LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday,
April 21, 1992
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING
PETITIONS
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): I beg to present the petition of Hans
Brandenborg, Gordon Brown, Marie Deniele and others requesting the government
consider restoring the former full funding of $700,000 to fight Dutch elm
disease.
Ms. Marianne Cerilli
(Radisson): I beg to present the petition of Julie
Benjamin, Charity Molyneaux, Karen Carrothers and others requesting the
Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): I beg to present the petition of Gordon
Melnyk, Mary Boyco, Linda McCall and others requesting the Minister of Justice
(Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of
PRESENTING
REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Mrs. Louise Dacquay
(Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Fourth
Report of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs.
Mr. Clerk (William
Remnant): Your Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs
presents the following as its Fourth Report.
Your committee met on Thursday, April 16,
1992, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 of the
Mr. G. Campbell MacLean, Chairperson of
the Board, Mr. Nick Diakiw, President, Mr. Del Crewson, Auditor, Ms. Marilyn
Edmunds, Communications Manager and Mr. Sid Kroker, Site Archaeologist,
provided such information as was requested by members of the committee with
respect to the Annual Report and business of The Forks Renewal Corporation.
Your committee reports that it has
considered the March 31, 1991, Annual Report of and matters pertaining to The
Forks Renewal Corporation.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
Mrs. Dacquay: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the
honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the
committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
* * *
Mr. Bob Rose
(Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Economic Development): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Second
Report of the Committee on Economic Development.
Mr. Clerk: Your Standing Committee on Economic
Development presents the following as their Second Report.
Your committee met on Thursday, February
27, 1992, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 and on Thursday, April 16, 1992, at 10 a.m. in
Room 254 of the
Mr. David Tomasson, Deputy Minister of
Northern Affairs, Mr. Gordon Trithart, Secretary, Mr. Percy Williams, Manager
of the Economic Development Branch and Ms. Brenda Kustra, Assistant Deputy
Minister of Northern Development Co‑ordination provided such information
as was requested with respect to the Annual Reports and the business of Channel
Area Loggers Ltd. and the Annual Reports and the business of Moose Lake Loggers
Ltd.
Your committee has considered the Annual
Reports of Channel Area Loggers Ltd. for the fiscal periods ending March 31,
1990 and 1991, and the Annual Reports of Moose Lake Loggers Ltd. for the fiscal
periods ending March 31, 1990 and 1991, and has adopted the same as presented.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
Mr. Rose: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the
honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), that the report of the
committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
TABLING OF
REPORTS
Hon. James Downey
(Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr.
Speaker, I am pleased to table the Manitoba Mineral Resources Ltd. Annual
Report of 1991.
* (1335)
INTRODUCTION
OF BILLS
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister
of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister
of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme), that Bill 78, The City of
His Honour the Lieutenant‑Governor,
having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House,
and I would like to table the message of the Lieutenant‑Governor.
Motion agreed to.
Introduction
of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the
attention of honourable members to the loge to my left, where we have with us
this afternoon Mr. Ed Mandrake, the former member for Assiniboia.
On behalf of all honourable members, I
welcome you here this afternoon.
Also with us this afternoon, seated in the
public gallery, we have from the
On behalf of all honourable members, I
welcome you here this afternoon.
* (1340)
ORAL
QUESTION PERIOD
Federal
Government
Untendered
Contracts
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier
(Mr. Filmon), a question we raised last week.
The aerospace industry is a very vital industry to this province, and it
is an industry that all of us share in this Chamber of wanting to maintain and
promote and enhance in the decades to come.
Historically,
Recently, the federal Conservative
government awarded a company $250 million of taxpayers' money, a grant. It is reported that the same company just
this month received a $1‑billion untendered contract from the federal
Conservative government dealing with contracts in the aerospace industry. Mr. Speaker, we have been advised, in
questions we asked last week, that the government really was not aware of this
situation and was advised after the fact.
I would ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): What action has he taken with the Prime
Minister and federal government dealing with the lack of tendering in this very
important industry affecting Manitobans?
