LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Friday, November 27,
1992
The House
met at 10 a.m.
PRAYERS
INTRODUCTION OF NEW
MEMBERS
Mr. Speaker: I am
pleased to inform the Assembly that the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly has received
from the Chief Electoral Officer a notice respecting the election of Mr. Brian
Pallister and Ms. Avis Gray as members for the constituencies of
I hereby table the notice respecting these elections.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to
you Mr. Brian Pallister, member for the Electoral Division of
Mr. Speaker: On
behalf of all honourable members, I wish to welcome you to the Legislative
Assembly of Manitoba and to wish you well in your parliamentary career.
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present Ms.
Avis Gray for the Electoral Division of Crescentwood, who has taken the oath
and signed the roll and now claims the right to take her seat.
Mr. Speaker: On
behalf of all honourable members, I wish to welcome you to the Legislative
Assembly of Manitoba and to wish you well in your parliamentary career.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Elizabeth Touchette, Karen Jonsson, Wanda Kellerman and others requesting the
government of
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Economic Growth
Government Strategy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, in every coffee shop, at every
farm kitchen table, at every plant, Manitobans are asking us about the length
of this recession, the brutality of this recession, asking us to deal with the
challenges of this recession, and I am talking about what this recession is
meaning for themselves, for their families, for their relatives and for their
friends.
Almost everyone we listened to knows of somebody that has
been either laid off or knows of somebody that is fearing a layoff in the next
couple of months.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Speech from the Throne, the
word "recession" was notably missing from the government's message to
the people of
I would like to ask the Premier: In light of the fact that the issue of the
recession is not acknowledged in the Speech from the Throne, does the Premier
believe we are still in a recession, or does the Premier believe as chair of
the economic committee of the cabinet that we are out of the recession?
*
(1005)
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I thank the Leader of the
Opposition for his question.
Indeed, as I have acknowledged in many fora on many occasions
in the past while, certainly the economy and the difficult challenges that we
face not only as a province but as a nation and collectively as a world, the
challenges remain.
It does not matter where you go in this country and it
does not matter where you go in this world, there are economies that heretofore
had been riding high with year-after-year growth of 4 and 5 percent or greater
that are now being brought down to very, very modest levels of growth, if at
all. That is true of
What is happening, of course, is not just a recession
that occurred in previous years but a restructuring that is taking place
worldwide in which people are changing from a production economy to a different
economy based on new technology, information age and all of those things.
So indeed we continue to face challenges, and that is
what the throne speech is all about, how we deal with those challenges and turn
them into opportunities by recognizing the realities of the restructuring that
is taking place; that is what the agenda is.
That is what we have proposed to Manitobans, and that is why we suggest
that we learn from the lessons around us and we do not just simply look for the
old solutions and we do not just simply deal with it in terms of the way in
which we have dealt with recessions or downturns in the economy in the
past. We have to recognize what else is
happening out there.
Mr. Doer: Mr.
Speaker, the Premier did not answer the question. The Premier did not answer
the question of whether he still believes this province is in a recession or
whether it is out of a recession.
In 1991, he mentioned the recession and acknowledged the
recession was in existence in this province in two separate Speeches from the
Throne.
In 1992, the Speech from the Throne fails to mention the
recession. How can you deal with the
economic challenges that
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier, in light of
the fact that the government is sending out letters to agencies, schools,
hospitals, all areas that deal directly with the provincial government, that
state, and I quote, we are faced with budgetary decisions in 1993 and 1994 that
make past challenges pale by a comparison, would the Premier not now
acknowledge that we are indeed in a recession, and will his solution of
cutbacks and more unemployment help us get out of the recession that we are in?
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, the reality is that you cannot sort of tie with a ribbon and paint
into a little one‑word definition what is happening in the world today.
I know that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer)
cannot get by and needs to have a quick hit slogan for the media, and this is
not a time for sloganeering. This is a
time for trying to understand what is happening in the world around us. There is a restructuring taking place in
economies that is different from anything that we have experienced in the past,
that is different from the simple analysis of, it is a recession.
It goes beyond that.
His colleagues who are in government, New Democratic colleagues,
recognize that. Mr. Rae is referring to
things such as downturns, restructuring, things of this nature, because we are
looking for ways in which we can describe to people the fundamental changes
that are taking place in the economy and the need for us to look at solutions
in a different way.
