LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Wednesday, March 3, 1993
The House met
at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Eric
Stefanson (Minister of Sport): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Annual
Report 1991‑92 for the Manitoba Horse Racing Commission.
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Hon. Clayton
Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might have leave of the House to
introduce a bill for the Minister of Justice?
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable
government House leader have leave to introduce a bill?
Some
Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: No. Leave is denied.
Bill 16‑The Public Schools Amendment Act
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister
of Labour (Mr. Praznik), that Bill 16, The Public Schools Amendment Act; Loi
modifiant la Loi sur les ecoles publiques, be introduced and that the same be
now received and read a first time.
Mr.
Speaker: The honourable member's bill is on the notice paper, not on the
order paper. The honourable Madam
Minister would need leave to introduce Bill 16.
Does the
honourable minister have leave to introduce Bill 16?
Some
Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: No. Leave is denied.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Special Needs Programs
Service Availability
Mr. Gary Doer
(Leader of the Opposition): House business is being managed like the
finances of this province.
Mr. Speaker, my
question is to the Premier. We were
raising questions all this week about the impact of government decisions on
kids and students in this province.
Yesterday we
learned, and we have had confirmation from parents and others, that specialists
working with special needs kids in rural Manitoba have been told that they will
be laid off at the end of June, some 66 staff working in hearing impairment
issues, speech impairment, behavioural problems, working in rural Manitoba,
have been told they will be laid off in the province of Manitoba.
Mr. Speaker, I
would like to know from the Premier what impact these layoffs will have on
children with hearing impairments, with learning impairments, with behavioural
impairments and impairments that are, unfortunately, germane to some kids in
rural Manitoba that need special needs programs.
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training):
Mr. Speaker, yes, it is true, a service
that we have provided through our department for the past 20 years is now a
very well‑established service. It
is well established within the divisions.
So what we have done is we now, through our funding formula, provide
both the operating costs and also the administrative costs for school divisions
to hire these clinicians within their own divisions. It is simply a change in who employs these
clinicians.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I would
quote the minister from May 7 of 1992:
Due to the large number of students with speech and language problems,
the service is stretched and follow‑up activities are not always as
extensive as we would like them to be.
These kids are
the most vulnerable kids in rural
I would like to
ask the Premier how he can justify cutting back these services to special needs
kids in the
* (1335)
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I think it
is important to give the member all of the information. Nineteen school divisions presently provide
this service. Ten of those school
divisions operate outside of the city of
Now we have
that same concern for young people and their parents. I would like to assure this House that there
will still be the funds flowing through our funding formula to employ those
specialists. However, they will be
employed at the local level at the school board level, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I do not
know how the Tories across the way could clap for a decision like that on the
children of rural
Mr. Speaker,
there is a declining enrollment in school divisions of rural
I would like to
ask the Premier to overrule his Minister of Education, to overrule the Minister
of Finance (Mr. Manness) and his cutting back on special needs children in this
province and maintain those services for all kids across
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, let me say
again that we have a strong belief that this service continue and because of
that we have, through our funding formula, increased the grants for a
clinician, increased the grants to $45,000.
We did that last year because we believed that the service was so
important. This year through this
action, we are now saying to school divisions that they would become the
employers, they would then have the control.
Mr. Speaker, in
terms of special needs let me also make it clear to the member that we
increased our special needs funding last year, and this year through our
announcement we have also increased the amount of money flowing into Level II
and Level III grants to pay attention to those particular concerns and issues.
Distance Education
Employee Layoffs
Mr. John
Plohman (Dauphin): Mr.
Speaker, the minister knows very well that the services and the funding that
she is providing is totally inadequate to meet the needs in rural
Manitoba. She knows that and she should
not be attempting to mislead this House.
Because of the
cuts that this government has made over the last number of years and this year
as well, which has resulted in the fact that there are no options available in
many schools, classes are combined.
There are teachers teaching three and four classes in one classroom, different
courses in one classroom. Because distance education is one of the only hopes
for equality of opportunities in education in the small rural divisions, Mr.
Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Education how she can justify the
cutting of six positions from distance education, which is providing this only
hope, this bridge, for rural small school divisions in Manitoba.
