LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday,
April 13, 1993
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable
member (Ms. Wowchuk). It complies with
the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk (William
Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of
the
WHEREAS the United Nations has declared 1993
the International Year of the World's Indigenous People with the theme,
"Indigenous People: a new
partnership"; and
WHEREAS the provincial government has totally
discontinued funding to all friendship centres; and
WHEREAS the provincial government has stated
that these cuts mirror the federal cuts; and
WHEREAS the elimination of all funding to
friendship centres will result in the loss of many jobs as well as the services
and programs provided, such as:
assistance to the elderly, the homeless, youth programming, the socially
disadvantaged, families in crisis, education, recreation and cultural
programming, housing relocation, fine options, counselling, court assistance,
advocacy;
WHEREFORE
your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of
* * *
Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the
honourable member (Mr. Martindale). It
complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the
rules. Is it the will of the House to
have the petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 1,000 young adults are currently
attempting to get off welfare and upgrade their education through the student
social allowances program; and
WHEREAS
WHEREAS the provincial government has already
changed social assistance rules resulting in increased welfare costs for the
City of
WHEREAS
the provincial government is now proposing to eliminate the student social
allowances program; and
WHEREAS eliminating the student social
allowances program will result in more than a thousand young people being
forced onto city welfare with no means of getting further full‑time
education, resulting in more long‑term costs for city taxpayers.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that
the Legislative Assembly of
*
(1335)
Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the
honourable member (Mr. Santos). It
complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the
rules. Is it the will of the House to
have the petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of
the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 1,000 young adults are currently
attempting to get off welfare and upgrade their education through the student
social allowances program; and
WHEREAS
WHEREAS the provincial government has already
changed social assistance rules resulting in increased welfare costs for the
City of
WHEREAS the provincial government is now
proposing to eliminate the student social allowances program; and
WHEREAS eliminating the student social
allowances program will result in more than a thousand young people being
forced onto city welfare with no means of getting further full‑time
education, resulting in more long‑term costs for city taxpayers.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that
the Legislative Assembly of
Introduction
of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the
attention of honourable members to the gallery and also to the translation
booth area, where we have 12 visitors from the Riverton Adult Day Care. They are under the direction of Leslee Gislason. These visitors live in the constituency of
the honourable member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans).
Also this afternoon, from
On
behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this
afternoon.
ORAL
QUESTION PERIOD
Provincial
Deficit
Government
Figure
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First
Minister (Mr. Filmon).
Comments made by the member for Rossmere (Mr.
Neufeld) last week in his speech I think are of concern to members opposite.
The member for Rossmere, in talking about the budget and the budget deficit of
'92 and '93, spoke about the fact that the $167 million is noted in the budget
of the government, a hundred million of which pertains to prior years, which
tells me that while the hundred million dollars may not be in this year's
deficit, there is another hundred million dollars in debt that was not there in
1992, March 31.
You
might say, and I quote, that the deficit this year was not 562 but was indeed
862.
That is the difference between last year's
debt and this year's debt.
I would
like to ask the Premier: What will the
deficit be when the Provincial Auditor ultimately reports on the government
finances? Will it be 562 that the
Premier announced in the budget? Will it
be 762, or will it be $862 million, as quoted by the member for Rossmere in a
speech last week?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): I am glad that the
Leader of the Opposition finally is interested in something called
"deficit." I know when he was
part of the Treasury Bench of the former government, he did not care one little
bit about deficits. As a matter of fact,
he proudly indicates that maybe the Pawley administration, in their last gasp
of life, maybe went too far.
Mr.
Speaker, with respect to the question, the member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld)
and I discussed this issue before the member for Rossmere made his presentation
in debate the other day. As I indicated
to him, as has been the longstanding accounting practice of this province, long
before we came to government, that when the change, as a result of a
methodological change as this was, with respect to the census adjustment‑‑that
it would be treated as an extraordinary liability.
Now, if it is a missed estimate with respect
to income tax, either personal or corporate, by that time the year‑end
numbers reflect that change. But in this
case where you had a significant adjustment as a result of a methodological
change, we rightly took $67 million of that and showed that as an add‑on
to our deficit. Now, I would indicate to
the member that the Provinces of
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I guess the Premier (Mr. Filmon)
will want to answer the question of why the
Was
it going to show in the deficit of 862?
Was it just going to float out there as a liability? He did not answer the question of how the
Auditor will show that and I guess we will see ultimately when the Auditor reports. Suffice it to say, it is the highest deficit
as a percentage of our gross domestic product of any government in the history
of running this province.
Population
Statistics
Impact on
Equalization Payments
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the government has spent a lot
of time blaming all their fiscal woes on equalization but not talking about
their population and their lack of population growth.
