LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, April 30, 1992
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Bruce Campbell, Jeff
Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
George Law, Heather MacKay, Evelyn Atkinson and others requesting the Minister
of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) consider a one‑year moratorium on
the closure of the Human Resources
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Valerie J. Black, Patricia Wilson, Catherine Westwood and others requesting the
government consider reviewing the funding of the
Mr. Speaker: I have
reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mrs. Carstairs). 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 residents of the
WHEREAS the
WHEREAS the Kimelman Report (1983), the Aboriginal Justice
Inquiry (1991) and the Suche Report (1992) recommended that the province
establish such an office reporting directly to the Legislative Assembly of
Manitoba, in a manner similar to that of the Office of the Ombudsman; and
WHEREAS pursuant to the Child and Family Services Act
Standards, the agency worker is to be the advocate for a child in care; and
WHEREAS there is a major concern that child welfare workers,
due to their vested interest as employees within the service system, cannot
perform an independent advocacy role; and
WHEREAS pure advocacy will only be obtained through an independent
and external agency; and
WHEREAS the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) has
unsatisfactorily dealt with complaints lodged against child welfare agencies;
and now
THEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly
of
PRESENTING REPORTS BY
STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Mr. Jack Reimer (Member of the Standing Committee on
Economic Development): I beg to present the
Fourth Report of the Committee on Economic Development.
Mr. Clerk (William Remnant):
Your
Standing Committee on Economic Development presents the following as their
Fourth Report.
Your committee met on Tuesday, April 28, 1992, at 8 p.m, in
Room 254 of the
Your committee has considered the Annual Report of the
Communities Economic Development Fund for the fiscal year ending March 31,
1991, and has adopted the same as presented.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
Mr. Reimer: I move,
seconded by the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), that the
report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
*
(1335)
Mr. Jack Penner (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on
Public Utilities and Natural Resources): I beg to
present the First Report on the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and
Natural Resources.
Mr. Clerk: Your
Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources presents the
following as its First Report.
Your committee met on Tuesday, April 28, 1992, at 8 p.m., in
Room 255 of the
Mr. Walter Bardua, president and general manager, provided such
information as was requested with respect to the Annual Report and business of
the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation.
Your committee has considered the Annual Report of the Manitoba
Public Insurance Corporation for the year ended October 31, 1991, and has
adopted the same as presented.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
Mr. Penner: I move,
seconded by the honourable member for
Motion agreed to.
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): I would like to table the 1990‑91
Annual Report of the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation and the 1991
Annual Report of the Manitoba Telephone System.
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to
Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of the honourable members to the
Speaker's Gallery, where we have with us this afternoon Peter Muir, Tibor Bodi
and Peter Aitchison. They are members of
the climbing team who will be attempting the first ascent of
On behalf of all members, I welcome you here this afternoon.
Also with us this afternoon, from the
Cet apres‑midi, aussi, nous tenons a vous signaler la
presence dans la galerie publique de dix‑sept etudiants de la neuvieme
annee de l'Ecole Provencher, sous la direction d'Ed McCarthy. Cette institution est situee dans la
circonscription du depute de Saint‑Boniface (Mr. Gaudry).
[Translation]
Also this afternoon, we
would like to indicate the presence in the public gallery of seventeen pupils
in Grade 9, from
[English]
On behalf of all
members, I welcome you all here this afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
North American Free
Trade Agreement
Public Hearings
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): In the Speech from the Throne in 1990, the
government said, Canadians said no to the old style of elite accommodation and
closed‑door politics. Mr. Speaker,
since that time, the government has participated in a number, almost on a
weekly basis, of trade meetings between provincial trade ministers and the
federal minister, one of which is going on again today in a downtown
We have been concerned about the secret negotiations on
trade. We are concerned about the secret
drafts. We are concerned about the
secret responses from the provincial government. We are concerned about the secret analysis
that has not been provided to the people of this province about the positive
and negative impact of North American free trade with
I would, therefore, ask the Acting Premier whether the
government will amend its terms of reference on proposed free trade with
*
(1340)
Hon. Glen Cummings (Acting Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member has been told many
times that the six principles that
The fact is that our Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism
(Mr. Stefanson) is involved on an ongoing basis with the federal authorities to
put forward
Mr. Doer: Mr.
