LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Monday, June 22, 2015
Mr. Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
Good afternoon, everyone. Please be seated.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Mr. Speaker: Introduction of bills?
Mr. Speaker: Seeing no bills, we'll move on to petitions.
Province-Wide Long-Term Care–Review Need and Increase Spaces
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And this is the background to the petition:
There are currently 125 licensed personal-care homes, PCHs, across Manitoba, consisting of less than 10,000 beds.
(2) All trends point to an increasingly aging population who will require additional personal-care-home facilities.
(3) By some estimates, Manitoba will require an increase of more than 5,100 personal-care-home beds by 2036.
(4) The number of Manitobans with Alzheimer's disease or another dementia-related illness who will require personal-care-home services are steadily increasing and are threatening to double within the current generation.
(5) The last personal-care-home review in many areas, including the Swan River Valley area currently under the administration of the Prairie Mountain regional health authority, was conducted in 2008.
(6) Average occupancy rates for personal-care homes across the province are exceeding 97 per cent, with some regions, such as Swan River Valley, witnessing 100 per cent occupancy rates.
(7) These high occupancy rates are creating the conditions where many individuals requiring long-term care are being displaced far away from their families and their home communities.
We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:
(1) To urge the provincial government to consider immediately enacting a province-wide review of the long-term-care needs of residents of Manitoba.
And (2) to urge the provincial government to recognize the stresses placed upon the health-care system by the current and continuous aging population and consider increasing the availability of long-term-care spaces, PCH beds, in communities across the province.
And this petition has been signed by C. Terry, C. Penner and J. Kullrory and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Mr. Speaker: In keeping with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to have been received by the House.
Provincial Trunk Highway 206 and Cedar Avenue in Oakbank–Pedestrian Safety
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Every day, hundreds of Manitoba children walk to school in Oakbank and must cross PTH 206 at the intersection with Cedar Avenue.
(2) There have been many dangerous incidents where drivers use the right shoulder to pass vehicles that have stopped at the traffic light waiting to turn left at this intersection.
(3) Law enforcement officials have identified this intersection as a hot spot of concern for the safety of schoolchildren, drivers and emergency responders.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge that the provincial government improve the safety at the pedestrian corridor at the intersection of PTH 206 and Cedar Avenue in Oakbank by considering such steps as highlighting pavement markings to better indicate the location of the shoulders and crosswalk, as well as installing a lighted crosswalk structure.
This is signed by A. Harmatiuk, G. Walker, A. Harmatiuk and many other fine Manitobans.
Beausejour District Hospital–Weekend and Holiday Physician Availability
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And these are the reasons for this petition:
(1) The Beausejour District Hospital is a 30-bed, acute-care facility that serves the communities of Beausejour and Brokenhead.
(2) The hospital and the primary-care centre have had no doctor available on weekends and holidays for many months, jeopardizing the health and livelihoods of those in the northeast region of the Interlake-Eastern Regional Health Authority.
(3) During the 2011 election, the provincial government promised to provide every Manitoban with access to a family doctor by 2015.
(4) This promise is far from being realized, and Manitobans are witnessing many emergency rooms limiting services or closing temporarily, with the majority of these reductions taking place in rural Manitoba.
(5) According to the Health Council of Canada, only 25 per cent of doctors in Manitoba reported that their patients had access to care on evenings and weekends.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government and the Minister of Health to ensure that the Beausejour District Hospital and primary-care centre have a primary-care physician available on weekends and holidays to better provide area residents with this essential service.
This petition is signed by K. Mazur, M. Tymko, K. Malby and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Minnesota-Manitoba Transmission Line Route–Information Request
Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The Minnesota-Manitoba transmission line is a 500-kilovolt alternating-current transmission line set to be located in southeastern Manitoba that will cross into the US border south of Piney, Manitoba.
(2) The line has an in-service date of 2020 and will run approximately 150 kilometres with tower heights expected to reach between 40 and 60 metres and to be located every four to five hundred metres.
(3) The preferred route designated for the line will see hydro towers come in close proximity to the community of La Broquerie and many other communities in Manitoba's southeast rather than an alternate route that was also considered.
(4) The alternate route would have seen the line run further east, avoid densely populated areas and eventually terminate at the same spot at the US border.
(5) The Progressive Conservative caucus has repeatedly asked for information about the routing of the line and its proximity to densely populated areas and yet–and has yet to receive any response.
(6) Landowners all across Manitoba are considered–concerned about the impact hydro line routing could have on land values.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro to immediately provide a written explanation to all members of the Legislative Assembly regarding what criteria were used and the reasons for selecting the preferred routing for the Minnesota‑Manitoba transmission line, including whether or not this routing represented the least intrusive option to residents of Taché, Springfield, Ste. Anne, Stuartburn, Piney and La Broquerie.
* (13:40)
This petition is signed by K. Cipriano, K. Wiebe, E. Adnom and many more fine Manitobans.
Mr. Bidhu Jha (Chairperson): I wish to present the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development.
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.
Your Standing Committee on SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT presents the following as its Third Report.
Meetings
Your Committee met on June 18, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building.
Matters under Consideration
· Bill (No. 3) – The Manitoba Floodway and East Side Road Authority Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la Commission manitobaine d'aménagement du canal de dérivation et de la route située du côté est
· Bill (No. 8) – The Conservation Officers Act/Loi sur les agents de conservation
· Bill (No. 12) – The Water Protection Amendment Act (Aquatic Invasive Species)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection des eaux (espèces aquatiques envahissantes)
· Bill (No. 35) – The Workers Compensation Amendment Act (Presumption re Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Other Amendments)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du travail (présomption relative au trouble de stress post-traumatique et autres modifications)
· Bill (No. 200) – The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les armoiries, les emblèmes et le tartan du Manitoba
· Bill (No. 212) – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Gift Card Inactivity Fees)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du consommateur (frais d'inactivité applicables aux cartes-cadeaux)
Committee Membership
· Mr. Bjornson
· Hon. Ms. Braun
· Mr. Briese
· Hon. Mr. Dewar
· Mr. Friesen
· Mr. Jha
· Mr. Martin
· Hon. Mr. Nevakshonoff
· Hon. Mr. Robinson
· Mr. Smook
· Mr. Swan
Your Committee elected Mr. Jha as the Chairperson
Your Committee elected Mr. Bjornson as the Vice‑Chairperson
Public Presentations
Your Committee heard the following presentation on Bill (No. 8) – The Conservation Officers Act/Loi sur les agents de conservation:
Michelle Gawronsky, MGEU – Manitoba Government and General Employees Union
Your Committee heard the following seven presentations on Bill (No. 35) – The Workers Compensation Amendment Act (Presumption re Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Other Amendments)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du travail (présomption relative au trouble de stress post-traumatique et autres modifications):
Michelle Gawronsky, MGEU – Manitoba Government and General Employees Union
Kevin Rebeck, Manitoba Federation of Labour
Cameron Abrey, Manitoba Association of Fire Chiefs
Sandi Mowat, Manitoba Nurses Union
Loren Remillard, Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce
Curt Martel, UFCW 832
Eric Glass, Paramedic Association of Manitoba
Your Committee heard the following two presentations on Bill (No. 200) – The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les armoiries, les emblèmes et le tartan du Manitoba:
Peter Cantelon, Canadian Fossil Discovery Centre
James Bamburak, Geological Survey of Manitoba
Your Committee heard the following presentation on Bill (No. 212) – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Gift Card Inactivity Fees)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du consommateur (frais d'inactivité applicables aux cartes-cadeaux):
Gloria Desorcy, Consumers Association of Canada - Manitoba Branch
Written Submissions
Your Committee received the following written submission on Bill (No. 35) – The Workers Compensation Amendment Act (Presumption re Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Other Amendments)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du travail (présomption relative au trouble de stress post-traumatique et autres modifications):
Alex Forrest, United Fire Fighters of Winnipeg
Bills Considered and Reported
· Bill (No. 3) – The Manitoba Floodway and East Side Road Authority Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la Commission manitobaine d'aménagement du canal de dérivation et de la route située du côté est
Your Committee agreed to report this Bill without amendment.
· Bill (No. 8) – The Conservation Officers Act/Loi sur les agents de conservation
Your Committee agreed to report this Bill without amendment.
· Bill (No. 12) – The Water Protection Amendment Act (Aquatic Invasive Species)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection des eaux (espèces aquatiques envahissantes)
Your Committee agreed to report this Bill without amendment.
· Bill (No. 35) – The Workers Compensation Amendment Act (Presumption re Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Other Amendments)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du travail (présomption relative au trouble de stress post-traumatique et autres modifications)
Your Committee agreed to report this Bill without amendment.
· Bill (No. 200) – The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les armoiries, les emblèmes et le tartan du Manitoba
Your Committee agreed to report this Bill without amendment.
· Bill (No. 212) – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Gift Card Inactivity Fees)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du consommateur (frais d'inactivité applicables aux cartes-cadeaux)
Your Committee agreed to report this Bill without amendment.
Mr. Jha: I move, seconded by the honourable member from St. Norbert, that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker: Any further committee reports?
Mr. Speaker: Seeing none, tabling of reports.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I have the latest Discriminatory Business Practices Act report for the House.
Mr. Speaker: Any further tabling of reports? Ministerial statements?
Mr. Speaker: Seeing none, I have no guests to introduce, so we'll proceed right to oral questions.
Equipment Order
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate those who participated in the marathon this weekend. I believe we have a number of colleagues who did. It's–I hope they're recovering well.
Last week we asked a number of questions about the tale of the Tiger Dam contract, the $5-million photo opportunity that the government presided over last July. Within a few days an invoice was issued.
We've asked the Premier a number of questions on the issue. I want to encourage him to answer one today. Obviously, someone in the government gave the go-ahead and placed the order for this $5 million of Tiger Dam equipment, since the invoice was issued.
So I want the Premier to tell us today: Who placed the order?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the process that we followed was a tendered process. The process has not resulted in the awarding of any contract at this stage of the game.
The member has many questions he wishes to ask. The money that was made available for the purchase of tiger 'dumes' came from the federal government. He may wish to ask his questions there because that's where the action occurred.
In Manitoba we followed a proper tendering process as required, and that process resulted in items being–the information being put forward online. Tenders were received, and no tender has been awarded to this date, Mr. Speaker, so there was no ordering of Tiger Dam tubes on behalf of anybody in our government.
Mr. Pallister: Well, this is a company that's in business, Mr. Speaker, to provide services and to make money and they don't issue invoices, surely, without an order being placed. So I think the Premier's covering something up here or missing something entirely.
The issue of the $5-million order was discussed; in fact, it was photo op'd in July. The invoice went out right away for $5 million. Four months elapsed before the Premier claims he was converted to the idea of shopping around. Treasury Board was being told to get 'er done for four months.
So I'm curious. The Premier's talking points issued last Friday say that he supported the idea of going to tender and expressed it in October.
Now, exactly when did he communicate the desire to go to tender in October? On what date in October?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, I supported Treasury Board having a fulsome review of this matter. They did their job. They made recommendations. They were discussed in Cabinet, and directly after that discussion, we–I directed that we move towards the tendering process, which was the recommendation that we had, and that would be early October.
Former NDP Ministers
Reason for Leaving Cabinet
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): That's kind of like the member for Riel (Ms. Melnick). He forgets when he knew for the first time she misled this House and the people of Manitoba, spring, summer, fall.
October 9th is what his talking points say. I encourage him to review them for accuracy.
The rebellion of five of his front-bench members, three of whom were Treasury Board members, became public with a press conference on November 3rd of 2014. The Premier now claims that he addressed this issue prior to that time, on October 9th of 2014, so almost a month prior.
So I'm going to ask the Premier today: To what does he attribute, then, the defection of five of his front-bench members a month later? If it wasn't the tale of the Tiger Dam and the untendered contract we've been discussing, what was it?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, anybody that makes a decision is more than capable of answering for themselves on that decision.
I can tell you what we've been focused on, Mr. Speaker, is growing the economy in Manitoba. We've been focused on that. We've been focused on ensuring that with our infrastructure program there are good job opportunities for young people, and we've followed through on that. We're seeing really good indications of economic growth in this province.
This Friday I was with, actually, the Leader of the Opposition where we made a very significant announcement with Sport Manitoba for a new life‑sport centre down in the Exchange District, Mr. Speaker, which will provide not only immediate jobs for construction in the community but a long‑term facility that will serve athletes training for the highest levels of competition in this country and internationally but also have a third of its time available for people in the neighbourhoods, in the inner city, in the North End, to use that facility.
So we're continuing on a mission to make Manitoba a better place to live, Mr. Speaker, and that's what Manitobans have asked us to do and that's what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Mr. Pallister: And you don't do that by disrespecting a tendering process and wasting millions of dollars.
Now, the Premier says that his colleagues are more than capable of coming clean with the facts around his tale of the Tiger Dam, but they're unwilling to come forward.
But they weren't so unwilling last November when, at a press conference, the MLA for Fort Rouge gave her reasons for departing. She said, quote: It is because we can no longer work with a premier who refuses to hear us.
Now, if the Premier is accurate in his assertion that he answered the objections of his colleagues and supported an open tendering process before they left, if the former Finance minister was not referring to the issue of the $5-million untendered contract in her comments, then what was she referring to? What issue caused the rebel five to rebel?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, that question was just asked; it was just answered.
And, Mr. Speaker, what all of us on this side of the House are focused on since we all voted for the Throne Speech was an agenda to ensure that we provide good job opportunities for Manitobans. It builds on our previous announcements that we're going to have a major infrastructure program in Manitoba: 5 and a half billion dollars over five years. This current Throne Speech said that we're going to take that experience of infrastructure and leverage it into more opportunities for people to get trades, more opportunities for people in high school to get access to a trade, a first-year apprenticeship or a college education or university courses. We're calling that first year now. We're moving forward on that.
And then we brought in a budget, Mr. Speaker, which did very significant things to invest in the future of Manitobans. We brought in Rent Assist. We brought in another major investment in infrastructure. We moved forward on health care, including CancerCare hub in the city of Winnipeg. We moved forward on things to improve the child‑welfare system with additional investments there.
And in the midst of all of that, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite voted against it. No surprise. They weren't focused on the priorities of Manitobans then; they are not focused on the priorities of Manitobans now.
Mr. Pallister: I see four of his members agree with his assertion, Mr. Speaker. I think that states the case well.
The Premier's agenda is to raise taxes, to push the Province into perpetual debt and to politicize transactional processes.
The former Auditor General–former Attorney General and Justice minister declared at the rebel press conference, quote: We noticed a definite change in the way things were being done; the Premier has become more concerned about remaining leader than necessarily doing things in the interest of the province.
Now, if the Attorney General was not referring to the issues that we've been discussing here in the last few days, this tale of the Tiger Dam, the $5‑million untendered contract, what was he referring to? What issue caused the NDP rebels to become rebels?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, I've answered that question trice–twice, but I can tell you what we are all concerned about on this side of the House is the plan of the Leader of the Opposition to privatize daycare in Manitoba. We're also concerned about his plan to privatize social services in Manitoba.
We'd like to know what other hidden agenda items he has not yet put on the table, Mr. Speaker. He should start coming clean with what his true agenda is for Manitoba.
The last time he was in government, he attempted to privatize the home-care system, and he failed. Regrettably, he did–was able to push through the privatization of the telephone system, which now leaves us with among the higher rates in this country.
* (13:50)
We're clear. We're here to serve the interests of Manitobans. Every single member on this side of the House wants to see economic growth in this province. We want to do it in a sustainable way. We want good opportunities for young people. We want to provide education and health care to the people who need it.
That's why we brought forward the budget we did. Members opposite voted against it. They need to be accountable for that and their agenda of privatization.
Mr. Pallister: That's a textbook illustration: When you have a record you can't possibly run on, and that's what this Premier has, then you incite fear. That's all he has left: fear. Because he's afraid, he wants to project it on Manitobans.
Well, his own colleagues were afraid. Annihilation territory, I believe, his pollster called it. And the MLA for Seine River at a press conference said this: In recent months, it's become clear that if you were in a position where you support the point of view of the Premier, then your priorities move up the queue. Sounds familiar, Mr. Speaker. Ahead of the priorities of Manitobans, that member said.
Now, this sounds like the issue under consideration. The Premier backed the Infrastructure Minister in pushing forward a $5-million expense without tender. The Treasury Board pushed back.
The Premier now claims he listened, but that was in October. Four months had passed, four months of pushing and Treasury Board resisting. Now, he says in October, before the rebellion began. The rebellion was in November.
To what was the MLA for Seine River referring to, then, if it wasn't this? Why did she leave? Why did the rebels leave? What was the issue that caused the rebellion? Come clean.
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member has repeated the same question three times. I've given him an answer three times. It's very clear that the member wants to focus on everything except his own hidden agenda for the future of Manitoba.