*
(1010)
That is what the throne speech is all about‑‑a
new way of looking at these things that are happening and looking for
solutions. Not looking for just simple
one‑word answers, because there are not any simple answers. If there were, the Leader of the Opposition
would have those answers, but we do not have them, Mr. Speaker, and so we have
to look at it in a much bigger picture.
We have to look at it in terms of how we respond to the restructuring,
take advantage of the opportunities that are created and build a stronger
economy by understanding what we are facing.
Employment Creation
Strategy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, why do we not try an action plan
to create jobs and maintain jobs in this province instead of the hollow
rhetoric of the Premier?
In 1990 this Premier (Mr. Filmon) came out with a Speech
from the Throne that predicted that
In 1991 when his ministers came in and hacked and slashed
and laid people off and created thousands of unemployed, why our 1991 growth
rate as coming in this fall in October, the final numbers show that
I would ask the Premier, how many layoffs and how many
more people are going to be unemployed because of his direct action in the
provincial government of
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that
because of the actions of this government, the Conference Board of
In addition, they report that our unemployment rate is
the second best in the country, second lowest in the country, the unemployment
rate.
In addition, they report that in the last two months
11,000 more people are working in
In addition, Statistics Canada reports that capital
investment in
In addition to that, they say that manufacturing capital
investment will be increasing at the highest level of any province in the
country.
In addition to that, they say that manufacturing
shipments for the first nine months of this year are up at the highest level of
any province in the country.
In addition to that, they say that manufacturing shipments
for the first nine months of this year are up at the highest level of any
province in the country.
Those are the things that are happening as a result of
the measures that we have taken to keep taxes down, to build our economy and to
ensure that there are incentives for investment and growth and job creation in
the long term, Mr. Speaker.
Education System
Budget Reduction Targets
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Education.
The government has offloaded millions of dollars to
school boards, which has resulted in huge property tax increases and the loss
of hundreds of teaching jobs throughout
Since the government on November 19 has told school
boards to expect more of the same‑‑in other words, a freeze‑‑how
many more teaching jobs and programs does the minister expect will be lost to
Manitoba children in the year coming up?
*
(1015)
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, one thing that school divisions
have asked of this government is to make sure that they are continually
informed about the fiscal position of this province so that they can make their
plans very well and with enough time.
The letter was to meet the request of school boards, to
provide them with the assistance so that they could do their planning in the
most effective way for the children of
Mr. Chomiak: Mr.
Speaker, since the school boards must present their budgets in several weeks,
will the minister advise this House whether the $17‑million cut will come
under the education funding formula that has already been revised three or four
times since the government introduced it last year?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.
Speaker, the member has obviously not understood any of the message that has
been sent out to the school divisions and to Manitobans.
First of all, the number which has been rumoured is not a
number which is to look at the new budget.
What we have done through that letter is to advise school divisions of
the fiscal position of this province to make sure that in the planning of their
budget they are very well aware of the position and they have enough lead time
to do the work.
Mr. Chomiak: My final
supplementary to the minister is: Has
the minister also sent this same letter talking about the fiscal situation of
the government and no increases to schools like
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.
Speaker, the letter which was sent to advise school divisions was sent to the
independent schools in
Economic Growth
Government Strategy
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier.
The Premier a few minutes ago said you cannot come up
with a one‑word answer. You cannot
use buzzwords. He said we cannot deal
with the old solutions, I think was the actual phrase that he used. Yet, in his own Speech from the Throne, in
nine separate places he uses the word "innovate" or
"innovation."
You know, using the word, Mr. Speaker, does not make it
happen. Unfortunately, when you look it
up in the dictionary, that word comes out with a definition of, introduction of
something new. It says that it means
that you must effect change. It says
that you have to have a new method or a device.
Will the Premier of this province tell the people of
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Well, Mr. Speaker, the ideas that we have are
new when you compare them to Liberal and New Democratic ideas, because the
Liberal and New Democratic ideas are, of course, to spend more and tax more.
Governments across this country that have tried that have
failed. Those are the new ideas that the
Liberals and New Democrats want to introduce to this House.