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, we certainly concur with the
final comment that this is a very important industry to the
My department has been meeting with the
aerospace sector over the last few days and are communicating with them in
terms of formalizing a common ground on this particular issue. There are many factors. Some of our aerospace companies currently
have work related to helicopter overhaul and repair. We are firming up that this work will remain
in place, significant contracts that are of tremendous economic benefit to not
only that company but the
From that, I anticipate that I will be
writing the Honourable Marcel Masse, and we will be pursuing the initiative
after that. Clearly, we are working with the industry, but there are many
factors. While we agree with the
perception and the concern on the untendered aspect of a very significant
contract, and that causes us a great deal of concern, we also have to do all of
the review that is necessary in terms of the total impact of this decision, and
we are doing just that, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, there could be no other question
that politics was the predominant factor that led to this decision to have
untendered contracts for $1 billion.
We have gone from a rigged tendering
process with the CF‑18 with the federal Conservative government and a
federal Conservative Prime Minister from the
Therefore, my question to the Premier (Mr.
Filmon) is: Will he raise this issue
with the Prime Minister, the highest authority in the country, Mr. Speaker, the
person who obviously chairs the federal cabinet? The federal cabinet is the body that chose
not to tender this contract. I would ask
the Premier in light of his relationship with the Prime Minister, in light of
his commitment to Manitobans that he only had to pick up the phone with the
Prime Minister on previous occasions‑‑he obviously has not raised
it with the Prime Minister.
Will he be raising this issue with the
Prime Minister in terms of this very important industry to Manitobans and the
lack of any tendering process in the award of this $1‑billion contract?
Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, I have already conveyed our
agreement in terms of concern about the untendered aspect of this contract, and
I am not going to stand here and defend the actions of the federal government
as it relates to the untendered aspect.
As I have pointed out to the Leader of the
Opposition, clearly there are many aspects to what has happened here. This is a very important sector within the
economy of
Federal
Government
Untendered
Contracts
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): I know the industry is very sensitive and the
local industry is very sensitive to this issue.
I understand their concern about the diplomacy that they have to deal
with in terms of this issue because of the absolute dependence they have on the
federal government, but surely the government leadership in this province knows
that merit is always in the best interests of Manitobans. Surely, we know in this Chamber that politics
will destroy the aerospace industry in this province, and preferential
treatment will unfortunately always go to
I would ask the Premier: Will he be raising the issue of merit in a
procurement policy and tendering process, and will he be calling on the Prime
Minister to stop either rigging the tendering process or not having any tendering
process? We must have merit. It is the only way
* (1345)
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, our position will be
consistent. It will be as it has always
been, and that is that we will deal with contracts with respect to tendering
major contracts and on merit. That is
what we have always believed in. That is
what we said during the time that the federal government awarded the contract
on the CF‑18.
I might tell you that we have always been
consistent in that respect in urging the federal government and urging
governments to use merit and to use price as the basis for awarding contracts,
unlike the New Democratic administration of which that member was a part, that
during the Limestone tendering process, in a number of cases, gave awards to
bidders who were not the lowest and in other cases negotiated contracts with
individual companies rather than going to a tender process, large contracts
worth hundreds of millions of dollars not tendered by the New Democratic
administration.
So, Mr. Speaker, that member speaks out of
both sides of his mouth. We will be
consistent, and we will say, tenders to be awarded on merit and on low price.
Education
System
Dropout
Rate
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of
Education.
Today we celebrated an outstanding
example, an inspiration to women in the province in the person of Roberta
Bondar. Unfortunately, dropouts from a high school system cannot aspire to
those lofty heights. It is unfortunate
that in this province, we have no data and no analysis on dropouts, and we
therefore cannot design programs that deal with high‑risk groups like
women and aboriginal people.
Can the minister provide this House with
any information she has on dropouts in the
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, the issue of dropouts is of great concern. We are attempting to address the issues
relating to dropouts, one, through the development of our new Student Support
branch which will be working very closely across this province with those
students who are at risk. We also
attempt to deal with those individuals who are in danger of dropping out or who
have dropped out through our literacy programs.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, is the minister aware that a
Stats
What programs are going to be designed to
deal with these people? Is the minister
aware of that fact?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important for
the member, perhaps during the Estimates process, to be more fully informed
about our new program, the Student Support branch which will be looking very
carefully at the issues which unfortunately put some students at risk, both men
and women, and also what we as a department, individual school divisions,
families and communities can do to assist in the great concern of dropouts.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary to the
same minister: Is the minister aware
that nine out of 10 is not a very good standard for this province, and is she
aware that of these women who drop out, the unemployment rate is 35 percent?