We've now been able–after we made a very major announcement, Mr. Speaker, of another 900 daycare spaces in Manitoba, with another close to $3 million of investment in daycare facilities, followed up by a $25-million plan over five years of daycares to be built in schools, we then found out from the members of the opposition they don't support that approach. They would like to privatize daycare; that was the approach they put out.
After we made significant investments in things like Rent Assist and social services, including in the child-welfare system, we then found out that the Leader of the Opposition wants to privatize the social services, Mr. Speaker.
What else is he hiding? He wants to stand there and pretend the double standard does not apply. The double standard is very clear for the member opposite. He does not want to be accountable for his own policies, but he wants to nitpick everybody else's policies.
Approval of Contract
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): This is a very serious issue. It speaks to the integrity or lack thereof of this NDP government when it comes to tendering practices in our province. And Manitobans deserve to find the answers to these questions which the Premier (Mr. Selinger) is not providing them.
Now, Mr. Speaker, as a member of Treasury Board, was the Minister for Jobs and the Economy urged at any point in time to approve the awarding of a sole-source contract for $5 million for the Tiger Dam equipment?
Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister responsible for Emergency Measures): Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to note in recent years we've worked with municipalities; we've worked with First Nations to provide support in terms of flood mitigation, both permanent and in terms of flood equipment.
The north of the–north of Winnipeg, Red River communities, the consortium, we've worked with them. They now operate two Amphibexes. They have various types of equipment.
We also received an–a proposal, Mr. Speaker, from the Interlake regional tribal council in the spring of last year which reflected the fact that they represent many of the most–hardest hit communities. At that time, we did not proceed with the proposal that they put forward. It was a $45-million proposal, which they did take to the federal government as well.
And when the flooding hit in the summer in July of 2014, I'd remind members opposite the fact that First Nations–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time on this question has elapsed.
Mrs. Stefanson: Again, this is a very serious issue. It goes to the integrity of this government with respect to the tendering practices that they do in this province, Mr. Speaker.
And I would think a Minister for Jobs and the Economy would have every concern for providing the best value for money for Manitobans, and if he does, I would urge him to stand in his place and answer the question today. He was a member of Treasury Board at the time.
Was the Minister for Jobs and the Economy urged at any point in time to approve the awarding of the sole-source contract for the $5 million for the Tiger Dam equipment?
Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, in July of 2014, we were hit with a major flood. We opened the emergency outlet, again proving the value of that investment in 2014.
There was a protest by every single First Nation in that area, supported by the Interlake regional tribal council, supported by the grand chief of AMC, that very much called into question our ability to operate something that was critical for Lake Manitoba and critical for Lake St. Martin.
And, Mr. Speaker, they asked for two things. They came forward proposals for greater flood mitigation. In fact, there's a Free Press article I'd refer members to, July the 11th, written by Larry Kusch, the headline states: First Nations call for greater flood mitigation. And the second thing they asked for was in terms of fisheries. We engaged in discussion with them, committed to both the fisheries compensation–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's on this–time on this question has elapsed.
Mrs. Stefanson: We know that the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) has been pushing for the sole-sourcing contract for the Tiger Dam equipment, Mr. Speaker, but the question is who else in Cabinet and who else in Treasury Board also pushed for that, the sole sourcing of this contract.
And that's why I'm asking the Minister responsible for Jobs and the Economy in the province of Manitoba: Did–was he urged by anyone to approve the sole sourcing of this Tiger Dam equipment, yes or no, and if he was, who urged him to do so?
Mr. Ashton: And this–Mr. Speaker, we did, in fact, work with the Interlake regional tribal council. We're–represents all of the First Nations there. We worked with the First Nations directly.
Over the subsequent two months, we resolved the fisheries issues that recognized that there were impacts from the operation of the emergency outlet.
When it came to the equipment, we made it very clear that it was going to be provincially owned equipment. That was communicated directly on September 2nd. Obviously, if it was provincially owned equipment, it would have to go through our processes in terms of Treasury Board. That's exactly what we did.
And I want to reiterate what the Premier (Mr. Selinger) said earlier. To this date, Mr. Speaker, the Interlake tribal council does have equipment now through federal processes and we have not awarded any contract whatsoever.
So it did go to tender and no contract has been awarded, period.
Approval of Contract
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): The member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), the current Finance Minister, was a member of the Treasury Board in October of 2014 when the request for $5 million in funding for the Tiger Dam untendered contract was heard.
My question for the member for Selkirk: Was the member of Selkirk urged at any time to approve this $5-million Tiger Dam untendered contract?
Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister responsible for Emergency Measures): It's been very clear on the public record that certainly the First Nations felt that they should own the equipment and certainly expressed their view that it should go through their procurement processes.
But, Mr. Speaker, I'd remind members opposite that we were dealing with a very real situation in terms of flooding, two major issues that were raised by the First Nations, one being the need for flood equipment, recognizing that we are working on the permanent outlets that will protect Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin, also the fisheries issues.
I point out again, Mr. Speaker, we did resolve the fisheries issues. Payments have gone to fishers in that area.
And when it came to the equipment, we went through our normal internal processes. A tender was issued. No tender has been awarded. In fact, the equipment, I believe, has been purchased now through the federal government, Mr. Speaker.
So, again, it was tendered and no equipment was sent to the Interlake regional tribal council for on–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time on this question has elapsed.
Mr. Friesen: The Minister for Infrastructure publicly announced this funding, $5 million for Tiger Dam flood equipment, in July.
Now, it's obvious he had a cozy relationship with the company that sells Tiger Dam. It is obvious that he had a relationship with the purchaser. We know that his pal had the exclusive rights to sell Tiger Dam in Manitoba. He was pushing this agenda; he was lobbying. As a matter of fact, the Free Press said that he was always trying to get us to buy Tiger Dam. It was a constant thing with him. It was clear he was urging.
My question, again, for the member of–for Selkirk is: Was he urged at any time to approve this $5-million Tiger Dam untendered contract?
* (14:00)
Mr. Ashton: Let's be very clear. Over the last number of years we greatly increased our purchase of flood equipment, and I'll take members back to March 25th, 2009, when we were hit by flash flooding because of ice jams north of Winnipeg. And we moved that evening, Mr. Speaker, to purchase flood equipment.
But it's not just from IFC; it's also terms of Aqua Dams and, Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, Aqua Dam is not a Manitoba-based company. I don't think they've got any involvement here. But we've purchased a significant number of Aqua Dams. Why? Because they work.
We've also purchased a significant number of HESCO dams, Mr. Speaker. I think we purchased in the range of $5 million in the middle of a flood situation.
Mr. Speaker, we've purchased from a variety of companies. I want to stress again, these products work. We're seen as a model throughout the–North America and the world. These products are used internationally. And we make no apology for investing in flood–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time on this question has elapsed.
Mr. Friesen: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is an issue about transparency. It is an issue about accountability. It is an issue about value for money. This is an issue about taxpayers getting the best value for their dollar, and it guards against waste.
Mr. Speaker, my question, then, again, for the member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), who was part of that Treasury Board deliberation when that proposal came up, is: Was he told to get 'er done? Was he urged at any time to give approval for an untendered $5-million Tiger Dam contract?
Mr. Ashton: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm glad the member opposite referenced value for money, because investing $1 billion, as we have over the last 10 years, in flood mitigation, that's value for money. Building the emergency outlet in 2011 and opening it in 2014, that's value for money. Moving ahead on the construction of a permanent outlet from Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin, which is going to bring the flood protection levels to as high as one in 200 years on Lake Manitoba. And, for the first time, we will have relocated on flood-protected areas; we'll have–communities that have been chronically affected by flooding for the last 50 years.
We on this side make no apologies for the value‑for-money investments we have made in terms of flood mitigation.
Auditor General's Recommendations
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, in a March 2014 report to this Assembly, the Auditor General recommended that the Province's management and administrative practices needed to be stronger. The Auditor General further identified that management and administrative weakness is resulting in a number of problems, including incomplete filing documentation, no compliance monitoring, limited communication.
Can the minister please outline today what steps have been taken to address these significant deficiencies in NDP tendering practices?
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I'm thrilled to be able to stand today and talk about the issue of contracts. As a member mentioned, there was a report.
The–we put forward a number of amendments the other–just the other day in the BITSA legislation, 2015. It calls for the–a new online registry. It calls for, as well, a streamlined administrative process to ensure that reports are comprehensive, timely, be more effectively delivered.
And the members opposite voted against it.
Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General went further, saying that the Province maintained an inefficient and error-prone process to enter information into the public access database. That inefficiency referred to–resulted in more than $180 million in untendered contracts that were not disclosed.
How many more $5-million contracts to NDP best friends is the public on the hook for?
Mr. Dewar: Well, Mr. Speaker, I reject that question. We're concerned about getting value for money. And the member should realize that the–more than 67 per cent of all the contracts that are let by the Province go through a competitive process.
There is only–the remainder of the ones that aren't, the majority of those who–there's only one provider, such as Microsoft: proprietary suppliers. This government purchased a number of water bombers from Bombardier, Mr. Speaker. They're the only ones that can provide that service. And we're proud that we did that.
Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, according to the Auditor General, untendered contracts increase the risk of procurement improprieties, and ensuring compliance with strong policies to mitigate that risk is essential.
Just months after the AG recommended policies to mitigate risk to the public, the NDP moved ahead with a $5-million untendered contract to an NDP donor. This is clear proof that the minister ignored the Auditor General's recommendations around transparency, accountability and openness.
Will he admit that today?
Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister responsible for Emergency Measures): Mr. Speaker, once again, a tender was put out and that tender has not been issued, so the member is wrong.
Service Provision Complaints
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): When asked in January of 2014 about services being provided by Complete Care for children in hotels–excuse me–the minister said she was not aware of Complete Care. Perhaps she should've been.
Besides paying them over $5 million, a recent FIPPA shows a steady increase in the number of complaints to her department regarding poor service from this agency.
Does the minister pay no attention to complaints received on service providers to her department?
Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Family Services): We've worked diligently with the authorities and the agencies and also community-based organizations across this province to ensure that we're providing a good quality service to families and children, making sure that children can thrive in their family and stay in their communities. We continue to work with these service providers. We take all issues that are presented to the department very seriously, and we investigate.
What I want to remind the member opposite today is that we are eliminating the use of hotels across this province.
Mr. Wishart: Mr. Speaker, clearly that wasn't soon enough.
I table information received from the department requested on October 15, 2014, and not received until June 17, 2015. Besides taking an undue period of time to reply, the information shows a steady increase in complaints received about Complete Care over the last five years with a sudden surge in the last two years.
Shouldn't a sudden increase in complaints indicate to the minister that there was a problem with the agency providing services to children in the government care in hotels?
Ms. Irvin-Ross: Today, what's important to focus on is the elimination of hotel use across this province for children in care, and we're going to continue to do that. All of our partners are working together to ensure that we're hiring more staff to provide the care that's necessary. We've hired over 80 more staff. We've increased the number of EPR beds across this province to 90 more beds. We're continuing to work with all of our partners to address the issue of children and safety. That's our No. 1 priority.
But we're not stopping there. Mr. Speaker, we are continuing to invest in prevention. We are continuing to make those investments. We are not threatening to privatize, and we certainly are not cutting any services to Manitoba families.
Mr. Wishart: Well, Mr. Speaker, what we have seen from this government is action only when there is a crisis in care.
Shouldn't a sudden increase in complaints about services provided by CFS to at-risk children been enough of a red flag for this minister to take action, perhaps before someone died?
Ms. Irvin-Ross: This government has continually taken action to increase the services available to Manitoba families, from prevention services to child care to education services and, when a family is in crisis, ensuring that we have adequate supports for them within the child-welfare system. We continue to make those investments. We are seeing the benefits from them. We have more work to do and we're committed to doing that work.
We recently have been able to say that we've eliminated the use of hotels across this province. We have done that by working with the agencies and the authorities across this province, dedicating more funds to hiring more staff and creating more resources. We are making those investments. We're seeing those changes.
We're celebrating with Manitoba families; we are not threatening them by privatization and unnecessary cuts.
Emergency Operations Centre
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, we have learned of the activities of today's NDP government with respect to the purchase of Tiger Dams for First Nations communities.
* (14:10)
Today's NDP government issued a press release last year on July 25th that highlighted the creation of, and I quote, "the first emergency operations centre for First Nations in Canada." It said initial plans for the centre include, again I quote, "rapid-response flood equipment stationed centrally in the Lake St. Martin area."
Will the Premier today tell us exactly where the centre is located and if the Tiger Dams purchased for flood protection were intended for floodfighting around Lake St. Martin?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question.
We did more than that on that July 25th announcement. We talked about the need to provide a compensation program for fishers who had lost their livelihood because of the flooding that occurred in the Lake St. Martin area, and we provided that to them and have followed through on that program. We also were working with the First Nations at that time to make sure that the emergency channel was open to allow the water to flow.
The–my understanding is that the Interlake regional tribal council is part of a solution where they work with Peguis, who has equipment, extra equipment and special equipment to fight flood protection, and as it turns out they have even more equipment now that they've received federal money to purchase additional equipment.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, in July 2014, water flowing into Lake Manitoba through the Portage Diversion caused concern about the rising water level of Lake St. Martin.
The Minister of Infrastructure was apparently involved in an attempt to purchase $5 million of Tiger Dams, and he is alleged to have reported–resorted to, and I quote, trying to bully his Cabinet colleagues into doing something they knew was wrong.
Mr. Speaker, this question is not a difficult level of transparency to achieve. Quite simply, again: Precisely where is the flood centre, and were any of the water-filled Tiger Dams to be used to protect people around Lake St. Martin?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the most important thing to protect the people around Lake St. Martin was to get the emergency channel flowing because that lowered the level of the lake by a very significant amount of water, which is why we built it in the first place, and we did it after consulting the First Nations in the area. So that was the most important thing to do, was to get the channel open and to have the water flowing through that channel on a renewed emergency basis because of the high waters.
The second thing to do was to give some comfort to the fishers who had lost their livelihood because of all the flooding disruption in their traditional territory where they were making a living. That program rolled forward.
We also committed to working with First Nations on providing them with extra equipment. Peguis had additional equipment. It has additional equipment right now. It got additional equipment from the federal government. I understand the federal government is reviewing the acquisition process that we followed. We followed a tendering process in Manitoba, a tendering process under the management of the Department of Infrastructure, who looks after those matters, and to date no tender has been awarded.
But we always were able to make available additional equipment and support to First Nations in the Interlake on a timely basis. We have a large stockpile of existing equipment, and we've always said if an emergency comes up, our existing equipment can be made available to you on an emergency basis as we build long-term capacity–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable First Minister's time on this question has elapsed.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, the Free Press reported that the minister's actions were so abundantly, obviously offside of standard tendering rules and that today's NDP government operates in a way that ministers are personally making deals with third parties to buy goods.
On January 19th, 2011, Barry Prentice wrote in the Free Press that Tiger Dams are the least reliable system and that a product testing report supplied by the minister would not qualify for an elementary school science project, a finding confirmed in the 2011 Flood Review Task Force report, which I table.
Did the Premier have good scientific evidence that the Tiger Dams would be effective in the terrain around Lake St. Martin, and if so, will he table that evidence today?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member raises an important question.
In my view, and this was the process that we followed in the tendering process, our officials consulted with the people of–that were looking after the flood protection measures for the Interlake regional tribal council. We always said we want to get the right mix of equipment. Nobody should be able to dictate one specific product. We have to get the right mix of equipment. That includes Aqua Dam. That includes HESCO Barriers. There are uses for Tiger Dams as well, but you need the appropriate equipment in the appropriate place at the appropriate time. And we have all of those types of equipment in our arsenal right now, including traditional sandbags, including super sandbags. All of those tools were available to us, and we deploy those tools as necessary in appropriate and specific circumstances, and we can make those available on an emergency basis.
The tendering process went through, a proper procedure. No award has been made at this point. The member knows full well that his question is completely specious because he knows we haven't awarded the contract.
New Student Housing Complex
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Mr. Speaker, we know that housing is central to lives and well-being and the health of all Manitoba families. And that's why our government has committed to add 500 new affordably housing units and over 500 new social housing units over the next number of years.
We also know that a priority of our government is provide housing with–for students for safe and affordable housing so that they can focus on their studies and that they can succeed.
Can the Minister of Housing and Community Development update the House on a great announcement that was made right here in the heart of downtown Winnipeg today?
Hon. Mohinder Saran (Minister of Housing and Community Development): Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for the question.
Today we were proud to announce the construction of what will become the brand new student housing, the U of W commons on the University of Winnipeg's downtown campus. The University of Winnipeg commons will house a vibrant, multigenerational community and provide a variety of housing options for people with diverse needs. This new 14-storey high-rise building will add 102 new suites of mixed house–or use housing. Forty-six of these suites will be affordable housing which will provide safe, supportive housing for students and families while attending the University of Winnipeg.
With projects like these, we can continue to provide families and students with safe, affordable housing in the heart of downtown.
