manitoba understand where the $1.8 billion is being spent?  Can the minister tell us how they are going to have more accountability and explanation for the people of Manitoba to save medicare by reform not by premiums?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, I think the preamble to my honourable friend's question underlines the very serious challenge that all provincial administrations are now facing to deliver health care.  I have often noted that from the comfort of opposition, New Democrats will always suggest more spending, less accountability and any number of fixes, that when they are in government, they immediately strip away from their rhetoric and move to action plans which involve more management of the health care system.

      There is no question that recent revelations, in terms of the medical review process and, in this particular instance, the request for repayment by the medical review commission of inappropriately billed services by three physicians, have raised a whole new series of issues around the basic trust that we have empowered in the billing system for fee‑for‑service physicians.

      Mr. Speaker, we have checks and balance in place.  They may not be perfect.  They may not work 100 percent of the time, but clearly they have in this instance worked, and we are willing to listen to reasoned suggestions on how to make the system even work more, including‑‑and I note, from at least media responses by the opposition, that they would be open to a legislative resolution of the difficulty of disclosure of physicians, should that be necessary, given that maybe no other solution might emerge.

* (1355)

Mr. Cheema:  Mr. Speaker, will the minister consider one positive idea?  Will he require that patients sign a form each and every time they see a doctor and also that patients receive a quarterly statement showing exactly what the doctor has billed the government on behalf of taxpayers?

Mr. Orchard:  Mr. Speaker, let me deal with the second suggestion first.  In terms of each Manitoban receiving with some frequency, on an annual basis or even more frequently, a summation of billings made on their behalf, there are two issues here.  There is, first of all, the cost of doing that.  I have to say that we tried something similar when I first came into government, and we did not have a great deal of positive feedback as to its utility in the overall health care system from those individual Manitobans receiving their statements.  However, I can indicate to my honourable friend that any Manitoban wishing to receive a copy of their billed services, that request can be made of the Manitoba Health Services Commission and that statement can be made available to them.

      On the first issue my honourable friend raised in terms of patients signing, in essence, what I would interpret as being billing forms, that is worthy of investigation, Sir.  I am willing to very much pursue that suggestion on behalf of my honourable friend in the Liberal Party to see if there is a method by which the taxpayers, the patients and physicians can assure that services are appropriately billed as the system would ask us to assure.

Mr. Cheema:  Mr. Speaker, all these ideas will improve our health care and save X dollars, improve accountability, and also give some assurance to the health care providers that they are not cheating the system.

      Can the minister agree that the government must do a better job explaining how we spend our $1.8 billion?  Now will they launch an education campaign to make sure the people know how we are spending their $1.8 billion?

Mr. Orchard:  Mr. Speaker, again I take that suggestion from my honourable friend as a valuable suggestion.  I know my honourable friends in the media were present, maybe not themselves personally, but were present today at a debate that all three of us had before the Manitoba Nurses' Union, and some information was attempted to be shared there, Sir.

      The whole Estimates process is one in which explanations are made as to how we expend our dollars.  I can indicate to my honourable friend that hopefully we will be able to provide a much more expansive detail of how current dollars are being spent, some of the challenges that face administrators, the health care system, political parties currently in government across Canada and to share along with that, hopefully, the vision that we have as government in ways in which we can see a positive reform of the health care system in Manitoba taking place for the benefit of the patient.

 

CareerStart

Program Funding

 

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East):  I have a question for the Minister of Finance.

      We have a very serious unemployment situation in the province of Manitoba.  Two years ago, our unemployment rate for youth was 13.5 percent in the month of March, and $7 million was allocated for the summer jobs program for young people, CareerStart.  Now the rate has jumped up to 18.6 percent, an incredibly high rate, Mr. Speaker, but the government has cut the CareerStart program to $3.5 million.

      Would the government, would the Minister of Finance, be prepared to bring the CareerStart program back up to the $7‑million level that it was at two years ago in light of the very serious unemployment situation?