I
would like to ask the Premier: In light
of the fact that in the '80s equalization payments, in some part, grew because
the population of
*
(1340)
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the
Leader of the NDP does not put forward a proper depiction of the reality
today. There is only one province in
So
I say to the member, if he is trying to paint the case that somehow
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I did not ask the question on out‑migration
and net migration. The population of
Provincial
Deficit
Impact on
Economic Performance
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, a final question to the
Premier: Some $700 million of the
deficit for 1992‑93 is outside of the equalization decline of $167
million, close to 696 to be exact is a deficit outside of the equalization
changes. We have been saying for some
time now that the last place economic performance in 1991 would have an impact
on our bottom line.
I
would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon):
What is the impact on the deficit of the economic performance of the
province, when we were in last place in 1991 and we are projected under the
government's own budget to be in seventh place in 1992? What is the result of the lack of economic
activity on the $700 million in deficit, in the '92‑93 fiscal year?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the
member is twisting all of these various areas of measurement and trying to then
say, okay, what direct impact is the result of certain changes. I say to him that as far as last year's
budget, if he wants to talk about the deficit breakdown, we brought in on the
expenditure side in '92‑93 and we are bang on with respect to
expenditures. On the revenue side we
acknowledged, as we said fully within the budgetary document, that $130 million
of that shortfall was as a result of the federal forecast associated with the
economy. Then another $30 million was
the result of debt, the value of the Canadian dollar softening. Then we took a $67‑million charge, as
against the new methodology associated with the Stats Canada review.
Mr.
Speaker, I had a conference call this morning with upwards of 200 investors
around the world who lauded this province and the budget it brought down
because of the fact hard decisions were made, the fact that tax increases were
not used as has been the case in other provinces. They acknowledged that we held down the
provincial sales tax at 7 percent and indeed that we were following the right
course. It was on that basis that they
will continue to lend us money. I would
think particularly the arch borrower of money who sits across the way, that
that would be very important news to him.
*
(1345)
Motor
Coach Industries
Dial
Corporation Competition
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, perhaps the 200 investors that
the Minister of Finance was speaking to would not have been nearly so impressed
if the Minister of Finance would have told them that the manufacturing base in
the province is disappearing, that last year we lost 4,000 manufacturing jobs
and we are about to lose more.
Mr.
Speaker, on March 12, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism said in a
response to our Leader that the purchase of a bus manufacturing plant in
Can
the minister indicate whether that will have an impact on the 1,200 jobs
approximately that Motor Coach employs in the city of
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, once again the member for
Flin Flon is totally inaccurate in his preamble when he compares
In
terms of his specific question, Mr. Speaker, at the time of previous questions
in this House we had direct contact with Motor Coach and we are assured that
the acquisition that the honourable member is referring to will have no impact
on their operations here in
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, the fact is that Motor Coach is
not the sole determinant of what is going to happen. The parent corporation now owns a bus
manufacturing plant in
Mr.
Speaker, can the minister tell this House what impact that conflict, the clear
conflict that Dial Corporation now has because it has a bus manufacturing plant
in
Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated at the time of the
previous allegations made by the NDP in terms of the impact on Motor Coach here
in
We
had direct contact with Motor Coach at that time in terms of the investment in
Mr. Storie: The minister has not yet indicated whether in
fact he has contacted any of the principals who will have an impact on any
future MCI operations in
Will the minister now meet with principals of
Dial Corporation to ensure that their long‑range plans do not include
competing directly with MCI's operations in
Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, unlike the member for Flin Flon
and his style of government in his day, we are in ongoing and continual contact
with businesses throughout
When we deal with Motor Coach Industries we
deal with their senior officials, and we were given assurances that the issue
that is being addressed here today will have no negative impact on their
operation in
*
(1350)
Budget
Fairness
Mr. Paul Edwards (St.
James): Mr. Speaker, despite the rantings of the NDP,
no one seriously today says that the government does not have financial
problems and does not need to show restraint in spending. But the Premier (Mr. Filmon) defended his
budget last Thursday as a fair budget.
Today the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is
reported as defending that budget as impacting fairly on everyone. He also said that there is no segment of
society that will feel it any more than any other. That is the defence of the budget, that it is
fair and it impacts everyone equally.
The
truth is the expansion of the retail sales tax is a regressive, not a
progressive, form of taxation. It does
not respect ability to pay.
My
question for the Minister of Finance:
How is the harmonization of the PST and the GST, which the minister has
embarked on in this budget, consistent with any definition of progressive, fair
taxation, and will he acknowledge that a consumption tax by definition impacts
poor people more than it does wealthy people?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): If the member believes
his rhetoric at all then he should be standing and lauding the government in
its efforts to keep the sales tax rate at 7 percent. There are Liberal governments elsewhere of
course that have increased the rate as high as 11 percent and 12 percent.