Nurse Staffing Levels
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, the minister's mismanagement has caused the OR in Altona to close because of the lack of nurses. The ER's also sporadically closed, and we now know that the patients in the hospital are suffering.
What does the minister have to say to Mrs. Krahn, an MS patient who says she doesn't know whether she will receive a weekly bath or not?
Hon. Sharon Blady (Minister of Health): I'd like to thank the member for the question.
Manitoba families, regardless of where they live throughout the province, do deserve access to safe, high-quality care close to home, and that's why we have continued to invest in those facilities and invest in doctors and nurses for those facilities, as well as bringing in nurse practitioners and physicians' assistants, things that did not exist under members opposite.
So I can tell the members opposite and assure all Manitobans that we are continuing to work with our regional health authority partners and facilities to ensure that facilities are operational to the best of their capacity and to full capacity at every opportunity.
Mr. Graydon: Well, Mr. Speaker, the minister has repeatedly stated that our money is on the table. Yet despite this claim, Manitobans are getting less service, obviously due to the mismanagement by this minister.
Mrs. Krahn goes on to say that she has to wait up to 45 minutes to be put on or taken off a commode.
Why are Manitobans paying more and getting less?
Ms. Blady: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the member for the question and remind him that while we cannot discuss the particulars of any given individual's case for privacy reasons, if he has any information that he or anyone else would like to bring to my office, I would gladly meet with them and, again, pursue an individual case.
But I can assure members opposite and all Manitobans that, again, we are working together, we are making investments, and, again, it's one of those things where we've hired and trained more doctors and nurses, replacing each and every one of the ones that they fired and said–sent running.
And, again, our numbers are up. So we will continue to work with our regional health authority partners.
Mr. Graydon: Well, Mr. Speaker, the ratio of nurses is more than 11 patients per nurse. Due to this heavy workload, nurses are stressed and not able to provide the quality of care to each patient that is deserved and that the nurses themselves want to provide.
Mrs. Krahn says she has to often wait up to 50 minutes to receive pain medication.
Mr. Speaker, why are the Manitobas paying more and getting substantially less health care?
And this minister does know of this case.
* (14:20)
Ms. Blady: I thank the member for the question and again remind him that we cannot discuss the particulars of the case in this Chamber.
I would also remind him that for all the critiques that are provided, members opposite still don't have a plan.
I guess he hasn't talked to the member from Morden-Winkler recently, because, again, and I will put on the record yet again, after five times being asked what their health plan was, the member for Morden-Winkler (Mr. Friesen) didn't respond to Mr. Adler, and, again, Mr. Adler's summary of the conversation was: I have no idea what they are going to do. He also said, you're disappointing me. He followed by adding, the PC party is often accused of beating the dead horse, dwelling on the obvious but not offering solutions. And he closed with, you've spent five minutes doing exactly what the PCs are accused of doing. You're fulfilling every stereotype that the NDP puts out there.
We're continuing to work with partners. They're beating dead horses.
Graduation Rates
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I'm not quite sure what the minister has against horses.
Mr. Speaker, we have more than 11,000 kids in care. We have less than two thirds of the kids graduating from high school and less than 50 per cent of them are even ready for school.
Today we heard that the minister for CFS doesn't track attendance for the kids she is supposed to be in care of. She admits today that she wasn't aware of service provider that her department has paid more than $5 million to.
Mr. Speaker, will the minister for Child and Family Services stand up today and admit that her government is failing Manitobans because Manitobans are tired of getting more–or paying more and getting less?
Hon. James Allum (Minister of Education and Advanced Learning): Actually, Mr. Speaker, I think the member had it right. Manitobans are getting more and they are paying less.
But, Mr. Speaker, we have established a task force to deal with the educational challenges facing kids in care. That task force will be chaired by Tammy Christensen from Ndinawe and by Kevin Lamoureux, who is a well-known instructor at the University of Winnipeg.
And Mr. Lamoureux, in talking about the task force, says, and I quote: I am grateful for the authors of the report for giving voice to the experience of some of Manitoba's most vulnerable citizens. It is in the spirit of care of our children in care and a deep respect for the professionals who work tirelessly to provide the best possible supports for them that we begin this task force.
Mr. Speaker, we work with community every day. I don't know why the members think that that's a bad idea.
Mr. Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired.
Mr. Speaker: It is now time for members' statements.
Crescent Drive Park
Hon. James Allum (Minister of Education and Advanced Learning): Everyone has a favourite park, whether it's the Assiniboine, St. Vital or Kildonan parks. These spaces have special meaning to the people who use them. They give us a place to relax, let our children play and enjoy the outdoors, all while staying close to home.
One of my favourite parks is Crescent Drive Park. It's located in the south end of Fort Garry-Riverview. It is a beautiful green space to explore.
I am certainly not the only one who has a soft spot for Crescent Drive Park. It's cherished by many of my constituents, and a group of them have formed a team called Crescent Park Rescue to advocate on its behalf.
We are very fortunate to have this active and engaged group in our community which originated as part of a campaign to protect golf courses and green spaces in Winnipeg. Through their volunteer efforts, we have learned about the high quality of the park's urban forest and about the many opportunities for recreation available in summer and winter. Among their accomplishments, Crescent Park Rescue can count projects that involve stabilizing the riverbank, tree planting and fighting invasive species that choke indigenous plants on the forest floor.
The group is to be congratulated on their latest effort to enhance ecological balance in the park, the recently designated Monarch Meadows. This garden is now a no-mow area so that milkweed can grow and attract Monarch butterflies. Crescent Park Rescue plans to add nectar plants and other wildflowers to increase biodiversity in the area.
To enable their success, Crescent Park Rescue reaches out to the community by hosting public events, conducting surveys on potential projects and drawing volunteers. This is truly a homegrown initiative.
We are joined today by members of Crescent Park Rescue's steering committee. I ask all members of the House to join me in recognizing their truly amazing efforts to protect our city's natural beauty for generations to come.
2015 Farm Family of the Year
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, it was my honour to be in the presence on Monday, June 15th, of many of Manitoba's agricultural leaders and future leaders in the Farm Family of the Year Agriculture and Agri-Food Scholarships.
In particular, it was a great pleasure to witness Ed and Kathy Friesen of Kleefeld, Manitoba, being awarded the 2015 family–Farm Family of the Year recognition.
Since 1999, the Friesens have operated Friecrest Holsteins and have grown and improved the farm significantly over the years. In their acceptance speech the Friesens paid tribute to the many people who have supported them along the way and in particular recognized their family: Jocelyn, Loralie, Janelle, Justin and Alyssa.
Friecrest is in every way a family farm, and the Friesens stress how they made sure that it was not just a place of work but one that would leave good memories and strong values for their children.
Through the years Ed has taken on responsibilities on several boards related to the dairy industry, and Kathy has also helped prepare the finances for both their farm and others'. They have also made it a priority to give back to the local community and farming industry by opening their farm to tours and visitors. They have also been active in their local church, and their faith is evident in their life, values and attitude.
Members of this Assembly know that farm families contribute far more to their communities and province than simply through their farm operations. They remain the foundation of many of our communities, and Ed and Kathy are examples of the many ways that farm families contribute to the province.
The Farm Family of the Year award has been awarded since 1966 and is sponsored by the Red River Exhibition Association and the Red River Exhibition Foundation. Ed and Kathy join a long history of distinguished winners and they are very worthy of joining this select group.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all members of the Legislative Assembly, I congratulate Ed and Kathy Friesen and their entire family on being honoured as the 2015 Farm Family of the Year.
Bike Week and Bike to Work Day
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Mr. Speaker, cycling enthusiasts, beginner cyclists and everyone in between came together last week to celebrate Bike Week in Winnipeg. Different events and celebrations took place throughout the week including group rides and how-to workshops, and it was capped off with the 8th annual Bike to Work Day last Friday.
That day, over 50 different pit stops were set up to encourage cyclists on their way to work. Various organizations and community groups offered snacks, drinks and even prizes to the morning cyclists. Most pit stops were–also served as mini bike tune-up stops to pump up tires or oil bike chains as necessary.
I had a great time helping out at the pit stop by Elmwood High School on the Northeast Pioneers Greenway. We handed out water to over 100 cyclists, both regular 'commuteters'–commuters and those who were biking to work for the first time.
Cycling is a great way to get to work. It reduces carbon emissions and helps keep you active. People who cycle regularly also know it's important to feel safe while you're riding. Bike lanes and pathways like the Northeast Pioneers Greenway help make active transportation easier and much safer. That's why I'm excited that this year construction will begin on a new state-of-art interchange and active transportation corridor around the Perimeter and Highway 59. Once this multi-year project is finished, families will be able to bike safely all the way down the Northeast Pioneers Greenway to Birds Hill and beyond.
Together with fantastic organizations like Bike Week Winnipeg and the River East Neighbourhood Network, our province continues to invest in active transportation, making it safer for everyone. Bike Week may be over, but I encourage everyone to get on their bikes in the coming weeks and go for a spin.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Tom Yandeau
Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to recognize a resident of my constituency who was recently inducted into the Manitoba Baseball Hall of Fame. Tom Yandeau of Plumas was one of the 13 distinguished individuals honoured at the annual induction ceremony on June 6th, 2015, at the Morden access centre.
Tom's playing career started in his home community of Plumas in 1979 and continued strong for 32 years as a switch-hitting cleanup batter for the Plumas Pirates. Here, Yandeau's stats included 247 home runs and a .440 lifetime batting average. To put things into perspective, over the course of his career, the great Babe Ruth achieved a batting average of .343. Hence, Tom's .440 is worthy of recognition.
Tom may also hold the unofficial Manitoba senior career home run record, clearing the bases 182 times in only 480 games.
Tom represented Manitoba in the western Canadian baseball championships in '95, 1996 and 1998, and in 2007, Tom was awarded the Manitoba Baseball Association's Volunteer of the Year award for his various achievements and unwavering dedication. As coach of minor ball, and as an executive fundraiser for Plumas ball diamond, which included upgrades such as a red clay infield, dugouts, a batting cage and an outfield fence, it's no surprise that Tom was the 2007 award recipient.
* (14:30)
In 2012, Tom was honoured by the Santa Clara league for his dedication to baseball and his commitment to coaching. As skillful with a playbook as he is on the field, Tom coached his Gladstone high school team to back-to-back Manitoba high school titles in 2010 and 2011.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all the honourable members join me in congratulating Tom for his recent induction in the Manitoba Baseball Hall of Fame and for his past and continuous contributions to the sport. A humble gentleman and a staunch supporter of Plumas, Tom deserves much credit.
As a coach, mentor, gifted athlete, community advocate, selfless volunteer, it gives me great pride to formally honour Tom Yandeau today in the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
Thank you.
National Aboriginal Day
Ms. Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, this past Sunday, June 21st, was National Aboriginal Day. All across the country, we celebrated indigenous history, culture and identity. Here in Manitoba we were proud to showcase the contributions that Aboriginal people make to our province.
Our families at Opaskwayak Cree Nation and The Pas celebrated National Aboriginal Day this year. It was a great weekend with lots of children's activities and a community feast. We also took this opportunity to honour the 2015 graduating students of Opaskwayak Cree Nation. I hope they're all very proud of their accomplishments.
National Aboriginal Day is an important time to reflect on where we have come from, where we are and where we are going. As Aboriginal people and as Canadians, it's a time to tell our stories and successes as Aboriginal Canadians and it's a time to demonstrate the strength and the resiliency of our people.
This year is particularly significant as we proudly mark the 25th anniversary of Elijah Harper's historic no which put an end to the Meech Lake Accord. Elijah Harper stood up for Aboriginal people and forced the Canadian government to recognize our voices. We are still seeing the results of his heroic choice today.
I truly believe that this year is also a year of hope. With the release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report and our Premier's (Mr. Selinger) apology for the 'tradegy' of the '60s scoop, I am hopeful that all Canadians can finally tear down the stereotypes that divide us and that we can move forward with our non-Aboriginal counterparts on the path to reconciliation. I have never been more proud of our province than today as we look ahead to a much better future.
Aboriginal people in Canada have been subjected to many hardships and trials: colonization, displacement, racism, systemic discrimination and so much more, and yet, we are here. We are proud, we are thriving and we celebrate our place at the heart of Canadian society.
Thank you.
Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements. Grievances?
Mr. Speaker: Seeing no grievances, orders of the day, government business.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, we would like to call for debate on second reading of Bill 17 and second reading on Bill 26, then debate on second reading on Bill 14, then second reading on Bill 15, and I will have more information for the House subsequently.
Mr. Speaker: Has been announced that we'll be calling bills in the following order: starting with debate on second readings of Bill 17, and then we'll move to second reading of Bill 26, and then back to debate on second readings of Bill 14 and second readings of Bill 15.
Bill 17–The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: We'll begin by calling Bill 17, The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable member for Brandon West (Mr. Helwer).
Is there leave for this matter to remain standing in the name of the honourable member for Brandon West?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: No? Leave has been denied. Is there further debate?
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, I want to put a few words on the record regarding this bill, and we look forward to it going to committee for a further discussion. I think this is something that came up a couple of years ago under the former minister of Justice, also responsible for Manitoba Public Insurance, and it came up in a committee hearing during presentations on another bill that was related to Manitoba Public Insurance.
And at that time a presenter came forward who was involved in the industry and was speaking about a case that he had a client for, and indicated that a caregiver who had been killed in an automobile accident, they didn't have indemnity, and the hardship that resulted for the individual who remained who was the beneficiary of the care was significant, and it was difficult to place a value, essentially, on the work of the caregiver.
And so, in many ways, it punished or it caused for there to be a hardship for an individual who is killed in a car accident, who's a caregiver; the person who remains found themselves in a difficult position because they lost the assistance of that individual.
Now, I recognize that this would likely affect a relatively small group of people, Mr. Speaker, but for those that are impacted, it would impact them greatly, I would say. And so when the amendment came forward to the committee that evening, we sought assurance from the government that they would be bringing forward either an amendment to the bill that was being debated at that time, or an amendment in the future that would resolve this situation. And so I suspect this is the fulfillment of that commitment that happened at that committee a couple of years ago.
I do know that there are questions, perhaps, about retroactivity and how far back this particular legislation can go. For the individual who presented that night, I think for the client that they were referring to, they would not be captured under this bill because it doesn't reach back in time that far, and you know those are the kind of discussions, perhaps, that can happen at committee, about how far back individuals should be able to make claim for these sort of causes, Mr. Speaker. And certainly we know that bills that have an impact financially on individuals, it is always difficult to set a date because you ultimately end up cutting somebody off, and then the argument should be that the date should go back even further.
Now, I recognize that that is the case and that makes it difficult to set a date, but that doesn't mean the discussion shouldn't happen, Mr. Speaker. It doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a discussion about what that date should be when this law comes into effect.
So, we are certainly willing to see this go to committee and see further discussion. I look forward to further discussion from the Minister of Justice at that time, the Minister responsible for MPI, Mr. Speaker. I gave him my assurance this morning that we would move the bill to committee so that we could have that discussion of public presentations on the bill. Any sort of concerns or questions can be raised there, and then we can make a decision about whether or not it moves for a third reading during this current session or whether it moves to third reading during another sitting of the House, and those discussions can certainly happen in the time ahead.
I certainly would, while I have the floor, Mr. Speaker, encourage the government to look at other issues around Manitoba Public Insurance. We know that there's been discussions more recently about a rebate–or, sorry, not a rebate, but a reduction in some of the rates for Manitoba Public Insurance. That follows on a significant increase from Manitoba Public Insurance just a year ago, and I think there is some uncertainty in the minds of Manitobans, and justifiably so, about how rates are necessarily being set. I remember at the last Crown corporation committee with Manitoba Public Insurance I had the opportunity to question the president of Manitoba Public Insurance, or the CEO and, at that time, there was quite a strong, strong indication that they would need the rate increase to ensure that there was a stabilization. They pointed to a difficult winter from the winter previous, and they gave an assurance to the committee and, through that, they gave an assurance to all Manitobans that there would–it was necessary to have that increase.
* (14:40)
We questioned that because there were others questioning that, certainly those who were more knowledgeable in the insurance business, Mr. Speaker, about whether or not a one-year variation on bad weather which caused a higher increase of claims was enough to have a significant increase in rates with MPI. And now we see, a year later, that they seem to not need the increase anymore, and there's going to be a reduction in many of the rates.
So I think there's a question among Manitobans' minds, and a legitimate one, about how the rates are being set and the variability of them, Mr. Speaker, and whether or not it is simply a reaction from year to year which causes uncertainty for the rates. And that is a problem.
Not to extend the debate too far, Mr. Speaker, but we do know that that same issue is relevant in Manitoba Hydro, the question of rates and how rates are being set. Now, in that case, of course, there isn't really variability. The issue in Manitoba Hydro is that the rates are continually going up and never going down, and the projections are that they're going to be going up for at least the next decade, as the corporation, even with the increases, sustains significant losses from 2018 and beyond. So that is a little bit of a different scenario but still within the ballpark, I think, because it still goes to the issue of rate predictability and how rates are set.