* (1400)

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, we are very mindful of the unemployment numbers across Canada and certainly in the province of Manitoba and within the classifications of youth and in other areas within our province. That is why, at some of the last days, when we were completing the budgetary process, we introduced yet additional funds and a couple of new youth program areas.  That is why we restored the same level of funding as last year in CareerStart.

      What the member, of course, is trying to do is focus specifically into some areas.  I would point out for him, for instance, that Manitoba, vis‑a‑vis a whole host of other economic indicators, is doing as well or above national averages, and if he wants to, in subsequent answers to his questions, I could focus or give greater detail with respect to base rate settlements, building permits, business bankruptcies, farm cash receipts, housing starts in urban areas, manufacturing shipments, personal bankruptcies, private nonresidential investment intentions and the unemployment rate.  I could give him the good news in all of those areas, Mr. Speaker, if he so wishes, in a subsequent question.

 

Social Assistance

Employment Creation Strategy

 

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East):  Mr. Speaker, I am asking a question on behalf of thousands of unemployed young people in Manitoba.  That is all.  What are you going to do for those young people?  That is all.

      Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question.  Would the government contact the City of Winnipeg welfare department which has developed a list of work projects for welfare recipients and explore ways and means whereby the province could assist the city in providing employment and training for welfare recipients?  I ask that since more people than ever before are on municipal welfare in the city of Winnipeg and indeed many other municipalities.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, mindful again of most of the comments the member has made, I can assure him that in very short order, there will be a full announcement made by this government with respect to youth unemployment, to programs put into place to deal with the program.  I can assure him they will be far beyond some of the programs that the former administration had to deal with problems that existed during their tenure in government.

      Mr. Speaker, those announcements, I tell the member, are imminent, and I just ask him to hold his position, if he can, for a few more days.

Mr. Leonard Evans:  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the positive announcement, but I ask, I repeat, or I change my question a bit.  I ask the minister‑‑I am talking about all people on welfare in the city of Winnipeg and indeed other municipalities.

      Will this government be prepared to work with the City of Winnipeg and its welfare department in providing jobs and training programs for people who are now drawing welfare, do a very positive thing, something that we did before?  Let us do it again.  Will you take that initiative?

Mr. Manness:  Mr. Speaker, I swear we have been through this movie before.  It was just before Christmas.  It seemed that at that time, the member was calling on workfare.  Of course, we are starting all over again.  It is a very serious issue.  I can indicate to him, the government will be making an announcement in very short order.  I expect that the member will be very congratulatory of the efforts put forward by the government, that he will leap to his feet and congratulate the government for its efforts.

 

Human Resources

Opportunity Centre Closure

 

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk):  My questions are for the Minister of Family Services.

      Recent statistics show that unemployment, particularly among young people, has increased once again‑‑this time to record levels.  Will the Minister of Family Services now review the true costs of increased welfare funding associated with the shutting down of the Selkirk training plant, the true cost?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, the member raises a similar question to the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans).  I would remind him that we have maintained the CareerStart Program at last year's levels, and young people and employers across the province are enrolling in that program at this time.  As the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) has indicated, we have a new program which was announced in the budget, the Partners with Youth program.  We will be bringing forth details on that in the near future.

Mr. Dewar:  Mr. Speaker, what will this minister say to the over 500 Selkirk residents who signed the petition opposing the closure and the dozens of single parents and young people who are being shut out of training opportunities by this minister?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, this budget has seen a massive increase in the spending of Family Services far outstripping some of the estimates of spending brought forward by people who work, I am sure, with the opposition caucus.  We have an increase of almost 9 percent in the Family Services budget this year.  We have some ongoing programs which assist with job creation, the Single Parent Job Access, the Gateway program, and the HROCs and HROPs.

      From time to time, we have to review the success of those programs and make necessary changes to more adequately supply the training for people who are looking for work in the 1990s.

Mr. Dewar:  Selkirk had a very successful program there.  Instead of closing this centre and having to increase welfare funding, will the minister postpone the closing for a year while he has the chance to meet with organizations involved and review the cost savings of keeping the centre training the unemployed?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, we have given a thorough review to our training programs, and I would remind the member that there are training programs coming out of other departments as well that will be working to assist Manitobans who want to get back into the work force.  We have looked very carefully at the programs and particularly the people accessing those programs who can also access the programs in Winnipeg and Gimli and access other programs that the government is bringing forward.