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training):
Yes, we have made some rearrangements in
our distance education for the purposes of a better delivery, because we have
understood, Mr. Speaker, as a result of listening to Manitobans, that distance
education should no longer just be a separate part of education but in fact
should be an integral part of education, should be an integral part of our
curriculum development and our service development. That is what we have done.
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, this
minister did not answer the question, how she is justifying the cuts of six
positions when she says in the Estimates, in her own words last year, that this
was a priority and an expanding area.
How can she justify the cutting of six positions?
Mrs.
Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member obviously did not hear
me. What I have said to him and to
Manitobans is that this is a very important part of education in
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, since school
divisions are telling this minister and telling us daily in communications and
phone calls and letters that in fact the services to children are being
affected by her draconian cuts, by her deep cuts in education, I want to ask
this minister: Will she now admit to
this House and to the people of Manitoba that in fact the services to children
are in fact being impacted in a negative way, and will she now admit that this
has been acceptable for her right from the beginning in her decision making?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, again let
me say, services to children are of utmost importance for this department, and
because services to children are so important, within our funding formula this
year we did what we said. We modified
that funding formula, we adapted the funding formula. We did so particularly out of interest to
children who need support for extreme behavioural and emotional disorders and
hearing impaired children. We increased
the funding to make sure that was available for the children of this province. We have also said, as school boards consider
their budgeting process this year, to please look at areas of budgeting that do
not affect children and programs.
* (1340)
Education System Reform
Program Development Support Services
Ms. Avis Gray
(Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Education.
The minister has told us in this House that she is interested in
education. She has told us that she is
engaged in a reform process, yet every day we see actions which belie any
leadership and any real reform initiatives.
Today we hear that program development support services will be
decimated. Over 50 staff years will be
gone, and services will be cut.
Will the
minister explain to this House how this decision fits into her education
reform, a reform which to date is illusionary?
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, let me say first of all that the
Child Care and Development branch will not be decimated, that it will continue
to support school divisions. It will
provide for school divisions supervision for those clinicians whom they hire,
that supervision that is very important for clinicians to get their
certification. We will also continue to
monitor the ADAP or the special education plans. We will also continue to act as
consultants. We will also assist those
school divisions in their hiring process.
If they would like some assistance in the hiring process, then we are
more than prepared to do that.
In answer to
the reform part of the question, Mr. Speaker, I have answered that this afternoon. We have understood that in some areas, and I
will use distance education as a very specific example, that distance education
is no longer seen as a separate part of education. In the process of reform, we are moving to
integrate it into education in
Report Tabling Request
Ms. Avis Gray
(Crescentwood): We
have no difficulty with this government embarking on reform in education. Will the minister take a page out of her
colleague the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and take some time and actually
write a document that talks about education reform?
Mr. Speaker,
education officials, people concerned about education in
Some
Honourable Members: Oh,
oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Crescentwood, your
question, please.
Ms. Gray: This is a serious issue
because education officials want to know what the education reform plan
is. It is not enough for the minister to
stand in this House and spout out sentences. We want to see a reform plan, a
blueprint. Will she table that document?
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The
honourable member has put her question.
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): I think it is important to remind my
honourable friend again that the education officials have been involved in the
process as we move into educational reform, that we have made sure that their
views of what reform should look like, how that reform should be accomplished,
have been integrated and that we have taken a great deal of time to work with
those groups.
We have worked
with parents in Manitoba to make sure that the views of parents are considered,
the views of labour and business and industry, so that the goals of education
and the accomplishments of education are also views that they would like us to
consider, too.
Ms. Gray: The Minister of Education
asks that we listen to her. We ask that she listen to what education officials
are saying in
Mr. Speaker: Question, please.
Ms. Gray: Is she prepared to table
a document to let us know what type of education reform she has planned rather
than just slashing and cutting‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question.
Mrs. Vodrey: I certainly reject any
suggestion of rural and urban school divisions having to compete for attention
to listen. I have made an attempt to
visit personally as many school divisions as possible. I have made sure that I have met with their
executive groups and have taken into consideration how they would like reform
to look.