With Manitoba Public Insurance, I do think that there are legitimate questions about whether or not the forecast for rates is reliable, when you go from one year suggesting that you need a forever-time increase to the rates because of a one-time situation with the weather, to the next year saying, well, we're going to be reducing the rates because of favourable weather or at least favourable accident claims, Mr. Speaker; that does cause questions about predictability.
So we would certainly ask the minister, not in relation to this particular bill, but more generally, in terms of his responsibility of being responsible for the MPI act, to inquire about that and why it is that the predictability of rates seems to be so difficult within the corporation, causing that uncertainty for Manitobans as well, Mr. Speaker.
So I would leave those questions with the minister, having committed to him to move this committee–to committee today. We will, in fact, move it to committee today.
In terms of the specifics around caregivers and ensuring that individuals are given some assurance that, when they lose a caregiver through an accident, that there'll be some compensation to make up for that loss, Mr. Speaker, I think that that is appropriate. I know that these are difficult issues when you deal with trying to determine loss and determining value of a loss.
I remember, for many years, the Member of Parliament for St. James-Charleswood-Assiniboia was involved with a dispute regarding Manitoba Public Insurance and trying to determine his future earnings and what kind of indemnity he should receive at the time. For those–I know most members are familiar with his situation, Mr. Speaker, but he was involved in a very significant accident that caused him to be paralyzed from the neck down and he at the time was, I believe, a student, an engineering student. He was travelling up north, and, if my memory serves me correctly, he struck a moose. And, obviously, his future earnings–and this was before he had any indication that he was going to go into politics–his future earnings would have been significant as an engineer and in the occupation that he was planning to do, but it didn't–the act didn't contemplate his future earnings; it only really contemplated his earnings as a student, which were, of course, much more diminished than he would have as a professional engineer, which he was nearly completed or perhaps just had completed.
And so he brought that issue forward, and I think that there's been significant and positive changes to the act in terms of how compensation is–or future income is determined, Mr. Speaker, and looking forward now, it's not simply what the income is at that time, but it can be determined, I understand, for what the potential income is, based on a particular career stream. And I think that is important because it recognizes that an individual would not be within that particular situation they were in for the rest of their lives.
So this is, I think, not exactly akin to that, but it's also, I think, another change within the MPI system where we tried to recognize a deficiency, recognize a flaw, and see where there's something isn't working, Mr. Speaker, and how is it that we can go forward and make sure that it does work.
I'm a little disappointed, not in the act itself, but disappointed that it took two years, Mr. Speaker, for this to come forward. We were prepared, I think, even on the night of committee two years ago, when the presenter came forward and made his case, we were prepared to make an amendment, maybe not exactly at committee that night, because it's difficult sometimes to write up an amendment to a complex act on the floor, not impossible, but difficult. But we were prepared to see an amendment come back at report stage that would have addressed this issue and that it would have been in place for the past two years. And I think that that would have probably been an effective and efficient way to deal with it. For whatever reasons that the minister may want to speak about in committee, it took two years for this to come forward. I recognize he was not the minister at the time when the concern was raised at committee. It was his predecessor or a couple predecessors, I suppose, who heard that particular presentation. So I would hope that he might be able to explain because it's not an unimportant issue to why it is that this legislation took two years to come forward and how many of those individuals might have been affected that weren't protected by the legislation because it took them so long to bring it forward.
I know that the government has been trying to prioritize this bill and I understand that and I'm sympathetic to that but, you know, it is sometimes difficult to wonder how it is that something has become an emergency when two–over two years nothing was changed, Mr. Speaker. We've been in this Legislature not as often as I would like, and perhaps not as often as we will be in the future, but I do know that there's been ample opportunity for the government to have brought this legislation forward. It's not complex legislation. It's not difficult to draft. I don't think it's the–it's not the weightiest piece of legislation that we have before us in this session. It's nothing like the amendments of the family law act, which we look forward to debating perhaps not before the completion of this sitting of the House, because it's quite comprehensive and quite in-depth but it is–this particular piece of legislation could have been brought forward much more quickly, I would say, to help those who were impacted.
So we do look forward to seeing who will come forward to committee and who will maybe have suggestions again. Our committee process has been mentioned by members of all sides of the House including the independent member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard), that the committee process in Manitoba is both unique and instructive. At its best, it does bring forward good ideas, and this would be one example of an idea that came forward from a committee hearing, Mr. Speaker. At its worst, it can sometimes devolve into something that isn't quite as eloquent or isn't quite as instructive. But, regardless, we think that it is something that should always be looked at in its best possible light; it could be something that is something that can be improved upon and made stronger in the province of Manitoba.
So I'm looking forwarding to hearing those presentations at committee on this bill. We're prepared to see it go to committee. My understanding it'll probably come to committee sometime later this week, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to hearing the presentations when we're there.
Mr. Speaker: Is there any further debate on this matter? Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is debate and second readings, Bill 17, The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 26–The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: We'll now proceed to call Bill 26, under second readings, The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act.
Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Family Services): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education and advanced education, that Bill 26, The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Ms. Irvin-Ross: Mr. Speaker, it is truly a privilege to stand here before my honourable colleagues to speak to Bill 26, The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act.
Honourable members on both sides of this Chamber have acknowledged the problematic reality that some segments of the Manitoba population, through no fault of their own, are more susceptible to abuse, neglect and exploitation. For this reason, we can all agree that government has a moral responsibility to work diligently to ensure that vulnerable Manitobans receive the protection to which they are entitled.
Mr. Speaker, in 2013, we introduced the Adult Abuse Registry, the first of its kind in Canada to help protect this vulnerable population. The registry holds the protection of adults with intellectual disabilities and patients receiving care in health facilities, throughout the province, as its primary aim.
* (14:50)
The bill before us today will enhance the registry's ability to function as a protective mechanism by requiring the Adult Abuse Registry committee to proactively report the names of individuals referred for placement on the registry to employers and regulatory bodies. This will ultimately enable employers to make more informed and defensible decisions regarding who works in facilities and agencies providing care to patients and vulnerable adults.
The creation of the registry specifically relates to an incident in 2009 where two workers employed by a not-for-profit agency funded by the Community Living disABILITY Services program abandoned vulnerable persons in a vehicle while they attended a movie. Existing legislation at the time of this incident did not allow for the individuals to be charged.
Agency raised extremely important concerns that staff may leave one employer after concerns of abuse and neglect of vulnerable persons have been identified and go on to secure employment at another agency serving vulnerable adults. Government responded by establishing Canada's first Adult Abuse Registry and introducing important amendments to The Vulnerable Persons Living with a Mental Disability Act related to the abuse or neglect of vulnerable persons.
Specifically, the amendments to The Vulnerable Persons Living with a Mental Disability Act that were proclaimed and came into force on August 15th, 2011, included new offences for abusing or neglecting a vulnerable person, a duty for all persons to report the abuse and neglect of a vulnerable person, a duty for service providers and substitute decision makers to take all reasonable steps to protect vulnerable persons from abuse and neglect and an increase in the penalties for committing an offence under the vulnerable persons act. Considered together, this makes the protection of vulnerable persons a responsibility of all Manitobans.
The Adult Abuse Registry was created on January 15th, 2013, to record and track the identity of individuals found to have abused or neglected a vulnerable adult defined under the vulnerable persons act. Amendments to The Protection for Persons in Care Act and its regulation came into force on March 15th, 2013, expanding the scope of the registry to include not only vulnerable adults under the vulnerable persons act but also patients as defined under The Protection for Persons in Care Act. The Adult Abuse Registry Act was drafted in such a way that use of the registry could be expanded in the future to cover other vulnerable populations.
The registry committee investigates complaints and determines if the employee abused, neglected or exploited an individual. Law enforcement bodies are notified to determine whether charges should be laid. The registry is used extensively by employers throughout the province to screen potential employees or volunteers to ensure that individuals have–who have abused vulnerable persons and patients in the past are not able to gain employment caring for any vulnerable Manitobans in the future. It acts as a safeguard to prevent access to vulnerable adults and patients by known offenders. From its inception, the registry has conducted over 40,000 checks for potential employees and volunteers.
The Adult Abuse Registry Act as it was originally drafted did not provide the ability for the registry committee or others in the departments of Health, Healthy Living and Seniors or Family Services to advise employers or regulatory bodies that an individual has been placed on the registry other than if a specific request was made by the employer to the registry.
The bill puts the onus on the Adult Abuse Registry committee to proactively advise employers and regulatory bodies when they form an opinion that a person's name should be entered in the Adult Abuse Registry because they have been found to have abused or neglected a vulnerable adult or a patient in Manitoba. Before proclaiming the new legislation in effect, the committee will be advised and trained regarding their new reporting responsibilities.
By way of conclusion, I'd like to reiterate that Manitoba's legislation will effectively strengthen the protective capacity of Canada's first Adult Abuse Registry.
Thank you.
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): It's a pleasure to rise to put a few words on the record regarding The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act.
The amendments, we think, are a positive effort to ensure that those found responsible for the abuse or neglect of a person in care is held–is absolutely held accountable, and we're always onside when we're trying to protect those who are vulnerable and the elderly in particular.
In fact, the honourable member for–or the member for Emerson (Mr. Graydon) had a bill not too long ago on elder abuse registry, which, unfortunately, was talked out rather than dealt with, that we thought was a valuable addition to protection.
All persons deserve to be protected from abuse, and this is especially pertinent when we're talking about seniors and vulnerable persons. And there are many different kinds of vulnerable persons, as we have come to recognize, whether they are elderly or whether they are impacted by any one of a number of limitations, including mental-health issues, Mr. Speaker, and there–a number of them are in very vulnerable positions and are very subject to the care of their workers. And, certainly, it's important that workers be kept track of and make sure that there is no one in that field that is–has a history that leaves anyone particularly vulnerable when they're in the workplace–when they're subject to these workers.
And a central registry that would inform employers and regulatory bodies about any abuses or alleged abuses would be certainly valuable and I think is something that would be appreciated by a number of different groups that are out there that are working with these vulnerable people to make sure these amendments–make sure that employers and the regulatory bodies are aware of these abuses, because a number of the workers, of course, can–could belong to different regulatory bodies, depending on the nature of their employ, and take the necessary step to make sure that these vulnerable persons are not in the care of anyone who has a history of abuse or 'eglect.'
Employers and professional bodies whose employees care for vulnerable persons must be informed of abuses by their employer so they can intervene and prevent any further a 'usic.' And there is, in fact, a criminal responsibility to do that. If this isn't done, it would be very critical.
Manitobans, we believe, have–absolutely have to know, if someone–if they have someone in care, that this person is being looked after by people that are responsible and accountable for their actions. We hear, fairly frequently, from people either with elderly parents or relatives or vulnerable persons who, in fact, are more and more often are actually not even resident in the province, so it's very, very difficult for them to check on their seniors.
I recall a case where I got a call from a lady who's lived in Toronto, been there–had family down there, and so was not able to come back and check on elderly parents that were actually in my constituency, and her biggest concern, really, was: How do I keep track of what's going on? How do I know whether my mother is doing well or not doing well? You know, she didn't have the family collections left in the community.
We put her in touch with a group that–actually, their service that they provide in the community is actually visitation. They just come by to visit the elderly seniors to make sure that they're not lonely, that they have everything in place that they need, and it seemed to help a little bit and certainly gained her a number of years when she was able to stay in her own home.
Eventually, of course, as often is the case with seniors, their condition deteriorates to the point where they have to get into personal-care homes, and that did happen in this case. And, unfortunately, the personal-care home that this one–this lady was put in actually was not in the immediate community, and so it made it more difficult for the few people that were still in the community that could come to visit her, it made it more difficult for them, so that I suspect that she is still feeling rather lonely in that facility. And certainly that is sad, that they have to move out of the community that they have been in for so many years. But she was looked after, and there certainly was no issue of abuse.
But I think it's increasingly important, with as many people that come and go in these service agencies that do provide care for either elderly or vulnerable persons, it's that we keep track of the employees, especially in light that, as I said, many of them change fairly often and it is difficult to keep track of them all.
Certainly, many agencies have a long list, a good working relationship with their employees and a number of people that they have had in their employ for some time, and know all about them and they know their histories. But there is always a certain element of transition that goes on, and so it's useful to have a place where they can be reviewed and impacted, where we can keep track of what's going on and make sure that the interests of their loved ones living in care facilities are respected.
* (15:00)
And it is very important, because injuries do occur. We've started to see a little bit more, whether it's employees or sometimes even other residents that we've had issues with in terms of actions taken in the care facilities. And we don't have that problem solved either, whether they be fellow residents. We certainly have seen a few incidents occur in the past and some that have turned out very badly, but we know that there are many more out there, that there are a number of seniors that do have incidents, and I think that we need to work more aggressively to make sure that any type of abuse is reported, whether it occurs from an employee or whether it occurs from a fellow patient.
We don't have good alternatives in place if it's a fellow patient. We do have a few facilities, and certainly we saw in some reports recently that there should be a move amongst most senior-care facilities to provide a more secure area to make sure that there is–those patients that have dementia in one form or the other or Alzheimer's are being kept secure and safe and make sure that they can't have an impact on their fellow patients because it is certainly very unnerving for many people living in these facilities to be worried about the actions not only in this case of an employee but be worried about the actions of their fellow patients, which leaves them very exposed to what might happen in the future. And we have seen incidents in that, even to the point where there's been a few seniors facilities that actually had to bring in security to make sure that there was no impact on the residents. So that would certainly be unfortunate if we had to see that type of thing develop here in Manitoba.
Whether seniors or persons living with a disability, anyone that must be in the care, must feel secure at all times and certainly very unnerving for these people to be in positions where they're not really sure whether the worker that they're–that's looking after them, and often in very personal way, is someone that they can trust. And there's certainly a lot of turnover, as I said. We–one of the complaints we hear most often from home care–people receiving home care is, well, I wish I could have the same worker more and more often. Well–and I understand that workers certainly have to have time off, but there seems to be, in many cases, a very steady rotation of workers, and people are uncomfortable with new people and–'til they get to know them.
I'm sure that the workers are qualified to do their job, but they now would have an extra level of confidence that they actually had been reviewed and they had been checked against a registry to make sure that they actually have no history whatsoever in that area. So, ultimately, it's very empowering, I think, to have an adult abuse registry committee in place so Manitobans can feel safe and know that there are efforts in place to make sure that they are safe in their homes.
Fear and worry of abuse while in the care of a care provider can heighten stress, worsen a situation for many already vulnerable people, and, in particularly, those that have mental-health issues are often somewhat paranoid about people coming into their homes and providing the service. And so, certainly, familiarity, a level of confidence, whether that is the person themselves or the person responsible for their care, which may be an adult in the immediate vicinity, it may be someone who is half a country away and is not really feeling completely comfortable about what's going on and the services being provided. And that particularly applies true as many of these people that have returned home into the community from institutions in the past that–the going-home initiative–as their parents in many cases become very old and in some cases pass away, leaving them with really no one to talk to other than the people that come in as caregivers. So they are very vulnerable in that regard, and we want to make sure that these people are as protected as is–as possible, absolutely.
For many, there's real and justified fear as they age that they might be subject to abuse. And I know my colleague from Emerson who brought forward the elder abuse bill the other day was expressing a concern that we're seeing more and more. I know that there's very little information in terms of absolute numbers on what occurs in elder abuse, but you certainly do run into situations where there has been a history of that and there is concern about that, and I think it's absolutely important that we do–we make every effort to provide as much protection as possible for people that are in that situation, Mr. Speaker.
Thankfully, there are some steps we can take to 'provect' seniors and vulnerable persons, and monitoring any form of abuse and making sure that this is recorded is key element in these steps. Members on the–on this side of the House are very concerned about the well-being and protection of seniors, in particular, as we said. Last session, there was a proposed seniors rights at, which, sadly, government had chose not to move forward on. Perhaps they'll rethink their position for that following what we have here today, which would certainly work well with that type of bill.
We consider the protection of aging segments of our population to be of the utmost importance, and safety and security of aging people should not be understated. I think it's increasingly important and, as I said earlier, whether that is actual staff situations and, of course, staff can could and go, as I said, or whether it is other people that are in the facility, other residents in the facility, we need to make sure that we have something in place to help with that.
While disciplinary actions against those who abuse and neglect vulnerable people are meaningful, preventing this abuse in the first place is the first priority. Amendments put forward in this bill will empower the Adult Abuse Registry committee to take preventative actions against the repetition of abuse by employees in health-care facilities. And while this is meaningful, it–we must also ensure that measures taken to prevent the abuse in the first place and the neglect that may occur.
And we do hear, unfortunately, sad situations where neglect does occur, whether it's in the home and with scheduling from home care, or whether it's in facilities which are understaffed and have–are struggling to find enough, whether it's nurses or health-care aides, to fill the positions that are available. I dare say, in our situation in Portage, that many of the personal-care homes, if they did not have access to agency staff, would be in a very tough position. They, unfortunately, have to use agency staff quite a lot of the time to help keep the numbers up so that they actually have the right ratios there.