Speaker, the minister has not told us what industries are impacted, what areas
of the province are impacted, who the winners and losers are, according to their
analysis. They have an $800,000 secretariat, and we do not know what they are
producing out of the bowels of the Legislature in terms of what is positive and
negative.
The terms of reference that the minister refers to do not
include any public input from the people of
I would ask the government why the public of
Mr. Cummings: Mr.
Speaker, to begin with,
Mr. Doer: Mr.
Speaker, I am not talking about
Judging from the bankruptcy numbers today, Mr. Speaker, which
are the highest in March since the history of keeping bankruptcy numbers, which
are on top of the bankruptcy numbers in February 1992, which are also the
highest in the history of this province, one would think the government would
start to pay attention to the public concerns on the economy.
So I would ask the Acting Premier, will they amend their terms
of reference to include public input from this province on what our position
is, what our response is, what the drafts say and what they mean for
Mr. Cummings: First of
all, the Leader of the Opposition chooses to misrepresent what is occurring in
the trend of bankruptcies in this province.
We are, in fact, improving. Mr.
Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition seems like he is not willing to listen to
some principles that this province laid down as the condition upon which we
would hold any potential agreement that the federal government may choose to
enter into.
The six principles were enunciated. They are very public. They are being put
forward very strongly at any meetings that our representatives are at, and if
he wishes to throw out all possibility of trade, he should think about the fact
that
Those are the kinds of opportunities that we have to seize on
to make sure that our principles are being dealt with.
Education System
Dropout Rate
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the
Minister of Education and Training.
Mr. Speaker, the Economic Council of Canada has outlined a
number of deficiencies in our education system and many which amount to four
lost years under this Tory government.
If literacy is a problem with graduates, then can you imagine what the
problem must be with those that drop out?
What specific programs and measures are being undertaken by
this government to deal with dropouts, specifically women who constitute the
second worst dropout rate of any province in
*
(1345)
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): We do take the results of this study very
seriously. We took it seriously enough
to make sure that we had a representative in
I would like to correct the honourable member in terms of this
being an indication of four years of our government because, if he in fact
reads the report, he will see the statistics are based on the years from the
early '80s, through 1987, as well, the years of the NDP government. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I would ask him to
look again.
Let me also say that this government did recognize the issues
that were raised in this particular report, issues such as high costs, skills
of students, quality of teaching and a linkage to work and employment. We do at this point have a number of
initiatives that in fact exceed the recommendations of the report which came
out yesterday.
Let me mention one which I have mentioned in this House
previously, and that is the creation by this government of the Student Support
branch. We are the only government in
Mr. Chomiak: Mr.
Speaker, will the minister outline what programs are in place, since she
refused to answer the question, for women who last year constituted the second
worst dropout rate in the country, to deal with the serious dropout rate in
this province?
Because the minister for the whole last week has refused to
answer the question in Estimates, will she tell us today what programs are in
place to deal with the situation of women dropouts in this province?
Mrs. Vodrey: Let me
answer again. In the first place, we
have created a very specific branch.
This government has recognized the concerns of at‑risk students,
people who are at risk of leaving school before their education is completed,
and we have created the Student Support branch.
Through that branch, schools, local communities will be able to
identify programs which they believe will be specific for their area, most
helpful to their communities, and apply for grant funding. In addition, the department is there also to
offer other kinds of supports which divisions might see as important.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr.
Speaker, my final supplementary is to the same minister.
If administrative costs to the
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.
Speaker, the issue of accountability has certainly been one of the priorities
of this government, and the issue of accountability we are attempting to
address through a number of areas: one,
the institution of provincial testing which the other side of the House has so
firmly objected to, and the most recent study has said it is very important to
ensure our standards.
In the area of the Student Support branch, there is over $10
million of grant money available.
*
(1350)
Education System
Curriculum Revisions
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that there is
death on both their houses because neither party, whether it be the Tories or
be it the NDP, has given education the priority it deserves in the
I think it is important, however, to look at how this
government has prioritized its expenditures on education, and I will use just
one example. Last year they cut five
curriculum consultants. This year they are
cutting an additional curriculum consultant.
In their own supplementary Estimates, they list as one of the tasks of
that particular branch the systematic updating of programs to ensure relevant
standards.