Mr. Speaker,
what my honourable friend seems to say is that she would in her own mind
develop a document, then put it out and then say to people this is what it
should be, but we have in fact taken a much different tactic. We have taken the time to listen to what the
goals of that reform might be to then put together the goals of reform, and as
we announced in the throne speech, we are moving towards the education
innovation forum, where the process of reform can be discussed.
* (1345)
Health Care System Reform
Pediatric Surgery Restrictions
Mr. Dave
Chomiak (Kildonan): My
question is for the Minister of Health.
The minister's
own action plan talks about moving treatment from more expensive facilities to
less expensive facilities. The
minister's own plan on page 15 says that teaching hospitals cost $775 per day
while treatment at a community facility could be for $410 per day.
Why is this
minister dictating that all children's surgery in the city of
Hon. Donald
Orchard (Minister of Health): My honourable friend also might acknowledge
that within the process of health care reform, we have indicated that the
direction for the urban hospitals and the teaching hospitals is establishment
of centres of excellence.
Mr. Speaker, I
would like to claim the original credit for establishing Children's Hospital
conceptually and developing it as a centre for excellence for inpatient care
for children, but unfortunately that has been a policy of successive
governments since 1975. Sir, that is
what is being accomplished with this consolidation.
That
consolidation of inpatient services, including surgery, including medical needs
for inpatient care of children in Manitoba, is being consolidated at the
Children's Hospital for two reasons:
first of all, Sir, they have the ability and the finest expertise in
Manitoba to provide for the most complex needs of children in Manitoba‑‑surgical
and medical; secondly, by maintaining pediatric departments in a number of
other hospitals, inpatient is a duplication of resource at a time of
constrained resources, and it makes not only program sense but very good
economic sense to consolidate the Children's Hospital.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the
minister can clarify since there is so much confusion out there, will the
minister advise this House, contrary to what is being said by the head of his
health reform, that outpatient surgery for children will also be consolidated
at the Health Sciences Centre? What is
it? Will outpatient surgery also be
consolidated or not?
Mr.
Orchard: I am quickly thumbing through my book, Mr. Speaker, because if I
can just find‑‑well, I cannot find the direct quote.
My honourable
friend the new critic for Health, and the New Democrats, would do himself well
to make more corrections of false impressions that he has left on the airwaves,
as he did yesterday, to his credit, Sir, where he stepped out of this House and
said, yes, emergency services for children will continue at St. Boniface
Hospital and other services.
He did not say
that when he alarmed the people of
Sir, that would
leave families who wish to access emergency and postoperative care the wrong
impression. It might compromise their
ability to receive emergency care at St. Boniface and other community hospitals
if they believed the words that my honourable friend misinformed the public
with some three weeks ago.
Sir, inpatient
services are consolidated to the Children's Hospital. That means admissions of children to hospital
beds, but outpatient services will continue in most, if not all, of the
locations currently, including St. Boniface, Victoria‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Chomiak: I have one more
supplementary. Mr. Speaker, I am
thankful the minister finally clarified the distinction that one side of his
department was saying one thing and he is saying the other. He has clarified now what the question
is. I hope he will tell the head of his
health care reform.
My final
supplementary to the same minister, Mr. Speaker, is: Will the minister also clarify, since we are
at this and since his own health reform head will not be able to clarify this
for members of the public, will 15‑ and 16‑year‑olds now be
considered adults or children for purposes of admission for surgery, because we
are told that 15‑ and 16‑year‑olds will now be admitted as
adults because they cannot accommodate all the children at the Health Sciences
Centre?
* (1350)
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I guess I
have problems with my honourable friend because coincidentally the other day,
when he was having yet another press conference on this issue of service
consolidation‑‑and I note with interest that the Premier‑‑no,
well, a member of the cabinet that made the decision to conceptualize the
Children's Hospital as a centre of excellence is in the gallery today‑‑1975,
yes.