And there is a bit of a downside to that, too, Mr. Speaker, because many of the agency people are not that familiar with the residents and are not aware of particular needs of particular residents that should be serviced. And, you know, there are people in the community with the right type of structure, you would think, that we could accommodate them and get them back into the workplace helping with these people. Amendments put forward in this bill will empower the Adult Abuse Registry to take preventative measures against repetition of abuse by employees of health care, and certainly a central registry because–so that people cannot move from employee–employer to employer while continuing their work.
So this is meaningful. It is important that we do what we can to prevent. Education about abuse is critical for all people, especially for those seeking employment with vulnerable and aging populations. I think it's increasingly important that people understand the needs and the problem of the elderly or those with mental challenges. I think it's–their needs are fairly unique in many ways, and sometimes a little frustrating for employees because, especially as dementia sets in with a lot of the older people, you have the same conversation time and time again, and it can wear on some of the employees. They are very patient people. That's certainly an important part of that occupation, to have the patience to work with the elderly, and I think it's important that we continue to see more of that in the future.
Manitoba need–Manitobans really need to know that the rights of vulnerable people are protected and that there are bodies like the registry to whom they can raise concerns if they see any possible mistreatment, and I think that might be very useful. Certainly, we've all had people come forward and say, well, I don't believe so-and-so in a personal-care home, or so-and-so in a group home, is being well-looked-after. And the options available to us right now in terms of bringing complaints forward are fairly limited, so certainly there is always some–certainly, if they're in a personal-care home there is the health-care facility, and we do take complaints to them to make sure that they are justified in nature.
But, in group homes in particular, it is hard to bring forward a complaint because, very often, the resident of the group home is not in a position to make the complaint and explain the complaint properly, so certainly something like this would be very useful.
While these organizations are important for enforcing rules about abuse, all people have a responsibility to know signs of abuse and neglect and to know that the proper procedures for addressing these particular things.
* (15:10)
So, Mr. Speaker, it–I think it's very important that we continue to put in place bills that provide and amendments that provide protection, both to the seniors and other vulnerable people. There is certainly a number of them in the community that we're very concerned about their long-term care and whether or not they're getting all the services that they provide that are necessary and whether or not the workers being put in place have been properly vetted. As I said, there is certainly always a bit of turnover in these positions, and sometimes the workers are there on a fairly short-term basis, and they can be from anywhere at all. In fact, there has been, certainly, a number of new immigrants, for instance, that go to this population. And I think it's important that we properly vet them as much as possible to make sure that there is no opportunity and no instances of abuse, and if there are any, that appropriate actions are taken either by the agency that is responsible or the professional organization that is responsible for that worker to make sure that the–that they take a professional standard to this as much as possible and that we work together to make sure that this doesn't happen and that anyone out there that sees some form of abuse take place has some place to go to let this information be shared and to make sure that someone actually takes action on this.
So, with that said, Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to put a few words on record regarding these amendments. Sometimes I think they maybe don't go quite far enough, but at least it’s a good step in the right direction. So we continue to look forward to this and look forward to the committee process where we may hear a few ideas that are worthwhile putting in as amendments.
So thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): It gives me great pleasure to rise and put a few words on the record.
We as a society have an obligation to better protect seniors from any and all instances of elder abuse while establishing some basic rights that we, as Progressive Conservatives, feel all seniors deserve.
Seniors–all people in Manitoba deserve to age with dignity, and seniors, especially as they get older, end up with different situations, some with dementia, and so on, that are–it's difficult for them to comprehend what's happening to them and it's very difficult for them to communicate, and in some instances, they just don't speak at all.
Now, it wasn't that long ago that there was a bill put forward, and it was in the last session; it was put forward by my colleague from Spruce Woods, and he brought Bill 205–that was the seniors' bill of rights–The Seniors' Rights Act, and the NDP shamefully voted against that particular bill, Mr. Speaker. And, in order to give them another opportunity at doing the right thing and to protect the people that really need to be protected, the vulnerable people of Manitoba, there was a bill brought forward by myself, Bill 213, and it was brought forward just recently. And it outlined many of the same issues that were brought forward by Bill 205 and a number of the issues that were incorporated in this that we're speaking to today, but–Bill 26–but at the same time, it went further, and it dealt with the issues in a more direct way.
And so, in November of 2014, the Honourable Alice Wong, Minister of State (Seniors), reaffirmed in Winnipeg that age would now be considered an [inaudible] code when sentencing. This inclusion of age as a variable of sentencing was incorporated into Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Elder Abuse), and was granted royal assent on December 14th, 2012. It now creates seven aggravating factors. And, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that at this point, a lot of the employees, a lot of the people that are working with the seniors, are not aware of all of the seven aggravating factors. And so this here needs to be taken seriously in the training for those that are going to work with the seniors as well.
As the Criminal Code now states, a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relative aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender and without limiting generality of foregoing: evidence that the offence was motivated by biased, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disabilities, sexual orientation or any other similar factor. Mr. Speaker, that's quite a mouthful to go through, but for the people that are working with the seniors, it's imperative that they're trained to know all of this when they're dealing with them.
And so, to get into step with the federal government, we felt that it was necessary to draft a bill that would stress provincially what our federal counterparts have noted, that the elder abuse is real and must be confronted. And, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, it's not being confronted with the–by this NDP government. And so when we look at the stats by the university
And so, when we look at the stats by the University of Manitoba Centre on Aging, it is estimated by 2026 that the proportion of the population in Manitoba aged 65-plus will increase to 20 per cent. Due to these demographic trends, the unfortunate reality is that instances of elder abuse will increase. We would like to think it's not going to increase, but the more people that are in the system, more people that are working with this actually would indicate just the opposite of what we would like to see.
So we wanted to promote information sharing amongst relative authorities regarding instances of elder abuse, making the government better track the data. And, when I suggested the data needs to be better tracked, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest, at this point, it's not being tracked at all, so there's no way to measure whether you're getting better, you're staying the same or it's getting worse. And it's a shame, knowing full well that since 2012 that this wasn't being tracked and still today we don't have a tracking system. It's not in any of this Bill 26.
The NDP government had an opportunity to vote for Bill 213, send it to committee, find out what the people of Manitoba really wanted to say, but, no, they took that away from them. They took that away from them the same as they did–took away the right to vote on the referendum whether to raise a major tax in the province, Mr. Speaker. That's unfortunate that the interests of Manitobans is not being taken into consideration when the NDP government makes decisions.
Currently, the government of Manitoba is not tracking the data and, according to their website, based on extrapolation, 4 to 10 per cent of Canadian seniors are abused. In Manitoba this would amount to between 6,000 and 16,000. That's a huge credibility gap, Mr. Speaker. This is by their own numbers. This is by their figures. Wouldn't that raise red flags in most people's line? It certainly does on our side of the House. So every instance needs to be prevented and to the best of our abilities, but in order to do so, we must know what the true number really is.
Bill 213 would've established a seniors' bill of rights, and we're giving the NDP–we were giving them an opportunity to do the right thing and stand up for seniors, unlike they did in–when Bill 206 was introduced by my colleague. It would've also established an elder abuse team which will act as a dedicated advocacy body for seniors who feel as though they have been subject to abuse.
It would've also strengthened the whistle-blower protection measures whereby no action of proceeding may be brought against a person for reopening–reporting in good faith that a senior or a likely–or is likely to be a victim of elder abuse. At this point you don't have those types of protections, and we know that the whistle-blowers are many times abused themselves by this particular government, like the NDP are fine at throwing civil servants under the bus for the government's failures. We, as Progressive Conservatives, believe that these public servants deserve much better protection. It's also essential that we track–or that the government does not track or report instances but that needs to be done.
So, Mr. Speaker, there should be penalties and they should be defined for making false reports. A summary conviction with a fine of not more than $2,000 could have been instituted. For an individual found to be engaging in elder abuse, a summary conviction with a fine of not more than $2,000 will also be–would've been also instituted. And for corporations, a summary conviction of much larger could've and would've been instituted. So this was thrown out, thrown away, discarded by this NDP government. That's–that was what their feeling was towards the seniors of our province, not protection, no protection for them, just discard anything.
See, Bill 213 would've created the bill of rights for seniors and the NDP shamely voted against it. Not only this, but the NDP have shown no commitment to strengthening the whistle-blower act. Civil servants shouldn't be thrown under the bus.
* (15:20)
And, Mr. Speaker, the NDP have been deceiving seniors on many, many occasions, and I can name a couple of them that really, really stick out in the mind of the NDP–of the seniors, when the NDP went door to door knocking on the door and said, we will not raise taxes. They went door to door and knocked on the door and said, we will not raise the taxes. They went door to door and knocked on a door and said, we will not raise the PST at the same time they broadened the taxes to cover many things that the seniors need, that they have to have, and some of them are even in transportation. It doesn't seem like a lot of money but when you're on a fixed income such as the seniors are and the taxis get charged an extra 35 bucks for this, and the hairdresser ends up charging tax for hairdressing, and it goes on and on–home insurance, Mr. Speaker.
And then they falsely claim that the–they have reduced the school tax to seniors, it's–that's a false statement, Mr. Speaker. And so it goes on and on that they deceived seniors, so why would the seniors today–they deceived them as they were aging and when they become in the care of some facility, why would they think that they have rights under this government when the government takes their rights away at a continual basis? So we feel that seniors in Manitoba, they deserve to be protected.
Additionally, we believe that legislation must be crafted based on best practices and credible information and, Mr. Speaker, they don't have credible information, so how do you craft anything of–that will be credible.
So, our seniors, who have dedicated a full life to the province of Manitoba to make the province better, have been excluded. They have been excluded by this particular government in every way, shape and form, and I think it's high time that the NDP started to put their priorities in the right places and protect our seniors.
Thank you very much.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise just to speak very briefly on this legislation. I look forward to it going to committee. At this point it seems quite a reasonable and important addition to this bill, but I certainly am waiting to hear for comments at committee stage, and look forward to suggestions that may come forward there. Thank you.
Ms. Jennifer Howard, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): It gives me great pleasure today to stand up and put a few words on the record in regards to Bill 26, The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act.
Looking at the various amendments that are being brought forward, it is a positive effort. It looks like the amendments that are being brought forward to ensure that those found responsible for the abuse or neglect of a person in their care are being held accountable.
Also, after they form an opinion as to whether a person has abused or neglected an adult and whether the person's name should be entered into the Adult Abuse Registry, the committee must report its opinion to the person and to the official who referred the matter to the committee. This bill requires the committee to also report its opinion to the person's current or former employer, to his or her governing professional body if they had previously received a report after an investigation.
It seems, Mr.–or Madam Acting Speaker, that we know on this side of the House that all people deserve to be protected from abuse, and this is especially pertinent when discussing seniors and vulnerable people. Employers and professional bodies whose employers care for vulnerable people must be informed of abuses by their employees so that they can intervene and prevent further abuse. If the abuse or neglect of one person is prevented by these measures, then they are worthwhile.
I know, Ms.–Madam Acting Speaker, that my colleague, the member for Emerson (Mr. Graydon), had brought a bill recently to the House, Bill 213, The Seniors' Rights and Elder Abuse Protection Act. And it was disheartening to sit here in the House and to hear and see the government–NDP government talk this–talk his bill out. Basically his bill was put into place so that it would better protect seniors from any and all instances of elder abuse while establishing some basic rights that we, as Progressive Conservatives, feel that all vulnerable people, including–and absolutely feel that all seniors deserve as well.
It must be noted that I know that prior attempts to passing Bill 213, before that, it was also recognized as Bill 205, which was brought forward by the member from Spruce Woods. And so in my time here in the House, since 2011, we've seen it be brought forward a few times and with all the same–with the same results, Madam Acting Speaker. We've seen that the bill has been talked out or non‑supported and without really good words put on the record as to why.
I know that even as yourself are–do casework within your own constituency, you get quite a few phone calls, I'm sure, as I do, in respect to–with respect to seniors and their treatment in care, whether that being within personal-care homes or just in the general population. And I think we need to do absolutely everything in our power to make sure that those seniors are protected because as the member for Emerson had mentioned and the member for Portage as well, sometimes they are unable to speak or feel that it is appropriate to speak on their own behalf because sometimes they feel that as a vulnerable person, they don't want to be considered as a vulnerable person. They want to be able to stand up for themselves, speak out for themselves. But when something along these lines happen and occur, they need that additional support so that they can feel that they can come forward and talk about those various issues.
The bill brought forward today–when we talk about prevention, while disciplinary actions against those who abuse and neglect vulnerable people are meaningful, preventing abuse from happening in the first place is essential. The amendments put forward in this bill would empower the Adult Abuse Registry committee to take preventative actions against the repetition of abuse by employees of care facilities.
While this is meaningful, we must also ensure that measures are being taken to prevent abuse and neglect. I know, Madam Acting Speaker, that last week, the community of Beausejour and Brokenhead held the 55 Plus Games, and we had–I believe it was about 950, 960 adults 55 years of age and older participating in the various activities. And on the Tuesday of last week, I believe it was the 17th or the 16th, was the national elder abuse awareness day. And we showed up to the opening ceremonies of the 55 Plus Games and we had many volunteers throughout the community handing out stickers, bringing awareness to elder abuse and trying to get that education key point out there to the public to make sure that everyone is aware, even though I know in this day and age that it's interesting that we still have to bring awareness to some of those abusive situations. But the point is, I guess, we just have to continue educating the public on a daily basis because it just–sometimes, it just takes that repetition for it to sink in.
What was interesting is that it was just shortly before that that the member from Emerson brought that Bill 213 into the House and it was voted down and not allowed to pass to committee. And, as the member from Emerson put on the record today, there's been a few things that have not been allowed to proceed to committee and get the public's opinion on the bill. And if it was allowed to go to committee and the public had come out strongly against the bill that the member from Emerson brought forward, which was The Seniors' Rights and Elder Abuse Protection Act, then I could see where the NDP government or the government of today would vote against it and then eventually squash the bill, Madam Acting Speaker.
* (15:30)
But I would also think that from a committee meeting that those people would bring forward potential amendments, and then the government could bring amendments and we could hear what the community, the Manitobans, various Manitobans who would come to committee, what would they have to say, so that we could incorporate some of those amendments to strengthen the bill because we know that The Seniors' Rights and Elder Abuse Protection Act would have been very worthwhile for us to bring in as legislation. And that's why it's very interesting that the minister for Child and Family Services stands today and brings Bill 26 forward, talking about The Adult Abuse Registry Act, when I don't see anything coming in that's going to actually strengthen the ability to do some prevention, and that's key. I think within Manitoba we need to continue educating not only our adults and seniors, but we have to get all the way down to our kids. And so, basically, birth to death, Madam Acting Speaker, I think we need to continually educate our Manitobans and for that, not only Manitobans but people across this great country of ours, Canada, and expand that throughout the world so that people are fighting against elder abuse.
And what interests me also, Madam Acting Speaker, in regards to both bills, is the fact that when there is an abuse that occurs, and I know that you and I have had a couple–not debates, but small discussions, in regards to when we know of something that is going on, you know, to report it, and it's–what happens then if it is not reported? And there's people that bring this forward and say, well, you know what? I have reported it, but then it becomes a he-said-she-said type of situation, and it's a–those are the tricky parts, when you don't quite know whether they're charting it, or the people who are in charge of the care, whether it's, you know, a senior's own personal-care home, health facility, a school, a seniors facility–anything along those lines. Whose duty is it to record it? And once they do or do not have it recorded, if another member, a third party or fourth party, brings it forward, is it not then someone's obligation to look into the story and to investigate on the matter? I think that the–as the member from Portage la Prairie had mentioned earlier, we are in favour and we're looking forward to, you know, bringing these amendments forward on this bill, but the thing is that there's so much reaction that seems to be coming from this government. It's–there's not enough prevention. It's a lot of reactive–whether it's legislation–you know, I know that, you know, the member for–the Minister for Education's bringing forward a bill in regards to the Red River amendment act, and I guess we're going to be talking about that shortly but, again, it seems to be a little bit of a reactive as opposed to preventative.
And so I just wanted to stand up today and speak a little bit about this bill being brought forward. I know that some of my other colleagues would like to stand up and put a few words on the record. So, with that, Madam Acting Speaker, I do feel that the amendments–this is a good start, but there's many things that we can be doing as legislators, lawmakers in this great province of ours, that we can start maybe looking at some of the preventative side. And it just doesn't seem that this government's willing to be doing that. It just–to me it looks like they're far more in the business of reacting to situations, no matter what the professionals are stating, what the–what Manitobans are bringing forward as far as red flags. They seem to be just worried about the after-the-fact and, well, we'll move on it if something happened, you know, the what-if government. And I think that Manitobans are wanting a change, and I think they are going to be voting for change next spring.