What is going to be done to address the needs of these people?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I would be very concerned if the
numbers are in fact nine out of 10. I
would like to have the opportunity to discuss the basis of that study with the
honourable member, but let me tell him again, that for those young people in
the K to 12 area, we are looking at our new Student Support branch to assist
young people. We are also looking at the
post‑secondary level to assist both men and women and at‑risk
people to be part of our training programs, our college programs and our
university programs.
* (1350)
Restraining
Order Enforcement
Child Care
Centres
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.
Speaker, in recent days, there have been very serious concerns raised with
respect to the Central Park Child Care centre.
The minister has indicated through his
department officials that they are investigating the situation, but what he has
not made clear, and what is still not clear is, is there a policy in the
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer
(Minister of Family Services): Mr.
Speaker, the directorate for child care has been in touch with the Central Park
Child Care Inc. on a variety of issues.
There is a new board in place and a director at the centre, and both the
director and the board have raised issues with the child care directorate. They have responded to all of those issues.
I think one of the issues that will help
them get through this period is our Board Development Guide that I tabled here
during the Estimates process last week.
We are working with the board and with staff there to work their way
through some difficulties. This is only
one of a number of issues that has been brought to the directorate's attention.
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, this is not the only child care
centre in the province that is going to have to deal with a very difficult
issue, and that is the issue of what happens in a child care centre according
to policy when a mother and/or a father informs the child care centre that
there is a restraining order against an individual who is to have no access to
that child.
Will the minister tell the House today,
what is the province‑wide policy in all child care centres with respect
to restraining orders?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, the department has a policy on
that and, in turn, each daycare centre develops a policy on that.
The child daycare staff met with the
director and a board member to discuss this concern. The director accepted that the centre did not
have a clear policy in place regarding restraining orders, but that it would
seek advice and ensure that an effective policy was adopted.
What I am telling the member is that every
daycare centre develops their own policies at the board level. Our policy is that if there are orders placed
by the courts, that they should be respected and obeyed.
Restraining
Order Enforcement
Departmental
Co-ordination
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.
Speaker, as the Minister of Justice knows, I have raised with him on a number
of occasions a similar issue with respect to schools and, again, there is not a
clear policy as to what is the effect on a school with respect to should a
parent be given access on the school grounds or within the school building to a
child who quite frankly has been ordered by the court not to have contact with
that particular parent.
Can the minister tell the House today what
action has been taken by his department to inform all the other departments as
to the enforceability of a restraining order in every aspect of their
department‑‑schools, child care centres or any other organization
of government which would have access to individuals against such a restraining
order?
Hon. James McCrae
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, restraining orders are legal
instruments, and the meaning of a breach of a restraining order is something
that is interpreted and decided in courts of law, so in terms of policy on the
part of the Justice department, our policy follows the law as it develops.
We have seen weaknesses in restraining
orders as they deal with women in difficult circumstances, as well as children
in difficult circumstances, and through the Pedlar review and its
implementation, we hope to achieve improvements in dealing with restraining
orders, in keeping people informed of what those restraining orders are, when
accused persons are in breach and when there are changes to those restraining
orders.
Improvements are happening through the
work of the government's working group, as well as the community advisory
group.
* (1355)
Agricultural
Land Taxation
Right of
Appeal
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
We have serious concerns with this
government's delays in reassessment, changes to portioning and the confusion as
to whether or not people have the right to appeal.
We are also concerned with this government's
deliberate and secretive attempt to get more money back from farmers. The Minister of Rural Development (Mr.
Derkach) said, and I quote: Bill 20 does not remove the right of appeal if
there are extraordinary circumstances which impact on the value of his or her
land. However, a recent court ruling
confirmed that only homeowners have the right to appeal.
I want to ask the acting minister: What remedial action is this government
taking to assure that their right of appeal is available on farm land as well
as to homeowners?
Hon. James Downey
(Acting Minister of Rural Development): Mr.
Speaker, I am not sure. I will take the
question as notice, but I do believe that the changes to the act that she
refers to were supported by her party.