Can the minister explain why this government is spending 17
percent less money on updating its curriculum so that it is relevant? What effect is that going to have on the
quality of education for our young people?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, first of all, I think it is very
important that we also maintain a sense of vision in terms of education in this
province and that we do not fall into a sense of complete panic that things are
all going wrong.
Let me inform the member of some of the initiatives currently
underway. Curriculum revisions are
underway in the K‑8 mathematics area, with emphasis on skill development
in that area. We also have plans
underway to produce a province‑wide distance education calculus
course. We are making major improvements
in the science curriculum. We are
assessing the English curriculum this May.
So we are in fact doing a great number of initiatives currently
underway.
Administrative Costs
'Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I was delighted at the Minister
of Finance (Mr. Manness) who yelled across the House, more money, more
money. Well, let me tell you what the
Minister of Education has done.
The Minister of Education, while cutting curriculum
consultants, has added 5.52 staff persons to Management Information
Services. We are going to know how many
kids fail, but we are not going to put any money into preventing them from
failing.
Will the Minister of Education explain that?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): First of all, let me remind the honourable member
that this government has in fact put more money into Education this year so
that we can look at the issues relating to education.
In addition to that, we have several projects currently
underway, legislative reform being one, and also our own government's strategic
plan, which points to the very issue that I think the member is raising, issues
of accountability and making sure that our students come to a successful
completion. So I do not accept the information in her question.
Core Curriculum
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Economic Council
of Canada indicated that what we were doing was trying to teach the middle,
that we had ignored the upper‑end students and we had ignored the lower‑end
students.
Well, this government has taken a very critical decision. They
have decided that in Grade 10 they will eliminate specific curriculums for
bright children and middle children and those who have difficulties in
learning. They have merged them all
together in a core curriculum in the fields of language arts, social studies,
history, geography.
Can the minister explain why they have gone to a core
curriculum when it is very clear that a core curriculum is not meeting the
interests of the vast majority of students?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): There is a core curriculum in Senior 1. We move then to areas of specialization in
Senior 2 or Grade 10, and in that, we look specifically at specialization in
the area of math and science. When we get to Senior 3 and Senior 4, there is a
differentiation of curriculum. This is
intended to give students‑‑and we followed pedagogical advice to
make sure that students in Senior 1 had a broad enough basis from which to continue
their education and make important decisions.
We are supporting students in the Senior 1 and Senior 2 level
with the Student Support branch because we understand that it is not the rigor
of the curriculum that causes young people to disengage but other reasons
supported by the Student Support branch.
GRIP Program
Coverage Levels ‑
Lentils
*
(1355)
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, more and more farmers are
painfully aware that GRIP in its present form is unfair and inequitable. We saw it yesterday when the farmers from
Area 12 showed this government for its true colours, for its mismanagement and
hypocrisy with regard to GRIP.
Now we have the lentil fiasco, with the minister's blatant 12th‑hour
interference in the marketplace, something he says his government does not
believe in. Yesterday a full month and a
half after the contract called for making these announcements, Mr. Speaker, the
minister continued in his contemptible ways by showing complete disdain for
this Legislature‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Question, please.
Mr. Plohman: I ask
this minister responsible for lentils why he did not at least have the courtesy
to make the announcement with regard to the change in the coverage levels, the
support levels for lentils in this House to the representatives. He should have made it months ago, but he at
least‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The question has been put.
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): There is great difficulty associated with
doing what we had to do yesterday. The lentil acres in 1990 were 55,000 acres,
last year 135,000 acres. This year it
looked like it would be 400,000 to 500,000 acres.
Mr. Speaker, we have informed our signatories that the price
set for lentils has been too high. We
have been saying that for 14 months. We
have received in the last three weeks a number of letters and phone calls from
producers and producer organizations saying that we must do something.
The
We went to the signatories committee this week‑‑they
met on Tuesday‑‑and said:
Would you look at the issue? They
gave us a recommendation that we should do something in
Mr. Plohman: Mr.
Speaker, this minister should have known this a year ago. He knew there was an increase in lentils.
Why did this minister not make this announcement a month and a
half ago? How can he justify the
interference in the marketplace that he did yesterday after farmers have spent
thousands of dollars on seed, and seed companies have purchased seed and
inoculate for that seed? Where has this
minister been for the last month and a half?
Mr. Findlay: Mr.