Mr. Speaker, this government continues to build a better
base for economic development, for innovation, for investment, the Economic Innovation
and Technology Council that had a very [interjection] The Leader of the third
party obviously does not want to hear the answer. She has demonstrated to us in the past the
lack of answers that she has. That is
why she is in the position she is.
Provincial Comparisons
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): We have heard about the innovation council in
Speeches from the Throne in 1988, in 1989, in 1991, in 1992. We have not seen it do anything yet, and that
is the tragedy.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier likes to talk about our economic
position. Can he explain why his own
Bureau of Statistics shows that
*
(1020)
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): You know, the Economic Innovation and
Technology Council held a major one‑day forum earlier this year, about
four weeks ago, and this Leader of the third party refused to attend. She was too busy, did not attend, did not
find it interesting or important enough to attend. That is the kind of interest we get for real
initiative, for real innovative ideas.
She will not even listen to the people out there, the people of labour,
the people of management. [interjection] The members of the opposition do not
want to hear answers, they want to sit there and shout.
I repeat for the edification of the member for
Now, she can go and dig through the figures and look for
something negative, because that is her wont, but the reality is that the
figures speak for themselves, that in the key areas of economic growth
Government Strategy
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, if the council's forum had not
been so filled with cronyism and they had not accepted some of the suggestions
made by opposition parties as to the people who should have been there, then
maybe he would have gotten more representation.
Mr. Speaker, the tragedy is that there are 11,000
Manitobans unemployed in October of 1992 who had jobs in October of 1991‑‑11,000
of them. Our participation rate in the
work force has dropped. We have a lower
percentage today than we had a year ago.
People are leaving this province because they see no hope; they see no
innovation. What is this First Minister
(Mr. Filmon) prepared to do to give a sense of hope to the people of this
province?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I repeat, that in the course of just the last
two months of figures, according to Statistics Canada, 11,000 more Manitobans
are working than were two months earlier. More so than that, with respect to
the people who were at that Economic Innovation and Technology Council Forum,
we had a former Labour government Minister of Finance from
There were almost 400 people at that forum. We had 40 people who were from organized
labour at that forum. We had people from
the academic and the research community.
We had people from the agriculture community.
I do not know what she is talking about, Mr.
Speaker. All I know is that she had the
opportunity to be there and participate and contribute, and she chose not
to. We know what her priorities are
.
*
(1025)
Health Care System
Budget Reduction Targets
Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (
I would like to ask the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard)
today if he will now give us the whole plan, the exact budget reduction
targets, the total layoff figures, the number of beds being cut in total, and
the impact on services and quality patient care.
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I genuinely welcome my
honourable friend's question and furthermore, hopefully this session, creative
suggestions from my honourable friend as to how governments across
Mr. Speaker, the uniqueness of the process in
Mr. Speaker, the second implementation phase of that was
announced some 10 days ago in which we set targets, on May 15, of 240 beds
which we believed the services of which could be reallocated more economically,
without compromising patient care, to other locations of service delivery in
the system. That undertook significant investigation
by the two teaching hospitals, resulting in the announcement 10 days ago of the
types of beds, 264 in total, between two hospitals and where alternative
services will be relocated. That
resulted, Sir, according to labour law of the
Now, Mr. Speaker, there would be no issue if we were not
so open with the process of how we intend to work towards protecting and
preserving medicare for the people of
Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis:
Since the minister will not be forthcoming and answer that question, I
would like to table for the benefit of members in this House and the public
information from his deputy minister showing cut‑back targets three to
four times higher than the announced cuts of 264 beds at our teaching
hospitals.
I would like to ask the Minister of Health how these two
teaching hospitals can achieve budget reduction targets of $19.7 million
without cutting more beds, without laying off hundreds of more staff‑‑which
in the words of Rod Thorfinnson on Wednesday of this week, he said this would
be absolutely devastating. Could the
minister now tell us the whole picture, the impact of these kinds of cutbacks
on our hospitals?
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, again I welcome my honourable friend's question because part of the
difficulty at our two teaching hospitals is that through varying circumstances,
shall we say, they have been unable to adhere to the no‑deficit policy that
has existed since my honourable friend approved that policy at the cabinet
table she sat in, in the previous government of the
*
(1030)
Part of the direction that we have given to our two
teaching hospitals to be emulated across the system is to no longer use the
standard reduction of services of closing beds and lay off nurses, but to look
at their management structures, an issue that has come forward every single
time to flatten those, to adjust those.