Reassessments
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Why is the government perpetuating the
hardship on farmers by delaying the reassessment, when in 1989 they made a
commitment never again to delay the frequency of assessment? Is this the government's agenda, to play with
assessment for their own political agenda?
Hon. James Downey
(Acting Minister of Rural Development): No, Mr.
Speaker.
Education
Support
Levy
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Hon. James Downey
(Acting Minister of Rural Development): The
record is, Mr. Speaker, that this government removed the provincial education
taxes off of the farm community. That is
what this government has done. As for
the rest of the information, I will take it as notice.
Sales
Techniques
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): Mr. Speaker, almost two years ago, when this
government introduced its drunk driving legislation, our party was pleased to
support that legislation. Last week,
when the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation
(Mr. Cummings) announced the Designated Driver program, we were very
supportive.
This leads me to a question for the
Minister responsible for the
I am wondering first of all whether the
minister can tell us, did she authorize this change in policy, and does she
condone such a change in policy?
Hon. Linda McIntosh
(Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): I should indicate at the outset that I do not
encourage, nor does the Liquor Control Commission encourage excessive drinking,
nor do they encourage pushing alcoholic beverages on unwilling consumers. I should also indicate that the member's
reference to the manual is referring to a course that has been set up in
response to a customer survey wherein customers indicated they wished to have
more service on the floor of the Liquor Commission.
It is a 125‑page course. I have not seen it. It is an administrative decision, and I
understand that this course has been in place for about a year. We have had numerous thank you's from
consumers for getting better service on the floor and no complaints about high‑pressure
sales techniques being imposed upon consumers.
Mr. Storie: We have heard from Liquor Commission staff
who indicate that they are being asked to sell more at higher prices, Mr.
Speaker, and I am asking the minister to explain to Manitobans whom this
benefits.
Mrs. McIntosh: I reiterate that I have been assured as
recently as this morning by the president of the MLCC that the MLCC has no
intention of pushing alcoholic beverages on unwilling consumers.
I should also indicate that as part of the
course which is designed to respond to consumers' requests to have informed
sales staff on the store floor willing to assist with questions such as what
wine would go well with salmon, for example, that we have had good response to
that initiative, the goal being to retain liquor customers here in
Mr. Storie: The minister does not know what was a part of
her own course.
Mr. Speaker: Question, please.
* (1400)
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, my question is: Will the minister, given her lukewarm
response to this issue, now instruct members of the Manitoba Liquor Commission
to delete references to hiding less expensive booze and pointing out more
expensive booze in the interests of protecting the young adults 18 years of age
and older who are going in and being asked to buy more expensive and bigger
quantities of booze, risking their own lives and lots of other peoples' in the
Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Speaker, I reiterate, this is a 125‑page
course designed to enhance customer service at the request of customers, as
information gained through a survey. If
there are one or two pages in that course that refer to selling techniques that
are inappropriate with the goals of the commission, they will not be used.
I have the assurance of the president of
the Liquor Control Commission, as of this morning, that no high‑pressure
techniques will be used to force liquor consumption on unwilling consumers.
Hazardous
Waste
Pesticide
Container Classification
Mr. Neil Gaudry (St.
Boniface): Mr. Speaker, a 1989 study of pesticide
containers left in landfills show that metal containers retain 7.5 times more
pesticide residue than plastic containers. The report said if there was a
proper campaign of rinsing the containers, they could be considered
nonhazardous.
The Environment minister said that a
recent report to get farmers to rinse the containers, through education efforts
by
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of
Environment table any studies done by his department which indicate that metal
containers are being rinsed and that there are no hazardous chemicals in the
metal containers?
Hon. Glen Cummings
(Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the new
Liberal agriculture critic raises questions that are based not so much on fact
as they are on the discussion of the unknown.
I believe that he is referring to the
report in the paper that says somehow the Department of Environment is not
following its own regulations in the allowing of certain shipments of
pesticides. I can tell you, that is not
the case. There has been no changing of
regulations or rules, and any movement of hazardous material that might occur,
or nonhazardous material as the case may be, is being properly mandated.
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Speaker, these metal containers have been
considered hazardous, as the government decided a special program was needed to
collect them.
Can the minister tell the House why he
reclassified the metal containers as nonhazardous waste when he told the House
on April 6 that he would not reclassify the containers to ship them to
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, my concern is that there is a
misunderstanding about the different materials that are involved.