Speaker, I would like to remind the member of my answer to the first question
that, for 14 months we have been talking about this, trying to get the National
Grains Bureau and Agriculture
We sought legal opinion to determine if the contract was
violated. We did what we did, and the
legal opinion said that as long as changes were made before April 30, it was
legally correct to do so. We did it in
response to numerous inquiries from the industry and from producers.
Mr. Plohman: Mr.
Speaker, this program is more of a mess under the management of this minister
every day.
I want to ask this minister how he intends to compensate those
farmers and those seed companies, such as the Farmers Co‑op Seed Plant at
Rivers, who have had 10 percent of their contracts, of their orders cancelled
this morning, only this morning, since this minister's announcement at the last
minute. How is he going to compensate them?
Mr. Findlay: Mr.
Speaker, nothing in our announcement prevented anybody from growing any number
of acres they wanted to grow or any contracts they have signed. Nothing in our announcement violated that.
I would like to read what the executive director of the
Manitoba Pulse Growers said yesterday.
He said: Even after higher
production costs are factored in, the support price for lentils guarantees
farmers a significantly higher return than for other GRIP‑insured crops,
even after the reduction.
They recognized that the support was far too high, relative to
other crops, and structurally, it was the right decision to take. We were promoted to do it by many people in
the industry.
GRIP Program
Coverage Levels ‑
Risk Area 12
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture if he is going to
honour his commitment which he made in writing to the representatives of Risk
Area 12, making a commitment to make an adjustment in their coverage if there
were changes. Will he honour that
commitment so they can go ahead and lobby the federal government to work on
that for them as well?
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, a year ago, I set up a process
involving farmers to come up with some legitimate numbers that we could advance
to the federal government. As I said
yesterday, I have written the federal government twice asking them to
understand that this was necessary to be done.
The committee has gone through its final report. I imagine the final report that all committee
members approve will arrive on my desk shortly.
We continue to ask the federal government to look at those numbers and
see if there is some way they can address the problem that has been in place,
the inequity that has really been in place, in that area for some 20 years.
*
(1400)
Ms. Wowchuk: My
question to the same minister is: Will
this government live up to the word of their minister? Will they put the money in place and put the
federal government on the line to see whether the federal government will stand
up to his word?
Mr. Findlay: Mr.
Speaker, we have been talking to those growers for a long period of time,
trying to find some mechanism that we could legitimately take some information
to the federal government. I say, when
that report comes in, we will continue to work with the federal government to
see that the information in the report will be accepted for them for '91 or '92
or forever.
Ms. Wowchuk: My
question is still to the same minister.
Will this government put the money on the line so that the
federal government will then be obliged to make a decision? They have a letter saying they will do
this. They need somebody to stand behind
this. I am sure many of his backbenchers
would be happy to do it.
Mr. Findlay: Mr.
Speaker, in terms of putting money on the line, we put $50 million on the line
for GRIP premiums for
Economic Growth
Building Permits
Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, in each one of the five budgets
that this Finance minister has tabled in the House and again yesterday, he
continues to promise us that somehow prosperity is just around the corner, but
his predictions to date have been rather faulty, to say the least.
Now when you look back over the last four years, when you look
back at the statistics that are contained within Statistics
I would like to ask the minister this question: How does he account for the fact that over
the past four years, the share of total building permits in this country fell
some 18 percent? In
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the member has taken me a little
bit unaware. I thought he was going to
ask questions on bankruptcies today.
Obviously, he could not find a selective area that suited his particular
questions.
As I indicated yesterday, when one looks at all of the
statistical areas, one can pick and choose to set their own arguments. I would like to say to the member opposite
that economic growth of our province as compared to the national average for
'92‑‑and I think Manitobans today are trying to develop a
confidence, indeed, all Canadians are, in their economy. I think they want to look forward, Mr.
Speaker. I would like to say that I am
assured that the American economy is beginning to pull out of its malaise. I am told by my economic advisers that if
that occurs in the
I say to the member opposite, if he wants to focus on four
years of the past, if he feels that he is serving his constituents in the best
manner and reflecting on four years of numbers that have occurred over the
year, he could probably accomplish an awful lot more if he would attempt to,
with the government, try and find the best ways and support the government in
trying to make
Mr. Alcock: Now, if
I understand the minister's comment, Mr. Speaker, he is asking me to support
his four years of failure, and I am afraid I am unable to do that right now.