We expect to see some significant savings in reduction of management at
our hospitals, a topic brought to our attention by the nurses union and other‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Employee Redeployment
Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, again that initiative is well in
process in collaboration with the management, with the union representation of
varying disciplines who are affected in these shifts of services from teaching
hospitals to community hospitals and community.
Those initiatives of retraining for redeployment are in process.
I have to say–and we knew this when we started the
process–one of the complexities in achieving a shift from hospital to hospital,
for instance of nursing personnel, is the existence of individual contracts
facility by facility which triggers the bumping process which causes some angst
within the facility. But we have asked
for co‑operation from the union, leadership from the union, and we expect
to receive same to assure an orderly transfer of personnel institution to
institution despite the existence of individual contracts, because that is in
the best interests of their membership in the health care system, Sir.
Mining Industry
Employment Decline
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First
Minister.
If any group in
Since this First Minister took office in 1988 three
communities have been closed, in effect, by mine closures, and layoff notices
have been handed out in the hundreds.
My specific question to the First Minister is: Can the First Minister tell this House and
the people of
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr. Speaker, unlike the administration of
which that member sat as a government member, this government has been very
proactive as it relates to the mining industry in
I can name several of them, if the members would take the
opportunity to listen: a $55‑million
loan commitment for a $187‑million upgrade of the smelter in his
backyard, right in his constituency; major mining tax incentives for a new mine
to be established in any community in the North without paying any tax until
the capital is paid for; prospectors' assistance.
The members well should know, if they have any experience
at all in the communities which they represent, that you have to find new
orebodies to have mines, Mr. Speaker, something that is quite often strange to
those members opposite.
Mr. Storie: Mr.
Speaker, that is how out of touch this government is. Six hundred and fifteen people received lay‑off
notices last week, 615 working people.
My question to the First Minister (Mr. Filmon), who
obviously is out of touch, does not know the answer, what does the throne
speech offer the people of
Mr. Downey: Mr.
Speaker, the day that any mine opens is the first day that it starts to close,
because there is a limited amount of ore that is available to be taken
out. New mines have to be found. We have put in place, like we did for
Mining Reserve Fund
Education/Retraining
Programs
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): The Minister of Energy and Mines should get
in touch with the people of
Mr. Speaker, my question to the First Minister, who seems
not to care about 615 people losing their jobs or their communities, is: The Snow Lake Community Adjustment Committee
has presented a proposal to government for a training and retraining education
package. Will the First Minister today,
given the extreme difficulty that community faces, accept that proposal, agree
to fund that proposal out of the Mining Reserve Fund so that at least the
miners and their families may have some other opportunities perhaps in other
provinces?
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I want the House to know and the
people of
The program that is in place and the formula is not
unlike what was in place when he was the minister, Mr. Speaker, when it was the
closing down of
Education System
Budget Reduction Targets
Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Education.
I was looking forward to the throne speech yesterday and
hearing some substance, particularly pertaining to education. However, since
there was no substance in the throne speech on the area of education we will
have to leave that document aside and look at the real issues facing the
education system.
Mr. Speaker, it has been reported that $17 million would
be slashed from the Education budget.
Will the minister tell this house:
How does the cutback of $17 million fit into the reform plan, and where
would those cutbacks be made?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I too was interested in the
reform in education plan that my honourable friend attempted to release about
three days ago. She released in her plan
for education all of the initiatives that this government presently has in
place, initiatives like Workforce 2000, legislative reform, parental
involvement.
There were absolutely no ideas from my honourable friend,
Mr. Speaker. We brought forward a number
of new ideas in our throne speech, and I think it is very important for the
member to begin to consider that we are looking for true educational reform in
this province through the plan laid down in the throne speech.
Parental Involvement
Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, can the minister tell us then if
she supports our parents' bill of rights and, if not, what other legislative
reforms will she have in order to give parents more of a say?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, we are, as we said in the throne
speech, very interested in making sure that parents are recognized as important
stakeholders, and it was in the throne speech, in answer to the questions from
the other side. We have looked for the
increasing role of parents partly through our legislative reform document as
well, and we will be looking forward to sharing that with Manitobans in the
very near future.