First of all, the report that the member
is referring to is a government report.
It was a survey that was done by the Manitoba Hazardous Waste Corporation
about four or four and a half years ago.
In that report, if you read far enough through it, it very clearly
states that if these materials are drained or rinsed, they probably should have
no problem being classified as nonhazardous waste.
As a matter of fact, in dealing with the
plastic material, which will probably be shipped to a southern location for
incineration, the material is being classified as hazardous even though a
considerable number of the tests indicate that it is nonhazardous. It is in fact borderline, Mr. Speaker, and it
is being classified as hazardous.
In dealing with the metal containers, we
are dealing with them in exactly the same manner as
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Speaker, can the minister tell the House
why there is a need for an elaborate collection system, and why he is making
the costly decision to ship these containers to
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what my concern
is, when the broad issues are not being looked at. Eighty percent of the material is packaged in
plastic. He is talking about the 20
percent that is being collected at the same time as the other material is.
Meeting
Requests
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, last week I was able to attend
the emergency meeting of the Heritage Federation and heard the serious concerns
raised there. Many MLAs have also
received concerned calls from their constituents about the abrupt and arbitrary
cancellation of the federation's programs.
This agency had no reason to believe that they were not fulfilling their
mandate, and there have been no new policy directions from the minister.
I want to ask the Minister of Culture,
Heritage and Citizenship why for six weeks she refused to meet with the
federation. Why did her deputy minister
cancel six appointments he made with the federation before March?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson
(Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, the decision in fact to change
the method of distributing money to the heritage community was a budget
decision. The announcement was made on
budget day to the Manitoba Heritage Federation, and we lived up to the
agreement that was in place that gave them 90 days notice that the agreement
would be cancelled on that date.
Peer
Review
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister
why she also refused to take into consideration the results of the program and
client review that the federation had recently concluded in December. If she had no intention of looking at it, why
did she encourage them to conduct such a province‑wide review‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson
(Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, in fact, the Heritage
Federation, as an independent umbrella group, had the mandate to conduct the
kinds of activities that they did conduct‑‑[interjection] Well, they say no policy direction. In fact, if we were setting policy for the
Heritage Federation, we would be accused of political interference.
The fact of the matter is, we will be able
to deliver funds to the heritage community at substantially less administrative
cost, still using the volunteer component within the community, and that will
mean that the heritage community will be better served, Mr. Speaker.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, what specific steps has the
minister taken to ensure that the peer review, not just volunteer review but
peer review, that the federation had in place will take place and not the
political patronage that the community really fears?
Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, the key issues here are
delivering funds to the heritage community in the most efficient and effective
manner. We will accomplish that with a
peer process that will be developed in consultation with the heritage
community.
Northern
Health Care System
Transportation
Fee
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Thompson): Mr. Speaker, last week the Manitoba Association
of Urban Municipalities met in
My question is to the acting minister of
municipal affairs. I would like to ask the acting minister whether he will be
recommending to the government that they listen to MAUM which is on record as
opposing the $50‑user fee. Will he
now be recommending that the government remove this onerous fee on northerners?
Hon. James Downey
(Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr.
Speaker, I can tell you that this government always pays attention to the
municipal bodies that have an annual meeting, if not more often. Their
recommendations are considered and those that the government feels we can move
on, we move on. Those that we are not
able to, we justify as to why we are not able to.
Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, if the minister is indeed
listening, will he now listen to the concerns of municipalities reflecting the
fact that some northerners, as in the case of one constituent of mine, have had
to pay 10 times for that fee, and there are individuals now having to go to the
social assistance department just to be able to achieve medical treatment?
Will that minister now listen to MAUM,
listen to northerners and recommend the removal of that onerous $50 fee?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that
where it is an essential medical treatment‑‑he has heard the policy
of this government, of this minister‑‑it is covered. There is no fee. I am not sure he is raising a specific
situation which I would recommend he bring to the Minister of Health (Mr.
Orchard), but where it is essential, it has been covered by this government and
directed by a doctor.
Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, I am referring to an individual
who has had to come to
* (1410)
RCMP
Services
Municipal
Costs
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Thompson): My final question to the same minister
is: Will the government also listen to
MAUM, and in particular to the city of
Will the minister be working with the
Attorney General and other ministers in the government to make sure that the
city of
Hon. James Downey
(Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr.