I fully
acknowledge, Mr. Speaker, that when New Democrats are in government they
sometimes get things right, but when they are in opposition they seldom
do. I recognize that. I fully recognize that. Let me tell my honourable friend that he
should seek advice from Dr. Aggie Bishop, head of the Children's Hospital, who,
after the press conference he held saying it was going to be a disaster, spoke
to reporters and others outside in the hall saying, look, we can accommodate
inpatient services for children in Manitoba very, very reasonably, effectively,
with quality, with patient care, with love and with the needed care being met,
Sir.
Post‑Secondary Education
Grant and Bursary Assistance
Mr. Reg
Alcock (Osborne): Mr.
Speaker, in the last full academic year that has been reported on, fully 30
percent of the students at the
I would like to
ask the Minister of Education one simple question. Why is she moving to a loans‑only
program and increasing the debt load of the 2,700 students who received some
grant and bursary assistance in this province last year?
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, presently, as the member knows,
the system is
In terms of any
changes which we might then move to within our provincial government, the
member will have to wait until the budget to see what that will be.
Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, what I want
this minister to do is to give the students of this province an assurance that
they will have the same level of grant and bursary assistance in the coming
year that they have in the current year.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I speak to
the students of this province. I had
them into my office yesterday as well.
May I say, at that time they were very pleased that this government has
capped tuition fees at 5 percent.
In terms of any
further assurances, Mr. Speaker, they will have to wait until the budget is
brought down in this House.
Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, this
government has increased student fees at the universities by over 80 percent
since they came into office, and another 5 percent increase is inconsistent
with the cuts that they are making at the other facilities.
Universities
Capital Assistance
Mr. Reg
Alcock (Osborne): I
would like to know, from the minister, why she has chosen not to provide any
capital assistance to the universities in the coming year.
Hon. Rosemary
Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, in the announcement that I made
last Thursday to the universities, I announced their operating funds. I told them, at that time, that the
announcement regarding capital would occur at the time that the budget comes
down in this House.
I would like to
remind the member that, by and large, university funding is not usually
announced as early as this time and before the budget, but the universities did
ask this year to please note, where possible, their operating grants. That was an important request from them. This government listened to their
request. We were able to oblige in the
operating. The capital will come with
the budget announcement in this House.
Social Assistance
Health Benefits
Mr. Doug
Martindale (Burrows): Mr.
Speaker, last week the Minister of Family Services announced yet another attack
on the poor when he cut health benefits by $3 million. At the same time the Minister of Health (Mr.
Orchard), in the same government, was negotiating a contract with a consultant
in the range of $4 million to $6 million.
Can the
Minister of Family Services explain why this cut was made at all, a cut which
affects low‑income people, those who have the least ability to pay for
their own optical, their own dental, their own medical expenses? Why has he eliminated coverage, especially
for procedures like root canals?
* (1355)
Hon. Harold
Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I indicated last week, when we
discussed this, that we have had a 65 percent increase in the funding for
social allowances over the last three budgets.
As a result of that call on public money, we have had to make some
adjustments to benefits to social allowance recipients, which still leaves them
more than adequate coverage, certainly much better than citizens of this
province receive who are regarded as being the working poor and others.
The delay that
we have put into place is the same delay that civil servants respect when they
come onto the job and that private plans have as well. So in order to preserve a system, we have had
to make some adjustments to it and those adjustments were announced last week.
Retraining Programs
Mr. Doug
Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, has the Minister of Family Services
or his staff studied the issue of improving or making changes to the work
incentive for people on social assistance, and if so, what did those studies
show? Is the government prepared to make
any changes there, especially progressive changes to encourage people to get
off social assistance and get into the workforce?
Hon. Harold
Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, the member raises I think a
critical issue that is facing governments across North America, and I know in
discussions with the member he is aware that the Premier of Ontario was talking
about going to a form of workfare in that province.
We spend
something like $12 million on programs for social allowance recipients and
moving them into the workforce. Part of
the difficulty, of course, is the difficulty of finding jobs for people without
the appropriate skills. This is a
challenge that I think we as government will be looking at in the coming months
and years, and one that all governments are looking at, is how to use those
funds to get people back to work. I can
tell you in discussing this with my colleagues across the country who are
responsible for social allowance programs, this is an area that needs reform
and we are looking very carefully at what other provinces are doing.