 

Bill 70

Cost Savings

 

Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Family Services.

      Behind the very poor unemployment statistics and the poor Manitoba economy are the men, women and children who have to live on social assistance.  It is estimated that for 1991‑92, the increase in social assistance recipients will increase by 34.9 percent, 37.6 percent in the city of Winnipeg, which represents 89 percent of all cases in the province of Manitoba.

      In Bill 70, the government wants to establish a one‑tiered welfare system, a system that we support provided it does not lead to a decrease in benefits for welfare recipients, for the 89 percent of the cases who live in the city of Winnipeg.  Mr. Speaker, estimates of the cost savings to the province for this single‑tiered system have been as high as $5.6 million.

      Can the Minister of Family Services today tell this House how much the province will pay by decreasing the benefits covered by the province in this one‑tiered system?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, the member of the Liberal Party brought forward a lot of statistics, some of which we will have to look at because I believe they are somewhat questionable.

      At the present time, the provincial social allowance rolls take care of some 27,000 cases, and on the municipal rolls, there are around 12,000 cases.  What this legislation is going to do, and I am pleased that the member is going to support it, is allow equal access to the program, no matter where you live in Manitoba, and as well standardize the rates that will exist across Manitoba.

      At the present time, there is a group of officials from my department and also members of the SARC committee that was established in 1989 working on some of the details of the program, and the figures that the member is looking for are not yet available.

* (1410)

Mrs. Carstairs:  Well, Mr. Speaker, that is simply not true. Many of the figures are certainly very much available.  The payments that are paid under the provincial system and the payments paid by the city are available.  They have been paid for a number of years, so they are not hidden figures.

      Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Family Services tell this House, what is the saving to the Province of Manitoba by the fact that they will be paying less to the City of Winnipeg for their share of the benefit package to social assistance recipients?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, the increase in our budget in social allowances this budget year alone is some $41 million. That includes the creation of a new program for the disabled.  It includes an increase of 3.6 percent in the basic rates.  It includes an increase of 3 percent in the shelter component of the social allowances as well as a flowing of the tax credits on a more timely basis.  Now the work that is being done by the SARC committee and the department is going to establish a single rate.  It is also going to establish a common eligibility for the program.

      The rates that are existing across the province today certainly are public, but they vary from one municipality to another.  In many cases, they are much lower than the provincial rate.  What the SARC committee and the officials are doing now is they are looking at the details of those programs, and probably by the end of May or June of this year, we will be able to come forward, when the legislation is passed, with the information on that rate.

Mrs. Carstairs:  Mr. Speaker, it is estimated that in order to equal some of the benefits that have not been paid in the past, the province will have to put in a contribution of somewhere between $500,000 and $1.5 million.  At the same time, they will decrease their benefits to the City of Winnipeg by some $5.6 million.

      Can the minister explain why he thinks it is an appropriate time for the government of the Province of Manitoba to get a $3‑million windfall on the backs of welfare recipients?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, the information that the member brings forward is not entirely correct.  We have increased the spending on social allowances in this budget by $41 million alone.  There are going to be changes in the amount of social allowances that flow to recipients.  In many municipalities the social allowances at this time are a fraction of what the provincial rate is.  There are some that have allowances that are equal to the provincial rate and others where it varies on the higher side.  We are working with the SARC committee to finalize these details.  We are working as well, and hope that members will move the legislation along to bring this to a reality, and we will be announcing those rates some time probably in June, after this committee has had a chance to do its work.

 

Furnace Inspections

Condemning Authority

 

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Labour.

      Recent reports of heat exchanger failures in Flame‑Master furnaces have caused widespread concern in the public of Manitoba.  Hundreds of homeowners in Gimli and Transcona, in particular, have been concerned that cracked heat exchangers are health threatening and must be replaced.  The current system allows for good furnaces to be replaced at great cost, and it also allows for bad furnaces to continue operating.