So, with that, I appreciate your time and thank you for allowing me to put a few words on the record.
Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I'm pleased to rise and put a few comments on the record regarding Bill 26, The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act.
And, Madam Speaker, I–Madam Deputy Speaker, we know that far too often, especially as we see an aging population and an increased number of people living longer as a result of new technologies and new treatments, we're experiencing and sensing that there are many, many in our elderly community that, as they have found cures for different types of cancer and heart conditions, we are seeing many adults aging and becoming subject to Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia that do create a whole different set of issues. And I can recall, not all that many years ago, when our personal-care homes, our nursing homes, were filled with many patients that were level 1, level 2 and very few level 3 or level 4 individuals.
Madam Deputy Speaker, what we're seeing today is that those that would be panelled at a level 1 or a level 2 are remaining in the community with home-care supports or other kinds of supports, family supports, and only those that are severely in need of health care as they age are being panelled and entered into personal-care homes. And we all know that there are instances when, as the elderly suffer from dementia, we are seeing more and more aggressive behaviour on the parts of some of our seniors in our nursing homes. And that does present issues for some of the most vulnerable individuals that might be residents in that same nursing home. And we do hear far too often the stories of elderly being bullied in nursing homes by–sometimes by other patients. And we see also that those issues aren't necessarily dealt with to the satisfaction of families.
Now, I do know that when you've got a family and you've got family supports when you're in a personal-care home, there is someone that is looking out for you. But my fear is that there are many within our personal-care homes that don't necessarily have a family connection or family that visits them on a regular basis. And so those are sometimes the individuals that might fall through the cracks and might be subject to some sort of elder abuse that maybe no one is detecting or recognizing. And we do have to ensure that we are putting in place protections for those individuals and that the reporting of elder abuse is extremely important. Now, we're very hopeful that there aren't staff within those personal-care home facilities that are abusing the elderly, but, Madam Deputy Speaker, if that is the case or the instance, that issue needs to be dealt with and those individuals need to be reported and dealt with.
* (15:40)
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am not certain that this legislation is really going to protect all of those that are in need of protection in our elderly community. Many of us have many seniors living independently right in our own communities. I have several seniors apartment blocks, and I have some 55-plus facilities where–and assisted-living facilities in my community that serve the needs of many of our elderly, and they can age in a facility that does provide the needed services for them.
One thing I would like to comment on, though, is the lack of the personal-care-home beds for those that need the support. And I hear very often the government standing up and talking about all the wonderful things they've done in health care, and do you know, in the northeast quadrant of the city of Winnipeg, there hasn't been a personal-care-home bed added in the 16 years that the NDP government has been in power. Now, I do know, in the–what the government often calls the dark days of the '90s, there were 240 new personal-care-home beds built under the Conservative government in the late '90s. And there hasn't been one personal-care-home bed addition in the northeast quadrant of the city of Winnipeg since that time.
And that's shameful, Mr. Speaker, when–Madam Deputy Speaker, when you see the number of seniors that are requiring panelling, and they–these are not level 1 and level 2 seniors, because you have to be a level 3 or a level 4 in order to get panelled for a personal-care home. And we haven't seen the addition of one new personal-care-home bed under this government's watch. And I feel that that's shameful. It's time that the government started to address some of the issues and some of the needs of some of the most vulnerable seniors in our community.
And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I really don't know exactly how much this legislation is going to do. And when I look back to legislation that's been brought in by this government to protect children, and they brought in with great fanfare a piece of legislation that they were–said they were going to put the safety of children first and foremost in any decision that's made supporting children, well, we've seen time and time again how that isn't occurring. Was the safety of Tina Fontaine first and foremost in the minds of this government? I would say no. There are others in our child and family services system who have fallen through the cracks.
So legislation isn't worth anything, isn't worth the paper it's written on, unless it's followed and unless it's implemented. And I would be very, very interested in knowing, and in listening at committee to those that might come forward and make presentation on this legislation, on whether it is actually really going to do anything for the seniors that need protection from abuse.
And, you know, legislation is great, but as my colleagues have said, what about the prevention, the preventative measures that need to be put in place, the education of individuals that need to know and need to understand that there are issues that go along with people that are diagnosed with dementia? Some of those people can be very aggressive. And many, many seniors are afraid and are bullied, in fact, by some of those individuals. Are we putting in place enough education, enough preventative measures, so that those that might be the aggressors in those situations are segregated in some way or removed from those that might be abused as a result?
Madam Deputy Speaker, there are all kinds of issues that we need to look at and to deal with when we're dealing with an aging population. I'm getting there; I'm at a point where may not be too much longer before I'm going to need some supportive services from the community. I'm hopeful that I won't and that I'll be able to age in place gracefully. I don't think that–sometimes I almost believe that I have early-onset Alzheimer's, and people do remind me that if I'm thinking that and saying that, it's probably not happening. But, nonetheless, we don't have control over some of those things, but we do hope that we have control over our ability to age in a respectful climate, in a respectful atmosphere, where we're not subjected to abuse and violence.
And, Madam Deputy Speaker, if, in fact, we have legislation or laws that can in some way help to protect even one individual, I suppose that's one individual that has been well served by us in the Legislature.
So I'm looking forward to hearing at committee what members of the public have to say, and I believe that we may have some additional questions for government as a result of those presentations and as a result of looking into this legislation a bit further.
So, with those few comments, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will finish and look forward to this going to committee.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Any other speakers?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 26, The Adult Abuse Registry Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
(Continued)
Madam Deputy Speaker: Calling Bill 14, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Home Improvement Contracts). Debate is open.
Is the House ready for the question on this bill?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 14, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Home Improvement Contracts).
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
(Continued)
Bill 15–The Foreign Cultural Objects Immunity from Seizure Amendment Act
Madam Deputy Speaker: Now calling second reading of Bill 15, The Foreign Cultural Objects Immunity from Seizure Amendment Act.
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: It's a–I believe it's a second reading, so you have to make the motion. I believe this is the second reading. This is a second reading. We require a minister to move that motion, I believe.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Mr. Kostyshyn), on behalf of the minister of consumer affairs, culture–lots of things–culture, heritage, recreation, sport and other fun things, that Bill 15, The Foreign Cultural Objects Immunity from Seizure Amendment Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mr. Mackintosh: Yes, on behalf of the minister, I understand, Madam Speaker, that this legislation is very positive for the future of our institutions that hold cultural objects. They will ensure that there are necessary protections in place and there is assurances then, that when these items are held, that their liabilities are not unduly founded. So we look forward to this moving to committee and receiving the support of all members of this House.
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden): Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd like to put a few words today on the record about The Foreign Cultural Objects Immunity from Seizure Act.
This is a very simple bill. It aims to streamline the process by which culture–cultural and educational institutions in Manitoba can import foreign objects without fear of seizure. This bill should assist our many great cultural and educational institutions as they continue to import fascinating and educational cultural objects, Madam Deputy Speaker.
* (15:50)
Elimination of red tape, this would also eliminate that. It is essential that this bill is about reducing red tape for the exceptional cultural and educational organizations in Manitoba and from important foreign objects for use in the exhibits.
On this side of the House, we have been calling for many years for the NDP to begin reducing the governmental barrier for people and organizations who seek to provide meaningful services and opportunities in Manitoba, Madam Deputy Speaker. We might see this simple amendment as a small step in that direction, but there is still much more that we can do–be done to support our arts and culture industries as they endeavour to provide the best possible experience to their audiences.
Despite the barriers that still exist, Manitobans are well served by their many cultural education museums like, for instance, the Human Rights Museum that was opened last September. We should be so proud of this in the city of Winnipeg and for the province of Manitoba and for this country and the world that we actually have this museum that's hosted in our great city of Winnipeg. I've been there–I was fortunate to be there about three different times, occasions. One was for the grand opening, the second was for the–it was for a citizenship opening, and there was also one for, I guess, we–I was at a gala, and I was able to take a tour of it. And the amazing thing about this museum is going, just looking at the architecture but also the exhibits that come–that we need to house these artifacts that would come from other countries such as, you know, Germany, to many different parts of the world that are coming to this exhibit for the Human Rights Museum.
And one occasion when I was able to go to the very top of the building by steps–I climbed this, the whole building, and one of the employees that were working at the museum indicated to–that it's amazing how many people are coming into the museum from–people throughout the province, the country and the world. And they indicated how many people from different–from Europe had come to the museum, and this was just only in September–no, actually, a few months after the grand opening. So it is a–have given a great impact to our–to the city and to the province. And if we get these objects, and if we can get them done quicker, there's great opportunity for other museums to lend these artifacts to this province and to our museums in the city of Winnipeg and throughout the province of Manitoba.
One of the things when I was talking to–briefing on this bill was that by some of the museums that right now, you don't have to go through the whole procedure of trying to get the approval through going through different ministries; you just have to go through the one Minister of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection (Mr. Lemieux). And, again, that can bring a good streamline of getting the objects approved and quickly into our museums as quick as possible.
I'm hoping that this is an indication–if this is going to reduce some red tape, there could be more red tape reduced in other industries, too. This is going to be a good start. I was in business for over 20-some years, Madam Deputy Speaker, and one of the most frustrating–working with a lot of different businesses out there, I specialized in financial planning for business owners in–throughout the region of Arthur-Virden. And one of the big frustrations they always come up with is the red tape. There was one instance where I was talking to one of my colleagues who looked after a hotel that was a chain that was actually being built on our side of the province for the first time. This owner had built four or five different hotels on–in Saskatchewan, our neighbours to the west. And one of the biggest frustrations that this person had was the timing that–how much time it took to build this hotel. They were challenged by the weather, but the biggest thing that they were challenged by was red tape. The frustration of this owner indicated that, you know, it was cost almost a quarter of a million dollars more to build it in Manitoba versus Saskatchewan because of all the red tape and bureaucracy that he–the individual had to go through.
And, like with this one here, this is example of, you know, we're doing it for museums and we're doing it for non-profit organizations, but this government has to look at small businesses and big businesses in this province to eliminate some of the barriers that goes along with the red tape and the bureaucracy of this government. Many contractors–I've worked with many contractors over the years, too, and that was one of the biggest frustrations. I just had a number of them go into a tenders process with Manitoba Hydro, and the frustration when they came out was that we have no–I don't think we have a chance to even quote on this building because of the regulations and the–we know that it's going to go, probably go to a company in Winnipeg because of all the requirements that this government puts on contractors who are building for, let's say Manitoba Hydro, or other government buildings. And this is–when I've heard this, it was like, it was, basically, they wouldn't have to spend that time even tendering because they feel they're already disqualified from tendering for the process.
And like this–the member across–the Minister of MIT and EMO indicated, that on tendering process, again, it's interesting that they went through the formalities of a tendering, but the contractors knew that they would have no hope in heck to even get the contract. And when they kind of thought that, you know, I can probably build that same building, that addition on that building, for $600,000, but we know that it's probably going to be costing them about $1.2 million, almost double, because of the red tape and the requirements.
I also had been involved with the daycare centre in Arthur-Virden–Virden, Manitoba, called Funshine. Again, the frustration there is that we have 43 daycare spots in this town of Virden, but the fact is we need more. And when it came to the construction of this, getting tenders and looking at the preliminary of building this new building for Funshine, there was a concern that the requirements–and, again, they have to raise more money because just by the red tape and the requirements. I know it's important to have safe buildings for our children, but some of these requirements, based on the contractors, said this was ridiculous, of how much red tape there was.
And so, Mr. Speaker, we had a great opportunity to lessen that cost by getting rid of this red tape, and this building could be built already and housing many children of daycare, who parents need the daycares, the system so that they can continue their work. There's a lot of parents who right now are limited for job opportunities. Like right now, in Arthur-Virden, there's plenty of jobs out there, but there's not many people to fill them, or skilled work people to fill them because the fact is there is so much red tape that when it comes to this daycare centre, and now parents that are trained cannot go to work because they can't find proper daycare.
And so this is probably the start that, you know, if we can look at reducing red tape when it comes to museums, we can reduce red tape in other industries. Despite the barriers that still exist in Manitoba as well served by their many cultural and education museums, whether it's a major institution such as the Winnipeg Art Gallery or the Manitoba Museum, or smaller galleries such as Plug In or Artspace, organizations who curate exhibits, provide meaningful cultural experiences for many Manitobans, Madam Deputy Speaker, and, for a while, there were many of these organizations specialize in local and Canadian art, a focus that we are surely to support. Some of them have opportunities to import foreign worker–works from unique experiences.
Certainly, the most notable recent example would be the Olympus exhibit at the Winnipeg Art Gallery. This exhibit imported awe-inspiring historic works from the National Museums in Berlin, one of the only two North America galleries to have such an opportunity. The Olympus features over 160 pieces of Greco-Roman history dating back to the seventh century of BC. Included in this collection is–are vases, statues and jewellery, most of which are over 2,000 years old, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is truly amazing to see. For many Manitobans, this is a once‑in-a-lifetime opportunity, and we should be recognizing the great work by everyone at the WAG, including their many volunteers, who make this exhibit possible. The amendments put forward to this bill will fascinate the Winnipeg Art Gallery and others who wish to provide similar unique experiences on foreign culture in Manitoba by giving a clearer point of contact when it comes to protection of those items.
This process will be a benefit to the new Canadian museum of human rights, an institution in which the Manitobans can take great pride. The Canadian museum of human rights has, by its very nature, a significant international focus. The curators there are likely to create interest in importing foreign objects for exhibits, and we certainly encourage them to do so. It's encouraging to see some of the support of these hard-working institutions who provide Manitobans, as well as many visitors, the unique culture educational experiences.
* (16:00)
Again, like I said, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have seen so many people coming to this province, and especially the last number of weeks when we had the gay rights–gay pride week that we had in Winnipeg, and we also had FIFA, the women's soccer tournament that had a number of games here in Winnipeg because of the one, what do you call it, the–when it comes to divisions and being here in Winnipeg. And we were fortunate to have the US team playing here in Winnipeg because it attracted a lot of Americans to come up to the city of Winnipeg and showcase this beautiful province, this beautiful city and this beautiful building.
We have had a number of people who came into the building to take pictures and, again, it's–a lot of people say this is probably one of the best legislative buildings in all of North America. And we should be so proud to be MLAs in this building.
And I'm proud of myself to be elected with my colleague from–MLA from Morris, to be elected the same time, and I remember the–that day that being in the Winnipeg Free Press as two of us winning the by-election, the class of 2014. And we'll always remember that and, again, this is a great place, and we have a great team here on this side of the House, and it's an interesting team on that side of the House. And it's been a great experience to be part of this whole prospective of being an MLA in the days of this going forward into the next general election.
Again, we have, again, a showcase of many great places in the province of Manitoba, including Churchill and rural Manitoba and all the lakes and rivers that we have so been so proud of. I'm, again, I feel so proud of being part of the–growing up in the Assiniboine valley where we had some beautiful scenic views and–of the river system and some of the culture stuff that we have out there when it comes to museums, local museums.
One we have, I took–I was able to take a tour of the museum in Virden, Manitoba, old historic house that was built around the same time the house that we actually live in, again, a historical house in the town. The reason why we have a museum with brick building, we–Virden, Manitoba, was fortunate to have two brick factories in our province–in our town, and most of the old, established houses are brick, and it's–if anybody has had an opportunity to drive to Virden, they should go drive around the town because there's more brick houses than–per capita than any other place, I believe, in Manitoba right now because of two–the brick factories.
And the museum that is housed in the brick building is the museum of Virden, and I was able to take my nieces and nephews over the years to the museum, and it's just amazing how much artifacts that were actually in that museum from all the–that people donated over the years in the town of Virden, who other–they donated during an estate or people were just end up moving and they wanted–moving from an old house to a new house and they decided that they wanted to give away some of those antiques, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Again, we want to make sure that we can get those artifacts from other countries to come here so that people who come to the Assiniboine Park Zoo who want to take the exhibits–the Journey to Churchill and also when they want to take in the Human Rights Museum, like I said before, and go into The Forks, again, if we could get more and more people coming into this province and this city would be great. And it's unfortunately that this government right now hasn't really put a lot of money into our tourism and culture activities, and it is a shame because other provinces have done that, and just listening as being my critic portfolio, I've been going to a lot of different talks and seminars, and what I've really learned is that the opportunity that–for jobs and growth are with, really, with culture, with culture of–business.
When it comes to incorporating art with technology, I was told that–excuse me, Deputy Speaker–I was told that there's a great opportunity to build the economy based on technology in the art. And many young entrepreneurs are coming out of university having art degrees, art as a speciality, and easily using computer graphics now to build up their businesses, and there's a big opportunity, and I feel that our province is lagging behind the opportunities that other provinces have, such as Saskatchewan.
And we look at the State of Michigan where the major city of Detroit is situated, and the opportunity they have is that they put more money into the film industry and arts and culture, and they really believe that there's a big payback and it's been reviving the state and the city, and I really believe that we're missing out on all that opportunity for investment.