Work Incentives
Mr. Doug
Martindale (Burrows): Will the Minister of Family Services give
serious consideration to improving the work incentives since there are many
people who are willing to work? For example, working as enumerators in the
referendum last fall, one individual earned $500, was only allowed to keep
$50. People need a positive
incentive. It could be built into the
system so that people are able to keep a much greater percentage of their
earnings instead of having them taxed back, effectively at the rate of 100
percent. No one in this country pays
taxes at the rate of 100 percent except people on social‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please.
Hon. Harold
Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, certainly the member is aware of
the tremendous number of reforms that we have brought in in the last two years,
very supportive. I think of the change
in the liquid assets test and the head of household changes. There are other reforms that we are looking
at.
Manitoba Public Insurance Corp
No-Fault Auto Insurance
Mr. Leonard
Evans (Brandon East): I have a question for the minister responsible
for MPIC. Manitobans continue to be very
angry and concerned about the excessively high Autopac premium increases that
they see under this government. They see
a government that is doing absolutely nothing to keep the cost down. In answer to my question of March 1, Mr.
Speaker, on the outrageous 75 percent increase given to the new chairman of the
board of MPIC, the minister replied that they are looking at, and I am quoting
from Hansard, "some very serious changes in the MPIC program," and he
went on to infer that Autopac 2000 is coming forward.
Mr. Speaker, will
the minister advise, does this mean that this government is now finally
prepared to establish the pure no‑fault system as recommend very strongly
by Judge Kopstein?
Hon. Glen
Cummings (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Public Insurance
Corporation Act): Mr.
Speaker, I was not making any announcements, but I think the member should not
rise from his place and try to ignore the fact that he was part of the
administration that was looking at a 30 percent increase.
Cost Efficiencies
Mr. Leonard
Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, if the minister will not
implement a no‑fault system, can he explain to the people of
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister charged with
the administration of The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act): Mr. Speaker, we have indicated, and I have
indicated very publicly on a number of occasions, that we are looking at all
aspects of the Autopac coverage that is required by law in this province. We are also assuring ourselves, through the
corporation, that the operations are efficient.
We will be doing a number of things within the responsibility of the
corporation. The corporation is actively
pursuing some options today which will, in due course, be presented.
Mr. Evans: It is still regrettable
that Judge Kopstein, who recommended a system that would have reduced Autopac
premiums by 21 percent, is being ignored, Mr. Speaker.
* (1400)
No-Fault Auto Insurance
Mr. Leonard
Evans (Brandon East): My final supplementary to the minister
is: Has this minister received any
representation in the past few months from the Manitoba Bar Association, or any
group representing the legal profession, in opposition to a no‑fault
system, since such a system will reduce litigation costs substantially by tens
of millions of dollars?
Hon. Glen
Cummings (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Public
Insurance Corporation Act): Mr. Speaker, I do not believe I have received
any communication from the Bar Association recently. I certainly received some a number of years
ago. I have also received representation
from the Manitoba Society of Seniors. I
saw representations that they have made regarding their concerns.
Labour Force Adjustment Strategy
Tabling Request
Mr. Kevin
Lamoureux (
The labour
force in the
My question,
Mr. Speaker, is for the minister. I would
ask: When will he table a detailed plan on the labour force adjustment that
will put Manitobans back to work now and prepare them not only for now but also
for the future?
Hon. Darren
Praznik (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Education
(Mrs. Vodrey) has indicated several times in this House, the work that is now
going on with the Canada‑Manitoba agreement, which includes the
Apprenticeship and Training branch of this department, and the co‑ordination
of a host of training programs across this province is now underway, and we are
working towards concluding that agreement.
I would point
out to the member opposite that over the years, through various administrations
in this province, both federal and provincial governments have built a host of
programs often duplicating each other.
Now, over the last while, myself, the Minister of Education and the
cabinet of this province have been working with our federal colleagues to sort
that out and give direction to it. So
that should be moving along shortly.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr.
Speaker, it is interesting he points to the Minister of Education. I am aware of a student at
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Question, please.
Labour Force Adjustment Strategy
Department Co-ordination
Mr. Kevin
Lamoureux (
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, first of
all, I would just like to address the innuendo that the honourable member has
raised in this House regarding courses.