I want to ask him a very simple question, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister explain to me why, after
four years of his policy, we are doing worse on building permits in this
province? A very simple question: Why have we done so much worse than the
national average‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The question has been put.
Mr. Manness: Mr.
Speaker, again the member wants to select into an area. Why does he not ask the question about the
capital investment intentions well above those in
No, all the member is trying to do is once again destroy the
confidence of the consumers and the business people in this province for his
own political gain, Mr. Speaker, and I say to him, shame. He has ulterior motives; he is out to destroy
the economy in this province. He is
contributing nothing.
Mr. Alcock: Mr.
Speaker, we have five years of intentions, and not one of them has proved out,
not one of them.
I want to ask the minister this very simple question. He has put in place a plan; he has had that
plan working now for four years. In the
area of building permits, our performance is worse than that of the
country. Can the minister please explain
to us why that has occurred?
Mr. Manness: Mr.
Speaker, it seems almost identical to the second question, which was identical
to the first question.
I can give again the same response as I did on the second
question, but I know, when you are in opposition, you expect there to be
instant fixes. I know, Mr. Speaker, we
have had requests from the opposition benches that we should bring forward a
stimulation budget.
Of course, what that was, was asking the government to spend
considerably more in almost all areas of government or to increase taxes and/or
to do anything to employ people. I am
here to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the approach that we are taking is the
correct one as is reflected in the financial markets, in the manner in which
our Premier (Mr. Filmon) and indeed our Minister of Industry and Trade (Mr.
Stefanson) can now access corporate boardrooms in the country with respect to
the message as to what is occurring in our province to make our regime more
competitive. It is being reflected in
the financial market, where today, for the first time in the history of
Sewage Lagoon ‑
Oak Point
Environmental Concerns
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I have photographs with me today
that show how a pit extended onto a previous landfill site has been used as a
sewage lagoon near Oak Point. This pit has no liner. It is not complying with the regulations for
lagoons, and it has been allowed to spill over onto the adjacent land.
Residents are concerned that the proposed lagoon to replace
this area is not the proper solution.
How will the minister resolve concerns that the lagoon that is supposed
to drain into
*
(1410)
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the member demonstrates why we
need to work with a number of municipalities to make sure that their waste
disposal and sewage handling processes are brought up to snuff. We have had an ongoing process in that
municipality to site a new lagoon, to site a new waste disposal ground. The department has worked closely with them
in examining the plans that they have put forward, the studies that they put
forward. The department laid down the
conditions of a licence regarding the standard of effluent. The time of discharge and all of the relevant
information that was brought forward was taken into consideration, and a
licence was issued.
It is under the conditions of that licence that we will control
and regulate and make sure there is no damage to the surrounding environment.
Environmental Impact
Assessment
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): It is the minister's department that
authorized this pit to be used in this manner.
Can the minister then table the environment impact assessment
that is going to show that there will not be any effect on fish stock and fish
breeding ground on the reserve across the lake which draws its water from
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): All of the information that the department
took into account in looking at the plans is public information. It was filed, and I am sure that the member
can have access to that.
Public Hearings
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Since there was no public hearing where the
residents could have their concern‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Question, please.
Ms. Cerilli: Will the
minister hold a public hearing on the siting of this new lagoon in the Oak
Point area?
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I regret to some extent that the
type of disagreements upon which the member is basing her questions end up
being brought to the floor of this Chamber, because in many ways this is not an
environmental issue. It is a dispute
between two communities about where this site should be located. It is a planning issue as much as it is an
environment issue. The environmental
restrictions that we can impose, the standards that we will require of
operation are the responsibility that we will deal with and make sure that
there is no damage.
The appeal that the member is referring to, a number of those
issues were raised and were dealt with in the licence. As so often happens, Mr. Speaker‑‑and
I do not for one minute deny it‑‑when municipal service sites such
as this are located, there is always some concern raised and some disagreement
about the location of it. There
certainly is a good deal of disagreement by a small group, but they were
clearly heard. The environmental issues
were raised, and we believe we have dealt with it.
Sewage Lagoon ‑
Oak Point
Licensing Process
Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, I can hardly believe that the
Minister of Environment would say that this lagoon in Oak Point does not raise
environmental issues. The fact is that
the proposed lagoon is to be a nonstandard lagoon, with its outlet entering
My question for the minister:
Why, given these concerns which have been persistent from the very
outset of this proposal from many of the local residents, did the minister not
require a proper siting study of the project and did he not require a proper
public hearing in front of the CEC to air those concerns and instead was
content‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The question has been put.