Speaker, I can assure the member for Thompson that it would be a lot easier to
provide services if we had not have been devastated by the tremendous debt left
by the New Democratic Party, the expenditures of $27 million in
Dealing with the specific issue, Mr.
Speaker, last year under our government, the city of Thompson received for the
first time ever support in the policing of their city, some $150,000 that they
had never received under the New Democratic Party.
RCMP
Services
Mrs.
Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, in 1987, the Deputy Premier who
was then sitting in opposition gave a very impassioned plea on behalf of rural
communities with respect to their RCMP police.
In those times, the RCMP were being cut from communities like
Can the Minister of Justice tell the House
today if they are going to take the same impassioned attitude about preserving
RCMP in government that they took in opposition?
Hon. James McCrae
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. In 1988 when we took office, we were looking
at a budget placed before this House by the previous NDP administration cutting
the number of RCMP positions by 23 in this province. We moved in our very first budget to restore
those 23 positions cut by the previous government.
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, we learned what they did in the
past. We would like to know now what
they are going to do in the present.
Can the Minister of Justice tell the House
today if they are going to overrule the RCMP and maintain the RCMP detachment
at
Mr. McCrae: When we learned of the plans of the RCMP to
realign the highway patrol function throughout this province dealing with the
597 members that they have under the provincial contract, which is up 23 from
what it was before the NDP cut it, Mr. Speaker, I met with representatives of
the RCMP and received assurances that service is what they need to provide on
our highways in the province of Manitoba.
If the honourable member can bring to my
attention any incident or any evidence that substantiates that somehow there
has been a reduction in service, I would like to know that, because I have been
given assurances otherwise.
Mrs. Carstairs: We are not talking about service, because that
was the argument in 1987. We are talking
about whether a detachment will be kept alive and well in
Will the minister give me a yes or no
answer?
Mr. McCrae: The honourable member has singled out one
particular area. There are changes in
many areas throughout the province, Mr. Speaker, so that the RCMP, with the 597
members they have, can deliver service.
Now, the honourable member does not want
to talk about service. Well, Mr.
Speaker, these are difficult times. In
spite of that, we have been able to keep up our complement of 597 members of
the RCMP.
If it were not for the signing of the new
RCMP contract, the city of
Social
Assistance
Off-Reserve
Status Indians
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): I have a question for the Minister of Family
Services.
As of April 1 of this year,
I wonder if the minister could tell this
House and the people of
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer
(Minister of Family Services): This is
an issue that I brought to the House over a year ago, that the federal
government was reneging on its responsibilities for Status Indians living off
reserve. As I recall, we had the support
of both opposition parties at that time.
We have been dealing with the federal
minister responsible, Minister Siddon, on this.
While they indicated at that time that they were going to discontinue
funding last March, they did continue funding for a portion of the year. Then they again continued funding for the
complete year.
We are still in discussions with the
federal government. We do not accept this. We do not accept the fact that they have
withdrawn this service. We think it is
their responsibility, and we are going to insist that they live up to it.
Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, the minister says‑‑if
I could hear him‑‑he will not accept it, but what if‑‑[interjection] I will reword this.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask this
minister: Is he as a minister telling us
that eventually it may come to the point that the Province of Manitoba is going
to offload this onto the City of Brandon and other municipalities, and is he
prepared to face the court challenge, as the mayor has threatened publicly to
take this minister and this government to court.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, the member is putting forth
hypothetical questions. Our position on
this has not changed. That is a federal responsibility. We are continuing our dialogue with the
federal government to insist that they live up to that responsibility.
We have talked to officials at the
municipal level who support us in this and who have assured us that they will
give us support as we continue these discussions with the federal government.
Mr. Leonard Evans: Would it be the intention of this minister to
offload onto the municipalities of this province? Mr. Speaker, this is not hypothetical because
the federal government has already made its position known. It is not a hypothetical question.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I would indicate that the
federal government made their position known to us over a year ago, and we did
not accept that position. They have
continued to flow money through the remainder of the year.
We again do not accept that position, and
we believe by the resolutions and the discussions that we have had with the
municipal officials that they support us on this initiative. We are going to continue our lobby and our
discussions with the federal government and insist that they live up to their
responsibilities.
Education
System