Department of Education
and TrainingAssistant Deputy Minister
Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Will the minister tell this House: How does the firing of Mr. Ed Buller,
Assistant Deputy Minister for Program Development & Support Services, fit
into this minister's plan of education reform?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, in the Department of Education we
will be looking very carefully at our process of reform and we will be making
very clear that we are looking for very excellent people to be moving ahead
with our reform program
Civil Service
Employment Reduction
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of talk from this
government about new, but there is a new reality of the hurt, the pain that
people in this province are feeling, people who have lost jobs and those who
are in fear of losing their jobs.
That is particularly the case right now in terms of civil
servants in this province. There are
indications that this government is once again going to be cutting back
severely in terms of Civil Service jobs in this province.
I would like to ask one very straightforward question to
the Premier so that he can give a clear indication to civil servants and their
families what the situation is going to be, and that is very simple. How many more Civil Service jobs are going to
be eliminated from the
*
(1040)
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, there is nothing in the throne
speech that indicates that there is going to be a wholesale removal of
positions from the Civil Service. The
reality is that like every administration in the world today, we have to
continue to review and evaluate what we do with the limited tax dollars that we
have available to us. We have to
continue to strive to be more efficient.
We have to continue to strive to provide services more effectively to
the people that we serve and the people who give us their money, entrust it to
us, to be able to provide them with services as effectively as possible.
In every respect, we are going to have to continue to do
what is being done worldwide, which is to do more, because people continue to
have greater and greater expectations of their government‑‑we hear
the demands every day from across the way‑‑more without spending
more money in order to achieve that.
It is a process of reinventing government. It is a process of ensuring that we can do a
better job for the taxpayers of this province.
In that, there is the matter of efficiency, and in that there is the
matter of always evaluating how we do things and striving to do them better.
In the course of that, from time to time, there are
shifts that take place that involve what may be fewer people being able to do
the same job. We have to recognize those
opportunities. We have to take advantage of those opportunities. We have to do them to ensure that government
remains efficient and remains true to the taxpayers' wishes of keeping their
tax load down.
Mr. Ashton: Mr.
Speaker, I did not ask the Premier for a recollection of all the world's
statesmen he has talked to in the last little while and what they think.
I asked him very simply:
What is he as Premier going to be doing in terms of Civil Service
positions in this province? Is it going
to be like last year when he said there were not going to be any cuts, and in
excess of 300 positions were eliminated? How many people are going to lose
their jobs?
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, you see, this is the interesting thing. This member is interested in
featherbedding. He is interested in the
old kind of mentality, which is to keep upping the numbers, to keep puffing up
the numbers.
There were only 39 actual layoff notices that were given
last year‑‑39. That is all
he is talking about, Mr. Speaker, and he puffs that up to 300‑‑yes,
indeed.
How many people, that is what we are talking about, 39
people, Mr. Speaker, because we as a government continue to strive for more
efficiency, for more effective delivery of our programs, because that is what
the taxpayers believe we should be doing.
That is what they depend upon us for.
All he wants to do is drive up the numbers, put more
people on the payroll and raise the taxes of people like he did for six and a
half years in government.
That is not acceptable, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Ashton: Mr.
Speaker, all I want is an answer. If the
Tory benches think that was an answer, they have more serious problems than
even I thought.
They eliminated 954 positions in their first majority
government budget. They eliminated in
excess of 300 last year. How many jobs are going to be eliminated by this
government in the upcoming year‑‑how many jobs?
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, I want to repeat for the edification of the member for Thompson, our
goal, our objective is not to have to raise taxes in this province. In order to do so, in times when we are
having reductions in transfers from
Mr. Speaker: Time for
Oral Questions has expired.
NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS
Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, may I have leave to make a
nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
I simply want to acknowledge and recognize that our
football team in this city is on its way to the Grey Cup this weekend. I want to ask and invite all members to join
in wishing them well in their competition in
This is an important event not just in the sporting
community, but I think it is an event that has united Canadians in the past and
will again in the future. The game is in
I think we all wish them well, wish our team well in
Now one other thing the members have been indicating in
Question Period that my colleague the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) has
been wearing Tory blue. In fact, it is
Blue Bomber blue today, Mr. Speaker, that she is wearing. I simply wanted to clarify that. Thank you.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I certainly on behalf of all my
colleagues‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Does the
honourable First Minister have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
Mr. Filmon: On
behalf of all my colleagues in government, I certainly want to join with the
member for St. James (Mr. Edwards) in wishing the Blue Bombers well. I will not be so timid about my partisanship
as I normally am, but I will tell him that I have no hesitation in saying that
we are firmly 100 percent behind the Winnipeg Blue Bombers. We do not worry about people who might want
to cheer for the Calgary Stampeders. We
believe that we have the best team in the Grey Cup, and they represent the best
city and the best province in
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): May I have leave to make a nonpolitical
statement? [agreed]
Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to join with my colleague from
St. James and the Premier in wishing the Winnipeg Blue Bombers all the best, of
course, in the upcoming game. We expect
that the Blue Bombers will win and my caucus certainly, to a person, is going
to be I think supporting the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.
I did want to say that there is another team in
MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC
IMPORTANCE
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), that under Rule 27.(1) that the ordinary business of
the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely,
the introduction of Sunday shopping in Manitoba.
Mr. Speaker: Before
determining whether the motion meets the requirements of our Rule 27, the
honourable Leader of the second opposition party will have five minutes to
state her case for the urgency of debating this matter today. A spokesperson for the government and the
official opposition party will also have five minutes to address the position
of their party respecting the urgency of debating this matter today.
(1050)
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr.
Speaker, there are two specific rules in the House which leads to the
introduction of a debate under Rule 27. One is that notice be given, and I
believe that we have in fact dealt adequately with that having given notice
just at midnight last evening of our desire to do this; secondly, there has to
be no other reasonable opportunity to debate this particular motion.
Now normally speaking, Mr. Speaker, we would be in a
Speech from the Throne debate which is a wide open and public process and any
matter could be debated at that particular point in time, but we are dealing
with a very special day in terms of the Throne Speech Debate. It has been traditional in this House that
today's debate would be given to the mover and the seconder of the Speech from
the Throne. It is rare that any member
of the opposition gets an opportunity to debate on this particular first
working day of a legislative session. If
Sunday shopping was not taking effect until the following Sunday, then it could
indeed be ruled, I think, that the Throne Speech Debate was an adequate
opportunity for people to dialogue on this very critical matter, but this is
not the situation. This action is taking
place this Sunday.
The mover of the Speech from the Throne, if the mover
takes the traditional time, will in fact be speaking until about 11:40. The seconder will then be speaking until
12:20. We adjourn at 12:30.
That does not give any opposition member in this Chamber
the opportunity to present to this government why we believe they should hear a
range of opinions with respect to Sunday shopping and not simply the narrow
views of that expressed by their own cabinet.
We believe that there are even members of their own back bench who might
like to participate and express their concerns about an initiative which I
think all of us would recognize is not truly a valid study. Anything which is put into place for five
months generally becomes a fait accompli.
All we have to do is look at the actions of the Minister of Culture,
Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Mitchelson), who changed gambling hours for the
summer and then they went on forever.
Mr. Speaker, we truly do believe that this meets the
obligations under Rule 27. There is
indeed no opportunity for members of the opposition. There is indeed no opportunity for members
other than those two who have been designated by the government to be the mover
and speaker on the Speech from the Throne.
In order to deal with this matter, which is of concern to Manitobans, we
must deal with it today.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Indeed there are a number of tests that we
apply in this House as to whether a matter of urgent public importance is in
order. I think if one looks at the
situation, there is some argument that can be made in both senses. Obviously, we are in the Throne Speech Debate
and, normally, that does allow a fair amount of leeway in terms of allowing
debate on a wide range of issues but, on the other hand, there is a very
specific role.
This is perhaps the one day of debate, as the Leader of
the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs) pointed out, that is very specifically by
tradition reserved for the speeches of the mover and seconder from the Speech
from the Throne. In fact, in the years
that I have been in the House I have never seen a divergence from that, Mr.
Speaker.
We believe that that is important. It is a very important opportunity for the
mover and seconder of the throne speech to be able to speak, and I believe that
it is a tradition that we all share an interest in. That is the dilemma that faces us today, Mr.