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, as I said at the outset, this has
been a very troublesome process. The environmental matters that are associated
with the siting of this lagoon, or any other service facility of this nature,
have to be carefully watched. They have
to be carefully designed and operations handled.
The fact that the original siting was used improperly is now
being corrected. One of the reasons that
this was not corrected over a period of time earlier was a disagreement about
where a new facility would be most properly located.
Mr. Speaker, the issues that were brought forward were, there
is a judgment call as to whether they are dealt with directly by the licensing
process or whether they go to a Clean Environment Commission hearing, and this
one was deemed to have been capable of being dealt with within the licensing
process, and that was what was done.
Public Hearings
Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Again, for the same minister, Mr. Speaker, the
minister recommended to local residents when they met with him that they go to
mediation with the R.M. The R.M.
declined to participate.
My question for the minister is: Why, after recognizing that the concerns of
the residents were worthy of a mediation proposal when it did not go ahead, did
he not go the second step and in fact give a full public hearing process the
opportunity for the residents to put forward their concerns to a board like the
Clean Environment Commission to be heard and adjudicated upon? Why, after recognizing their concerns were
valid, did he not do a full job?
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Again, Mr. Speaker, while I do not think the
member should characterize anything I said earlier as not being concerned about
the environmental issues, there was also a planning issue that was within the
jurisdiction of the municipality to make.
In the jurisdiction for which I am responsible, the licensing
of any design and building and discharge that might occur in relationship to
this facility was properly handled and will be properly regulated in the future
to make sure, whether it is a city of
Licensing Process ‑
Appeal
Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, finally, for the same
minister. An appeal of this licence by
the residents is currently before the minister.
We are advised that the minister has privately told the R.M. that they
can start tendering this without having released publicly the results of the
appeal.
Has the minister in fact made up his mind on this appeal, and
if so, why did his department privately inform the R.M. before making the
decision public in the normal course?
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Again, Mr. Speaker, someone is either
misinformed or has chosen to take a different tack on this.
Environment licence is valid during the time of appeal, and if
the municipality chooses to proceed to go to tender or to get bids on
construction of a site during that period, they are quite entitled to do
so. The results of the appeal and the
reasons behind any decisions that are made around that will be made public in
the appropriate time frame, and all people involved will have a copy and full
access to that information.
Social Assistance
Off-Reserve Status
Indians
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, the federal government's
withdrawal of 100 percent social assistance funding for status Indians living
off reserves will cost $8.7 million a year for the City of
What is the Minister of Family Services doing to avert a crisis
in the City of
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): I reject that the province is doing nothing
about the withdrawal of federal funding.
We have made a very strong stand on this issue, and we used to have the
support of the opposition. I am
disappointed that they have changed their position on that.
We also have the Manitoba Assembly of Chiefs, the UMM and the
MAUM organizations supporting us in our dispute with
Bill 70
Amendments
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Will the Minister of Family Services amend
Bill 70 in order to prevent a massive tax increase for city taxpayers,
estimated at 5 percent?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): It is interesting that opposition members
have yet to speak on the bill, and the member is asking us for an
amendment. We have brought that
legislation before the House and given it second reading and look forward to
members' comments on that legislation.
If the member is here to solve some of the financial problems
of a municipal level of government, I encourage him to speak with city
councillors and maybe give them some direction on ways in which he would see
them changing their budget.
We are working with the SARC committee, which has a member, a
city councillor, on that committee. They
have presented a report to government.
We have basically accepted that report and are bringing in legislation
based on that SARC report.
Mr. Speaker: Time for
Oral Questions has expired.
*
(1420)
NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS
Mrs. Louise Dacquay (
Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great sense of pride to rise today
to wish a group of Manitobans the best of luck as they set off to celebrate
The present expedition will face many logistical, climatic and
physical challenges during their attempt to climb
Some of the members of the climbing team are with us here today. Tibor Bodi, a constituent of mine, is one of the three climb leaders, and Peter Muir and Dan Dunbar also comprise a part of this team. The other members of the team, who regrettably were unable to be with us today, are Peter Aitchison, Bob France, also both climb leaders, as well as Richard Ti