      Has the Minister of Labour determined who has the authority to condemn furnaces?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Labour):  Mr. Speaker, first of all, a very good question from the member for Elmwood, certainly a very topical issue.

      As the member for Elmwood may be aware, the legislative scheme under which we are operating today is the same legislative scheme that has been in effect in this province for quite a number of years.  Under The Gas and Oil Burners Act, they require that designation of furnaces be approved, as prescribed in the regulations, under a particular regulation that I believe was approved in 1987, which defined "approved" as being approved and listed by the Canadian Gas Association which approved the furnaces in question.

      With respect to insulation, that is done by the gas company which is required by the legislation and regulations to supervise and install the fittings and to report back and register with the department, and those things, of course, have been done.

      Regrettably, in this particular instance, the Canadian Gas Association which certified this particular unit pursuant to the regulations and the act, there was a flaw in the heat exchanger cells that was not detected at that particular time, and hence we have the problem today.

Mr. Maloway:  Mr. Speaker, from the answer that the minister has given, he has still not told us who has the ultimate authority to condemn the furnace because there is major confusion‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Question, please.

Mr. Maloway:  Would he clarify and tell us who has the final authority, the gas company or the government?

Mr. Praznik:  Mr. Speaker, of course, this Legislative Assembly, through The Gas and Oil Burner Act, has the final authority in these matters under the act and legislative scheme that was established in this province for some years. The authority for inspection has been designated to the gas company which is responsible for the installations of the particular furnaces in question.  They, of course, have to certify and register with the department that the installation meets the regulation and codes.

      The member has made some reference to the furnace.  We put out an announcement a week or so ago after we received notice from the Canadian Gas Association on the furnaces.  Anyone who has this particular model is encouraged to contact either the gas company or the Department of Labour, and we will ensure that things are properly inspected to see if they contain the cells that are flawed.

Mr. Maloway:  Mr. Speaker, it is fairly clear to me that there is major confusion out in the public as to who really has the authority.

 

Mandatory

 

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood):  My final supplementary question to the minister is this:  In view of the number of recent incidences of carbon monoxide poisoning and since the gas firm and the department only carry out inspections on request, is the minister prepared to bring in mandatory, periodic inspections for all furnaces in this province?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Labour):  Mr. Speaker, the scheme which is currently in place requires the supplier of the gas to have a responsibility for the installation and to ensure that it is working properly.  They are the providers of the fuel. They have that responsibility under the act.  Where there is any difficulty that occurs, in this particular case, the inspection goes on.  If individuals have some concern over their furnace, they have the ability to request an inspection, and we are pleased to oblige.

      I should just tell the honourable member, in answer to his questions, some very relevant information that I think is important to this matter.  There was some concern about the costs, in the paper, about the $1,200 per furnace.  I understand that staff in the department have identified the supplier of the cells that can be purchased somewhere in the neighbourhood of about $60 a cell.  So the cost of actually rectifying this problem could be in the range, depending on the number of cells that have been affected in the furnace, at somewhere near a third of the price that has been discussed in the media.

Mr. Speaker:  Time for Oral Questions has expired.

 

NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS

 

Mr. Jack Reimer (Niakwa):  May I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement?

Mr. Speaker:  Does the honourable member for Niakwa have leave? Leave.  Agreed.

Mr. Reimer:  It is my pleasure to draw the attention of the House to the fact that members of the Laotian, Cambodian and Sri Lankan communities are celebrating their respective New Years during the course of this week.

      Recently, it has been my privilege to share in some of these New Year celebrations, and I have found them most enjoyable events.  We, as Manitobans, take pride in our rich and diverse multicultural society.  Each of us cherishes the freedom and the opportunity to express and to foster all aspects of our own cultural heritage, our own languages, our customs and our traditions.  This openness and acceptance is fundamental to promoting understanding, mutual respect and harmony among all ethnocultural communities.

      The diversity of Manitoba's multicultural mosaic, of course, also includes the observances of traditional festivals and the customs or the practices associated with them.  We are privileged to be able to share these special cele