I know members across will always like jobs where there's actually maybe unions and–but with our–I believe that, you know, we believe in entrepreneurs, creating new opportunities for entrepreneurs in the arts and cultural field and that is where I think the biggest growth opportunity will be is for small businesses is in arts and culture. And I would really believe that anything we can do to create more culture to come to this province and this city, the more that we need to do because we see that opportunity on this side of the House, Madam Deputy Speaker, and this is one step to get rid of that red tape for both–for every industry out there that's out there that can bring more jobs to this economy and be able to give people opportunities.
I've been in business and some of the red tape that I had to deal with, it gets frustrating, and I'm on a project right now in business and I'm finding it's the most frustrating right now is that I talk to my business partner to see if we were ever going to do another project, and based on the red tape that we have right now in this province we probably wouldn't do anything more going forward here. But I believe that there is always hope and there's always hope that we change this government and create an environment that would give us opportunity for growth in our economies when it comes to all industries out there.
We want to make sure that daycares are built, but for safety and–but also at the same time it doesn't cost a quarter of a million dollars more than it should be with that side of the House being in power. I think a lot of this red tape and inspectors and all that sometimes it gets overdone and I believe that there's–the only reason that they do it is to create more civil servant jobs. I believe it's good to have great civil servant jobs but if we can allocate it to the–to build this economy in the private sector would be really good, and we want to see that happening, Madam Deputy Speaker.
And, going forward here, I would just want to–in recent decades we've been seeing a rise in prominence in global citizens and increasing young Manitobans who are talking advantage of opportunities to live and work globally. I know many people who have gone to other countries to work and we see that with the–especially with the Commonwealth countries. We have so many people going to Australia and there's so many Australians moving here and it's amazing how many of those different countries, when a person tends to move to these countries, they get married to a citizen there and they end up living there and vice versa. We have so many Australians who were born in Australia that live in Canada and we have a lot of Canadians who actually live in Australia and abroad, and we see that with other countries like New Zealand. We see that with the British Isles, and we also see that with Ireland and even France.
It's the opportunity that we have and the more we actually become more global and become globalization, the more opportunity that we have to be in touch with a lot of these different countries to show that we are a showcase in this province to be in a global market, to be competitive with the rest of the world, and this gives the opportunity to be known and recognized worldwide, that we are a place to be reckoned with, and that we are a province that has a lot of cultural exchanges and a lot of human rights–human resource when it comes to human brain power that we can export and import from different parts of the world, and the exchanges that we have with our–you know, we don't want to see a brain drain the way that this government is creating this red tape and stuff. I think we're going to see more of our youth going to other provinces and other countries to work because they don't see the opportunity because of the red tape that we have in this province. And this, again, will start the opportunity for us to create–reduce red tape and keep our youth or even attract other youth to this country.
* (16:10)
I remember something on CNN a few years ago. They indicated that Canada is actually working really hard to attract businesses, and the reason for that is they're opening up barriers. And we also–allowing our–the best of the best to come into this country to actually go to university or to create businesses in this community.
And, with our immigration policy, compared to the US, they said that it was Miami who actually had the highest concentration of non-born residents in their city, and in that–in this case, it was only about 30 per cent of residents in Miami who were born in this–in their country. But, in Toronto and Vancouver, over 50 per cent–it was almost like 60 per cent of the people that were in these cities were from other countries, and that is why Microsoft, knowing that the opportunity they had with employees and the talent around the world that–why it was located in Vancouver is because of the opportunity. And this was actually a report that was done on CNN a couple of years ago, and it shows that, by the exchanges of human talents and–
Madam Deputy Speaker: Sorry. The honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I hesitate to ask. I'm asking leave of the House to interrupt the member's speech just for a moment so that I might do House business, as there's a pre-arranged House rules discussion that's supposed to take place. So if I–I wonder if I might have leave of the House to interrupt the member's speech to make a few House announcements.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Does the member have leave to interrupt the member's speech–the member will have almost eight minutes remaining in his speech–to deal with House business? [Agreed]
* * *
Mr. Chomiak: I want to thank–thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I thank the members, particularly the member who speaks.
Mr. Speaker, would you canvass the House to see if there is agreement of the House not to call votes or quorum for the remainder of today's sitting?
Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House agreed that there will not be votes or quorum called for the remainder of today's sitting? [Agreed]
Mr. Chomiak: Could you please–after we conclude debate on the present bill, could you please call second reading, Bill 210.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Thank the honourable Government House Leader for that.
The honourable member for Arthur-Virden, to continue his remarks on–sorry, the honourable Government House Leader?
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, and finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd like to announce that the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development will meet on Wednesday, June 24th, at 6 p.m., to consider Bill 5, Bill 14, Bill 18, Bill 26 and Bill 206.
Madam Deputy Speaker: It's been announced that the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development will meet on Wednesday, June 24th, 2015, at 6 p.m., to consider Bill 5, Bill 14, Bill 18, Bill 26 and Bill 206. That's for the information of the House.
* * *
Madam Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Piwniuk), to continue his comments.
Mr. Piwniuk: Madam Deputy Speaker, I guess–to continue here, one thing is a truth and reconciliation at the National Research Centre in Winnipeg, at the U of M, is also an important feature that we have here in the city of Winnipeg that was just added with the whole aspect of rights and reconciliation for our First Nations people.
We also have the opportunity of how to display a lot of our First Nations artifacts, too, to individuals, so if we actually allow this to happen, Madam Deputy Speaker, then there's also the exchange that we can actually be sending some of our Aboriginal artwork. When it comes to Inuit, to our Metis population, there's a lot of unique cultural archives that we have, too, that we can actually lend to cities in Europe, such as London, Paris, Zurich, Milan, Rome. There's Athens, Greece, and we also have Poland–the cities of Warsaw, Poland, and Moscow, Russia. And many Chinese artifacts, too, there's a–it's a whole different culture in the southeast Asia when it comes to Beijing, China there, like with the different dynasties of different Chinese leaders that we have. There's such a great opportunity to bring those artifacts to our beautiful province of Manitoba and to the city of Winnipeg with all the museums that we have that we can do that exchange.
We also have Aboriginal art that comes from New Zealand with the Maori, and we also have the Aboriginals in Australia who have a lot of nice artwork, too, that we can be bringing to our beautiful province of Manitoba, again, to educate our youth and to educate everyone. You know, it's amazing; I have been fortunate to travel the world and see a lot of these different artifacts and different museums. I remember taking my kids on to this–first taking them before 9/11–three months before 9/11, and then taking my kids again in 2009, we went to New York City and we toured many different places in New York, and there were some major nice areas such as the Statue of Liberty. We went to Ellis Island, which is now a museum. We learnt that my wife's father–great-great-grandfather came through Ellis Island, first as a–to come to America, and then he and his family moved up to Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. And we, actually, were able to see his name that was displayed as–it was Winchester Gerrard [phonetic], I believe his name was, and John Winchester Gerrard [phonetic]–and he came through the US from Britain, and so that was a museum.
But what the most fascinating part about New York–we were not very far from Central Park, and what a beautiful place, Central Park. You know, my second passion is landscaping, and I was fascinated by the–Central Park, how it was all architecturally developed with bridges and roads and architecturally. Landscape, architecture was amazing in that park, Madam Deputy Speaker.
One of the things that were along the parks, I remember, was that there was about four or five different museums that we went to see. And we went to the 'guggenheimer' museum, which was fascinating. We went to the one that the–I forget what the museum was called, but it was the one that was featured on Night at the Museum and with all the exhibits. And my kids were fascinated by these museums, and it was so neat to see all these different artifacts in the city of New York.
And, again, this is the opportunity that we can bring some of those artifacts from the city of New York to the city of Winnipeg, and this bill will allow that to happen very quickly and streamline it faster, and we'll be able to get–be housed in our museums faster, and will it be able to educate our general public and especially our children. I think, right now, with the Roman–at the WAG–it is actually–they're incorporating Legos–that they're bringing Legos into the exhibit so that the kids actually can look at these artifacts but also play with Lego, and why not? If there are two–if parents can enjoy the art and their kids can play Legos, it’s a win-win for everyone, and plus also those children have the opportunity to be exposed to the museums at an early age.
And I–that's why I believe that when we went to New York City, I wanted to be–get sure my kids were exposed to the arts and culture of different places in the world and, you know, it was nice to see in the–one of the museums they also had dinosaur bones and some skeletons of dinosaurs, and, again, that was good–great for the kids. And, again, we want to learn–teach our kids different cultures in the world and the respect of different cultures. And, when it comes to the First Nations, to the Aboriginal population, you know, we–it's even nice to see this town of Virden. We're starting to–you know, it's amazing; people from all over the world are coming to live in the town of Virden because of the oil industry.
With a lot of skills that people have, they're coming into our area. And we have a Filipino population moving into the town of Virden. We also have the Jamaican population coming into the town of Virden and the Ukrainians. And it's kind of interesting. And British are buying farms, and what's interesting is some of those are our backgrounds–my wife and my backgrounds. And it's nice to be–that we represent a constituency that, you know, even in the town–such as places like the town of Virden has such a multicultural aspect to it. And it–I remember when my wife first moved to Virden, myself and my wife, and there was two families that were black in the families, and one thing my–everybody used to always ask my wife, so, when are you finishing–are you finished university? They thought my wife, Michelle, was one of their daughters.
* (16:20)
So it just shows now it's come a long ways and now we have so many different groups of people living in the town of Virden, and they also bring their cultural opportunities. And, again, by more education, more knowledge that people have about other cultures and artifacts that can be brought, and to–people understand the respect of each other is going to be so important to our province as we grow forward.
And we reconcile, and we reconcile not only just with the First Nations people, but with everybody. Everybody–a lot of people who have had oppression in different parts of the world are here. We have a lot of refugees from Sudan. We have a lot of refugees from Ethiopia. And they bring their cultures. And one day it would be nice to have some of those cultures come here back to Winnipeg so that these individuals can go to the museum. Those children from those generations of refugees can come to and look and have some pride of their own culture when it comes to bringing those artifacts into this museums here in the city of Winnipeg and around Manitoba.
And, Madam Speaker, on my conclusion, we look forward to committee and hearing from the arts and culture communities regarding the amendments put forward in this bill, and worthwhile efforts to assist as many great organizations who import and provide culture experiences for Manitobans, as well as encouragement for those educational and culture institutions that currently do not import foreign exhibits but are interested in doing so.
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Any other–the honourable Minister of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection.
Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection): Just wanted to put a couple of comments on the record that I certainly hope that the House supports this bill unanimously.
And I know the importance it means to the Museum for Human Rights, also a Manitoba Museum, also the art gallery and many other cultural institutions that really depend on bringing artifacts from other museums and other cultural entities from outside of our country, outside of our borders. But when those objects come to Manitoba, there's a real hope that these objects will be safe when they arrive here, and they will return the–in the same condition, and not have to worry about claims being put against them and so on by different groups or entities.
So, Madam Deputy Speaker, what I just want to comment on today is the fact that I believe that this is recognized by the opposition and others of cutting red tape, ensuring that the approval process is streamlined, to ensure that the artifacts and objects coming into our province are recognized for what they are and the importance they are to our institutions. And that for culture and heritage and tourism, and those industries that support good jobs and steady growth in our economy, and in a way tells the stories to the world about how important Manitoba is as well. Every dollar we spend in tourism results in about $170 returned and we certainly boast about 2,000 companies in Manitoba in the arts and cultural sector, creating an economy of about a billion and a half dollars every year.
So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I just want to say thank you to my critic and thank you to others for supporting this bill. And I know that our premier cultural institutions in Manitoba want to have world-class travelling exhibits come here, and by passing this bill and ensuring that those artifacts and objects are protected, is truly an important piece of allowing the Manitoba Museum, Manitoba Human Rights Museum as well as the WAG, for example–the Winnipeg Art Gallery–to ensure that they bring more of these exhibits into Manitoba and thereby also improving tourism, is truly important.
So I really appreciate the support we're getting from the opposition and others in this Chamber for this bill.
Thank you.
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to first of all start off my comments by saying congratulations. I don't think I've had the opportunity to speak and extend my congratulations to you in taking over the role of Deputy Speaker. And, having worked with you for many years, when you start out working as a support staff person here in the Legislature and also your duty as a MLA and then as minister, we know the kind of professionalism you bring to the Chair and we appreciate that very much and great to see you in that position.
And I do want to put a few records on the–a few comments on the record in regards to Bill 15. As we all appreciate, museums are very important to us in that it helps us understand what happened before we came here and before we were born or before we immigrated or however it is that we came to Manitoba.
I've had the opportunity to, obviously, visit the museums in my community and those of others, and there's one in particular, the Steinbach heritage village museum. They even have a prairie sod mud houses, and we had a tour through there years ago. And they explained how in the beginning if someone were to pass away during the winter and they hadn't thought of digging a grave ahead of time and the ground was so frozen, that they would actually take the individuals, wrap them in shrouds, tie them up in the rafters where they would basically freeze until spring would come and then they could bury the individuals.
And had company from Europe and we just must have looked so aghast, and it was one of those almost unbelievable stories like, really, that's actually what they did. And they were telling us, yes, because they couldn't put the body outside because the wild animals would get at it. It's just these unbelievable stories of the hardships that people went through to try and settle, and we know for a fact that, if it hadn't been from–for some of our First Nations communities intervening with some of the first settlers, they would've never have survived, and it was just out of the kindness and generosity of some of the First Nations that took pity on these first settlers that some of them actually did make it.
And you go to these museums and you realize this isn't ancient history. We're not talking about 6,000 years ago or 9,000 years ago; we're talking the last couple of 100 years, and just amazing what was done in that time frame. And often we have company come from Europe and, you know, they talk about their cities being 400 years or 600 years, celebrate a 1,000-year history, and we take them to museum, we talk about 100 years. But I point out to them that a city like Winnipeg grew that way in 140 years; you know, it didn’t take us 600 years to grow into a city.
So our history is very interesting. In fact, there's a harpsichord, I believe, at Lower Fort Garry, and it was brought here under such duress. It had to be brought in by canoe and by York boat and on horse and on ox cart and all the rest of it just to bring some music to the fort; there wasn't the kind of transportation that we have today. So I would–I always encourage individuals, you go to these museums and you always come away with a really good lesson on how tough things actually were.
In fact, they had a TV show a while ago where people would go out and pretend like they were settlers, and I can't remember the name of the TV show–
An Honourable Member: Pioneer Quest.
Mr. Schuler: Pioneer Quest. I thank the member for Gimli (Mr. Bjornson), and, in fact, one of those couples and I think there were two couples that would go out–it was way past Anola; it was in my constituency–and they had to go and they were given a certain amount of preserves and they had to sort of figure out how they were going to sustain themselves, and the one guy ended up getting an infection and they did have to lift him out of–airlift or transport him out of the site because if they hadn't, he would've died. He would've died of heart failure because he had gotten some kind of an infection, and it got into his lungs and was moving into his vital organs.
* (16:30)
So there again it just shows you how tough things are, so when you go to these beautiful museums we have, the Manitoba museum of history on Main Street, just an amazing place, and you go into Nonsuch. I will have to confess to this House that I struggle getting in–going into the Nonsuch because just walking into it there, I get claustrophobic. I can't imagine being on that ship for 20 or 25 days in stormy weather, and I guess if you had claustrophobia you died. That was the end of you because there was no way you were going to get off any other way, and you go and you look at these artifacts, and you go, like, that's just horrifying. And yet, people, and the human spirit–they endured and made it through, and that's just remarkable.
The latest museum, of course, is the Museum for Human Rights. I had the opportunity to be there at numerous occasions for different functions. I've had the opportunity to walk through, and what an amazing–amazing–telltale museum. And it really does focus on the darkest periods of our human existence; it's when we turn on each other, and not in a combat role, not in a soldier versus soldier or fight versus fight or anything like that. It's where we as human beings turn on each other simply because we're different, or believe something different, or look different or whatever the case may be. And I believe that that museum is one of the most unique ever in the history of this world, because it really does take on unbelievably sensitive topics and lays it out there. I believe it lays it out there in a proper fashion. It lays it out there for people to learn and, certainly, for students to come through. It's done in a very tasteful fashion. And I just think it is one of the most beautiful things we could've had in this city.
And, certainly, to Izzy Asper and his family who started it, and others, then, who got on board, and the kind of private funding it's gotten–and, again, we want to have artifacts come that might be in dispute. And we know that there are often artifacts that are disputed by different individuals. And we don't take a side, for instance, as a Canadian museum of human rights wouldn't take a side on that. But, if there is a dispute, that dispute is probably best wherever the artifact originates from and those who are disputing it; it's better they deal with it there. But, in the meantime, the artifact itself should still be available for the public to see and learn and students to have a look at it, and without getting in the middle of a dispute. And that's what this legislation is supposed to do and is supposed to rectify that we can get those items. And there are often disputes about them, and, you know, perhaps legitimate disputes. But we still want to see them coming to our museums and our institutions, that we can display them despite the kind of disputes that are surrounding them.