There has been no announcement yet.
For
the student and the individual case, I am happy to look at that particular
student's case, but one of the difficulties that
In
terms of working with my colleagues for a labour market strategy in this
province, I would like to say that there are two working groups. In fact, there is a working group that is
working within departments. There is
also a working group that is working among departments and those departments
include the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik).
They also include my colleague the Minister of Culture, Heritage and
Citizenship (Mrs. Mitchelson), I T and T.
So we have been very inclusive in developing a labour market strategy in
this province.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, then can the minister explain to
me why the registration fee would be accepted and then the course be
cancelled? That is not innuendo. That is, in fact, what has happened.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, as my honourable colleague first
stated the case, he stated a proposed change.
So he would have to present to me the specifics of the individual
involved and, of course, I will be more than happy to look at those specifics
should he present them to me.
Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting
Older Worker Adjustment Strategy
Mr. Jerry
Storie (Flin Flon): Mr.
Speaker, while all of northern Manitoba is suffering under the lack of economic
leadership by this government, the community of Snow Lake and‑‑[interjection] The Minister of Health
(Mr. Orchard) knows full well that the Minister of Energy and Mines bungled the
Hydro contract. In the communities of
Mr. Speaker, my
question is to the Minister of Labour.
Can the Minister of Labour explain to the House why, after receiving a
copy of a letter dated October 6 from the employment and personnel
administrator in Flin Flon at Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting, asking the
government to begin to establish a program for older worker adjustment, the
Province of Manitoba as of a week ago had provided no response and no
leadership on an issue that affected as many as 120 older workers in Flin Flon
and Snow Lake?
Hon. Darren
Praznik (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would remind the
honourable member for Flin Flon that the Department of Labour through our
Labour Adjustment unit has been working very closely with the community
committee in the town of
I would remind
the member for Flin Flon, the terms of the POWA agreement are fairly
restrictive. Before even a candidate
would be eligible for consideration, they would have to be out of work for at
least a year. So it is not as if there
is an issue today that has not been acted on.
That process is part of the adjustment process in which we have a staff
dedicated and assigned to the
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, the minister
did not answer the question. The
question was why has the government not responded.
Can the
minister tell the people of Flin Flon and
Mr. Praznik: If I understand the
member correctly, I believe he is referring to the POWA program, the program
for older worker adjustment, where in essence the federal and provincial
governments buy an annuity for an individual, I believe over 55 years of age,
who is not able to be retrained, but the criteria for that particular agreement
is extremely restricted.
I would say to
the member, before you can ask whether or not a government would support that
application, we are not even sure whether or not there (a) will be any
applicants who will qualify, or whether the community will qualify, but I can
tell him that we have staff assigned who have been working through the Labour
Adjustment Committee in the process, which is the route to go, and that has
been ongoing since the initial announcements from Hudson Bay Mining and
Smelting.
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, the
minister has not even read the letter.
The chairperson of the
My question is
a simple one: Will the government of
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, because the
president of Hudson Bay‑‑in fact, this must be the first time that
the New Democrats have accepted the word of a president of a mining company
holus‑bolus without judging it against criteria.
Mr. Speaker,
there are criteria by which that program operates. One of them is that those individuals are not
eligible or have not been able to be retrained within a year of being laid off. If they are eligible, we will consider that
application.
I have to say
this to him, that the process is underway. This department has assigned staff
to that process, but if he is asking me for a commitment here today, whether we
do not even know if this layoff will be eligible, that would just be silly.
* (1410)
Crow Benefit
Government Position
Ms. Rosann
Wowchuk (
I want to ask
the Premier to state very clearly his government's position. Does he feel the payment should stay as it
is, or are they supporting the idea that the payment should be changed to the
farmers?
Hon. Gary
Filmon (Premier): Mr.
Speaker, as the member knows, we in the economy of
Of course, we
are going to want to be open‑minded, to look at all opportunities to
increase the value of our production, to increase the revenues to our
individual producers and to ensure that we do not ignore any opportunity for
economic growth in our farm community.