Speaker, and you in your ruling as to whether there is another opportunity.
The second point indeed, Mr. Speaker, as has been pointed
out, is that this issue of Sunday shopping has apparently been decided in
cabinet. It is being implemented this
Sunday before we have even had a debate in this House on legislation to bring
that in. I would take from the throne
speech that we are going to have retroactive legislation on Sunday shopping in
this province, and that is absolutely reprehensible.
It places us in a difficult position today in the sense
that even if we have this matter of urgent public importance debated, it will
be nothing more than a generalized debate and will not give us the opportunity
to do what we really want, which is to deal with the issue in a bill so that we
can debate it and we can vote and have a decision made by this House.
Let us not forget, this issue has traditionally been
dealt with on an all‑party basis.
It was dealt with by the NDP government by all parties. This government showed its new level of
highhandedness, its autocratic behaviour by ramming through something in its
cabinet and then dictating that to the
I would suggest that if the government has concerns about
a matter of urgent public importance, the way we could deal with this matter
right now is for them to announce when they are going to bring in the bill, the
retroactive bill, and announce when we are going to have the opportunity, as
members of the Legislature, to speak out on behalf of our constituents. In my case, point to the mistakes this
government is making by pushing ahead, ramming this through, when even some of
their own caucus members do not even agree with this.
So the bottom line is, Mr. Speaker, we want a debate on
this issue. More importantly, we and the
people of
Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the great left-wing coalition of
this province is still alive. Here we
have a situation today where the opposition parties are trying to argue for the
urgency of debating Sunday shopping.
The throne speech makes reference to the fact that the
government will be bringing in legislation dealing with this issue. Let me say that I have given notice, at least
my office has given notice to the Clerk's Office. I believe that the Order Paper on Monday, if
not Tuesday, will indicate that the bill dealing with Sunday shopping will be
introduced for first reading next week.
Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, as soon as the Throne Speech Debate is
concluded, we will obviously be calling that bill for second reading at that
particular time.
Let me point out, Mr. Speaker, the bill will be enabling
only. It will not force anybody to shop
on Sunday. It will not force anybody to
work on Sunday. So the argument is not
whether or not this bill is debated before Sunday coming. That is a ruse.
Mr. Speaker, let me also say, though, that the weakest
argument put forward by the opposition is that tradition dictates that members
opposite cannot speak today. That is not
a rule. Any member today can get up and speak after the seconder. I am led to believe that the total number of
minutes that our mover and seconder will consume for the Throne Speech Debate
totals roughly between 40 and 50 minutes.
So there will be ample time for the Leader of the Second Opposition
(Mrs. Carstairs), if she so chooses, to get up and make her presentation. It is a wide open debate.
For those reasons, Mr. Speaker, I say to you that there
obviously is no urgency. There is
obviously an incredible opportunity to debate this issue over all of next week,
over all of the Throne Speech Debate and, indeed, more importantly, my promise
to the House that this will be called in a bill fashion for second reading as
soon as we have considered the Throne Speech Debate.
*
(1100)
Speaker's Ruling
Mr. Speaker: I would
like to thank all honourable members for their advice as to whether the motion
proposed by the honourable member for
I did receive the notice required under our subrule
27.(1). According to our Rule 27 and Beauchesne's Citations 389 and 390, there
are two conditions to be met before a matter of public importance can
proceed. They are: (a) the subject matter must be so pressing
that the ordinary opportunities for debate will not allow it to be brought on
early enough; and (b) it must be shown that the public interest will suffer if
the matter is not given immediate attention.
With the respect to the timing of the discussion of the
matter, there are no other opportunities for this Assembly to discuss the
matter before Sunday shopping commences on a trial basis in
Regarding the second criteria for discussion of a matter
of urgent public importance, that having to do with the urgency of the matter,
I am not convinced that the matter is so pressing that the public interest will
suffer if it is not given immediate attention by being debated today. I am aware that members view the matter to be
a pressing one, and I understand this issue will affect a large number of
people in the work force and business, but I am not convince that the public
will suffer.
Therefore, I am ruling that it does not meet the criteria
set by our rules and practices. Further,
there will be an opportunity for the matter to be debated when legislation is
before the House to provide for Sunday shopping.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, with respect, I challenge the
ruling.