And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe it's important for us to continue to have a strong museum culture in Canada. Again, as said, we may not have the longest historical record, but we still have an important record. And it's important that we look at our past and we look at the past of humankind, what we've achieved. And we should also look at the kinds of things that aren't our finest moments, and that we study them and we look at them and do so in the framework that, hopefully, they never be repeated again. And, unfortunately, very shameful to us as humankind, we seem to be repeating it again and again, and we see it over and over again. And, even though sometimes it's smaller in numbers; others, it's greater in numbers. But still, it's unfortunate these things keep happening. But it's good that there's some place where they're being documented and where they're being put on display, that we walk through and we can say to each other, you know, we just have to stop this, we've got to prevent this from happening, we've got to learn from it, we've got to take it as an example, because these are just the lowest–lowest–times of what we have done to each other as human beings.
So I understand that this bill will also go to committee, and I know that all of us are going to be interested to hear what individuals are going to present. And we hope that there'll be strong presentation on it. And then, of course, it'll come back for third reading and, certainly, look forward to that debate. I know that there are other colleagues that would like to put a few words on the record, as we all should as legislators; that's why we're here.
So, with those few comments, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to speak on Bill 15.
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm pleased to rise to speak to this bill and an interesting little piece there. Long been a fan of museums. In fact, whenever I travel, I try to go to particular places that do have museums and spend some time in those. Obviously, Ottawa is a place that there are many of those important museums. I have also been down to the Texas school book repository, and interesting place it is there. It not only talks about what may have happened during the assassination, of course, but also the various conspiracy theories that you see across there.
And, of course, in Brandon, we have a few museums as well, and one that we visited recently was the Commonwealth Air Training Plan Museum, and remarkable place it is with the volunteers that have put so much effort into this particular museum and the work of maintaining not only the aircraft that they have on display there, but they actually maintain them in flying 'contition'–condition.
And I have been very fortunate–I–to have a flight in the Tiger Moth, and I recommend, if anybody has an opportunity to fly in a biplane–an open cockpit plane–that you take that up and–but remember to bring goggles. That was something that I did forget to bring, and I was interested–the pilot sits behind you and he's got the goggles on and a little bit of a face mask, and away you go and you're up in the front with the noise and the smoke and a few little bugs here and there and lots and lots and lots of wind. So–but a remarkable flight. And this quite a while ago that this happened before they rebuilt the Tiger Moth and not much to it, you know: some canvas, some wood, lots of glue, a few wires. And we were able to fly in these devices, so quite remarkable.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
I said to them afterwards, you know, you could probably charge just about anything to people to go up in flights in this, and they said, well, you know, right now insurance is about $50,000 a year, and we're not sure we would cover that. And I'm quite sure that they would be able to cover off the cost of the insurance with what they could charge. But, of course, what we're also finding there is, as we have the volunteers that are aging, the people that know how to fly these are aging as well. And remarkable time walking through the museum there talking to many of the volunteers.
Of course, they have also added another display there that is a memorial project that is quite striking when you drive up to the museum, and it is a tribute–a monument that is 300 feet long, a black granite wall with every name etched in it–over 19,000 individuals who fell during the Second World War in the air force, and not just pilots but others that were part of the air force: the support crews, the other individuals that worked–the mechanics, and so it's quite remarkable to walk along that long wall and to see the names and then to see the ages. Many of the ages were 18, 19, 20. They even had to go back into the record books to find the actual ages, because it was common during that time for someone who was not old enough to use their older brother's identification to get into the military, into the air force. So some of the people, obviously, on that wall are below the age of 18, even though they were thought to be over 18 when they joined, of course, under someone else's name just for the opportunity to go over to Europe and make sure that they could represent us over there and defend what we hold so dear here.
So, should you have the opportunity to get out to the museum there, I fully recommend it. Of course, there is a bronze statue that was struck there as well of an airman, and it is quite remarkable to walk along the mall–a tremendous display.
And, of course, they're looking for contributions, because there's been a lot of fundraising happening for this wall. There's not a lot of support throughout Canada and the province for particular governments that have a–have had challenges in how to support museums, of course, so fundraising–private fundraising and financing has been an important part of this facility.
* (16:40)
And, touring through the museum, of course, you see the planes, as I've said, that still fly, and those are such as a Fleet Finch, a Tiger Moth that I mentioned, a Stinson, the Cornell, the Harvard. And this summer they will be having a bit of a history‑takes-flight session out there, where I know that there are some bombers coming across the country, and I know they'll be landing here in Winnipeg as well.
But they will have a B-17 and a B-25 bomber there that you can tour inside. I don't believe you'd be able to fly in them this time. I think that that might be something you'd have to look at in Winnipeg, and see if they–you'd be able to fly in them. But, nonetheless, they'll be on July 11th that they will be having those two bombers in Brandon, along with the Commonwealth Air Training Plan Museum with all of their yellow–bright yellow airplanes that you can go and you can observe, and some of them, I'm sure, will be flying. And it's quite remarkable to listen to them.
More interesting than ever, though, to listen, Mr. Speaker, to the people that have put them back together and the knowledge and the ability and the love and the time that it takes to do so, because, obviously, this is not something that you just learn overnight. Many of these people were part of this organization when the training took place, and they learned on the fly, as such–no pun intended, but they did, indeed, learn very quickly as they maintained these aircraft for the museum–well, for the flight school that soon–that became the museum.
Indeed, when we were out there meeting with individuals, they did say that many of the people that came in to train in this museum–or, sorry, in the air training plan, the first piece of equipment that they actually had control of themselves was an airplane. They may have never ridden a bicycle, they may have never driven a car or a tractor or anything else, and the first actual physical device that they were given control of would have been one of these airplanes. And could you imagine, at the age of 17, 18, 19, to be told, okay, climb into the cockpit and here's what you have to do, and away we go, and now you are in control of this major piece of equipment that you can, of course, live and die by. And, of course, many of them, unfortunately, did have accidents as they trained, and some of those accidents were, of course, very unforgiving. So we did have a number of individuals that were killed during training as well as during the wars, and they are all memorialized on this particular wall.
So quite a remarkable part of our history that is perhaps not very well known, Mr. Speaker. But I do encourage everybody to stop and take a look as you're driving by and, indeed, to donate, if you feel so inclined, because that's one of the ways that these museums raise funding. So it's quite the remarkable place to be there, and I would definitely encourage everyone to do so.
So, if you're travelling by Brandon on the Trans‑Canada Highway, it's a little turn just north, a quarter mile or so into the airport, and quite something when you drive up there to see it. If you happen to be very fortunate that Mr. Archie Londry is around when you arrive–I don't know that Archie would ever run out of stories–but he has, certainly, a number of stories that he can tell you about his time there and the love and the dedication that has gone into the creation of this museum and how much they have depended on the community and how much they still depend on the community for fundraising and making sure that they have adequate funds available.
We've been very fortunate, my wife and I, to attend some of their events. And I recently attended a memories dance with them, and I've spoken about that particular event here previously, Mr. Speaker, where it was a bit of a surprise to us. There were no ranking active military at the dance, and I was actually the only elected politician there, and I would have been senior in any case. But they were all looking at us when the music started, and then someone leaned over and said, by the way, the ranking or the most senior elected official is the one that's supposed to start the dance. So it was fortunate that my wife and I did take some dancing lessons and were able to remember a few of them, but others were on the dance floor with us to make sure that we didn't feel too uncomfortable. So we did a little bit of that, and it's quite something to engage with all these people and see that–the dedication that they have to an organization of this nature. So quite remarkable that we have museums of this nature in Manitoba.
I know there are many others around and when we have objects that are coming on display, this museum does sometimes get objects come from other areas that are on display at certain times, as there are many of the museums here. And so I guess what we see in this bill is that should something come through here that it might be in dispute in another area, that we're protecting it from seizure here.
And I'm not sure if you've ever seen the film or read the book about Monuments Men, Mr. Speaker. It was, to me, quite a remarkable film, and talked about this many seizures of many artworks by the German military during–towards the end of the Second World War. And I'm sure there are parts of the film that are perhaps elaborated upon, but others, of course, that are true.
And it would have been quite extreme to see all of that artwork lost or damaged, and much of it was. There was much that was destroyed as the Allied troops moved across Europe, and the German military's instructions were to destroy the artwork, so, unfortunately, some of it was. Some of the artwork, of course, was seized from families, especially Jewish families or other families that were persecuted during the Second World War and shipped off to concentration camps.
And so that artwork has–we've seen many times in the media recently and not so recently, the lawsuits from surviving members of those families to try to get their artwork back. And some of that has been very successful. I'm sure it's quite difficult to determine where it–where that artwork originated from, who originally belonged–it belonged to, the provenance as such, and to make sure that it's not a frivolous lawsuit but indeed, that the correct work is returned to the correct family. And I know there's a lot of work around the world done in that regard, Mr. Speaker.
So I guess this is an area that–should some of that artwork be passing through Manitoba, it may be at risk, and as I read this particular bill, it tries to make sure that it won't be seized while it's coming through Manitoba. We can assist, I'm sure, in certain areas of those particular lawsuits, but it's not something that you want to see as an opportunity for individuals that have artwork coming into jurisdictions that may not be regulated in this regard.
So quite something when we see all the displays that do come through Manitoba. And I know, going back to the air training plan museum, they talked about how they find some of their displays. They'll get calls from perhaps a farm, and they'll say, you know, we've got this old airframe out here; perhaps you want to come and take a look. And they have gone out to farms and restored and recovered some of the old airframes.
Because what happened after the war, this was all surplus equipment, and it was an opportunity for farmers and others to gain an access to certain things. Wiring was in short supply–electrical wiring–so all the aircraft had wiring that they could pull out and use part of it to electrify a farm, which was quite remarkable in those days. Other things that would be contained in an airplane would, of course, be oil. And certainly oil, during that portion, just after the war years, was in short supply. And, of course, in Canada we have this thing called winter that does come around once a year even though we seem to forget it. And often the airplanes had antifreeze as well, and that was something that would be quite useful in the farm to make sure that the tractors could run during the winter.
So all of those and many more were stripped from these planes over the years, and what was left, perhaps, was the frame, the fuselage that you would see, and what a tremendous place to have as a structure to play in, as children, as often used at. Sometimes it was to house livestock.
* (16:50)
So a variety of uses for this aircraft after the war, and then we find them. Sometimes the museum does get calls to come and take a look at them and see if it's something that they may want to pick up, and they often do and move it into the museum. Because when they do reconstruct planes–obviously these parts aren't made any more–and they are able to construct one intact plane out of the many parts that they have from the several different remnants that they get in there. And they–we have been fortunate in many regards to, as I've–they've put them together to actually make them work, where the engines will be torn apart and restored so that they're actually able to function. Quite something, if you could think of some of these planes, Mr. Speaker, where they've been pulled out of a pasture where they've been sitting for some 30, 40, 50 years and restored to the point where someone is actually going to get in that plane, start it up and fly it.
So, if you can think of the youth that were part of this training plan, that were given the controls of the aircraft with, I'm sure there was much trepidation as they had their maiden flights. I'm sure quite the same as it's the second maiden flight of some of these aircraft once they've been restored and to make sure that everything was put 'toruther'–together correctly, and everything's going to work, and then you have the pilot that's going to take that on its new second maiden flight and making sure that not only that it takes off, in fact, but, you know, it's the landing part that we want to make sure that it returns intact and can be restored and returned to the museum in good shape and perhaps do that again. So it's quite something and remarkable, I think, when you see those.
The Tiger Moth that I spoke of is one of the few planes that doesn't have a wheel in the back. It has two wheels in the front and then it has a drag in the back, so it has to take off and land on grass. And there are runways, of course, around the Brandon airport that that is what they were designed for; there are grass runways, and so they are maintained. But it's not something you want to land on a concrete runway on because you'd pretty quickly have a canvas fire around your tail, I would think–not a great thing to happen. But it's remarkable takeoff on a grass runway and then to come back in and land again on that grass, not necessarily the smoothest.
But, you know, when you're up in the air in a biplane, in the open air, it pretty much feels like you're floating, Mr. Speaker, and a lot of wind noise and other things around you, as I mentioned, but they don't fly very fast and they have lots of wings to support them up there with the two–the upper and lower wings. So it doesn't need a tremendous, high-powered engine to drive it through the air, but it's able to do so and certainly a memorable thing for me, and I highly recommend if anybody ever has an opportunity, not just for that one but for some of these older planes.
But I'm sure there are people that have trepidations about flying, and that's maybe not the best place to work it out if you're afraid of flying because you are belted in, but–and we didn't do any flips or spins because what they do have with these older planes is that, as you do a roll, they do have a problem because the oil will go to the wrong part of the engine and then it doesn't run anymore, and that's usually not a very good thing for the plane. So, you know–but those are all things they worked on during their training.
And I do remember discussing some of their training with them, and there was a–there's a bit of a myth in Clear Lake that there's a steam engine at the bottom of the lake, a traction engine, one of the ones that you see at the Threshermen's Reunion, because there was a lot of–that over time they would do quite a bit of tree cutting there and there was even a place where they used to mill the wood. So what would happen is when the lake is iced over, the shortest route was across the lake. So the traction engines would cross the lake, you know, with the–pulling a sled with wood on it, and sometimes, apparently, these went through. So I've heard about four or five different rumours where those traction engines are located in the lake, and, of course, the lake is quite deep, 80 to 90 feet in places, and quite dark. So it's not something you could easily go down and find.
But there was a rumour at one time that this was part of the navigator training, that the navigators would take off–the pilot would take off with a navigator in Brandon, and they would have to do a triangulation, of course. They would fly so far for so many–at certain speed for so long and they'd get to a certain point, and if they looked down, then they were supposed to see a landmark that they could report on their flight status, and then would turn so many degrees and fly over another area. And one of the rumours was that they would fly over Clear Lake, and if they're in the right place, if they tilted the wings and tipped over, they could actually see the steam engine at the bottom. But the pilots and navigators tell me that's not true, and it would be quite remarkable, wouldn't it, if you were that good, especially at that age that you could actually find something that close. But it is one of those urban myths that we have as part of this, Mr. Speaker, so it's quite something when you go in there and listen to the tales.
There is also, I think, one of the more remarkable areas of the museum is the chapel, and I've had a few of my colleagues here remark that when they've been in that chapel, it's quite striking when you go in there and see the telegrams that mothers received from the war effort when their son was killed or, in some cases, their daughter; pretty sparse words in many of those telegrams. And the original telegrams are in the chapel that you saw, that the family would've received from the war office, talking about the death of their son or daughter in the war, and then an often, a second–or the first telegram, of course, they'd often get was that, you know, the private or whatever was declared missing, and often, a couple of weeks later, there would be another telegram coming in that they had been declared dead.
So quite striking to receive those, I'm sure, Mr. Speaker. But even to see the actual telegrams in the chapel is a remarkable piece of display, and lots of areas there where you can see the names of the individuals that did go through this program. There was even a movie, For the Moment, made of that particular program a few years ago with an actor. Russell Crowe came through Brandon when he was quite young and perhaps not so much a star as he is now, but they did use many of the aircraft from this museum in that particular film.
So that's something that we can, I guess, celebrate and know that it's well known. And this particular act, I'm sure, as we move it along, will make sure that should a display museum such as this have some more displays come through, that they are lent, like, for instance, these two bombers that are going to come, the B17 and the B25, that they are protected by seizure, because you never know what follows these particular displays, Mr. Speaker.
So, with that, I'm sure there's others that may wish to speak to that–this particular bill.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the next member to speak, I want to draw the attention of honourable members to the fact that, as we have been doing for some time, recognizing our pages whose last day it would be. And today, of course, it is the last day for Lara Penner-Goeke, one of our pages, and, of course, Lara's in grade 12, at the Westgate Mennonite Collegiate, with a grade average of 94 per cent. And Lara is going to attend the Canadian Mennonite University, in the fall, and take a bachelor of arts program and not sure about a future career at this point. But she enjoys playing soccer and playing the piano; in fact, she is a grade 8 piano player, so she's quite skilled. And I'd like to wish Lara all the best in her future career opportunities.
Thank you very much for your service to the Assembly. Thank you for your service to the members of the Assembly.
Now is there an honourable member that wishes to speak to this matter? Are we ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 15, The Foreign Cultural Objects Immunity from Seizure Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Mr. Speaker: Now proceed to call–the honourable member for Midland.
Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland): Is there leave of the Assembly to call it 5 p.m.?
Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable member.
Is it the leave of the House to call it 5 p.m.? [Agreed]
The hour being 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.
CORRIGENDUM
On June 18, 2015, page 2007, first column, fourth paragraph, should have read:
The Premier also delivered a concerning message in the Legislature March 20, 2014, when he said it wasn't necessary for the Auditor General to investigate the 30-year exclusive licence to operate Manitoba's property register that today's NDP government sole-sourced to Ontario's Teranet.