I
can answer the question even more specifically by‑‑when the member
uses the word "harmonization."
We are not taxing services, Mr. Speaker.
To put into place a system where the federal government would collect our
provincial tax at the border we had to accept a broadening of the base‑‑no
different than the
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, it was a Conservative government in
Mr.
Speaker, he has defended again the across‑the‑board increase or
increase in taxes of $75 for every property owner in this province as
fair. My question for the minister: Why again did he not respect the principles
of progressive and fair taxation and raise the same revenue on a scale that
took into consideration those who could afford to pay?
He
defended that by saying, we cannot tell if someone owns a small house; they may
be rich. Well, why did he not respect
ability to pay in the imposing of a $75 increase in taxation on every
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, seeing the member is such a
staunch supporter of the ability to pay, then I am sure he will support our
measures on the expenditure side, particularly in the Department of Health, in
the personal care homes, where we have introduced that method to a greater
extent. I imagine he and his party will
be staunch supporters of that particular approach on the expenditure side.
The
member talks about the credit side and why is it we could not take into account
and relate incomes to the supposed value of a home by way of assessment. I ask him, if he would talk to some of his
friends who are accountants and maybe do some of the tax filing, he would find
out that there is a tremendous strong linkage as between the property tax
credit, the cost‑of‑living tax credit and all of the other credits
provided by the
One
of the great difficulties that we had when we considered this whole area was
that we would not impact in reducing at all the property tax credit, that we
would minimize the impact on the working poor, whom we sense have to be
protected the most through any taxation changes. I am proud to say that for the most part, we
were able to do that.
Mr. Edwards: The fact is, you live in Tuxedo or the west end,
you have got the same $75, Mr. Speaker.
That is the bottom line.
Mr.
Speaker, finally, for the minister‑‑he raises health care. How is it fair to require patients who need
home care services to pay for home care equipment under $50, like crutches,
like colostomy bags? How is it fair to
charge those people that money when you have absolutely no criteria which
respects ability to pay? Will the
minister admit that he is seeking to solve his financial woes on the backs of
the poor and the elderly and the sick?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate what I said last
week. Each and every one of us has an
indebtedness of $11,500, and as much as the member would try and characterize
this as the government's debt, this is the people's debt. Therefore, every one of us in society has to
make some contribution towards that debt.
The
member can try and pretend that we have a tax system that is not
progressive. We have one of the most
progressive tax systems in the land. We
have the most progressive tax credit system in the land, and I am saying to him
that there was no way of dismantling that short of reworking it and rewriting. On that basis, when we take into account that
everybody has to make some contribution to the indebtedness that we each have
in this province, there was no alternative, and I am there to say that the
budget is a fair document.
*
(1355)
Course
Cancellations
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, this government claims that it
does not want to pass on a debt to our children, but this budget ensures that
the young people of
I
want to ask the Minister of Education:
Could she tell us how fewer courses, students with no places, unemployed
teachers, how does this fit with the continued and apparently hollow rhetoric
that we hear from both the federal and provincial Tories?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, our
colleges have had to look at the kind of programming that they will offer,
because a great deal of the programming that they offered was also underwritten
by the federal government. The federal
government has decided that it will be changing the way that it funds training
programs at our colleges, and they will be funding more programs as fee
payers. As a result of that, the
colleges had to re‑examine what they could offer, but in addition, they
also looked at enrollment in the colleges.
They also looked at how highly people were hired following their
training at the colleges. So a number of
issues were taken into account by our community colleges.
Youth
Employment
Programs
Reductions
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, will the minister explain why in
her department she continues herself to cut youth employment programs, when
this month youth unemployment has jumped from 12.9 percent to 15 percent, and
we are not even yet seeing the impact of the lack of summer jobs for students?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): The
labour market statistics, I believe, indicated that
Budget
Impact on
Youth
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Will the minister tell us the impact of the
new housing tax, the additional gasoline tax, the extra tax on school supplies,
the tax on journals, the increases in fees at colleges and universities, and
the cuts to summer youth employment?
What is the collective impact of this on the young people of
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): We have
not even begun to speak about summer employment for youth. I have just let the
member know, and she can see in the budget, that we are certainly committed to
youth employment at, particularly, summer jobs.
We are also continuing to be committed to our training programs and to
accessibility to our universities, so I think the member better look again at
the commitment that this government has.
St.
Boniface Hospital
Layoffs
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, today we are advised that
another 141 people will be laid off at St. Boniface Hospital. In his November press release about health
reform, the minister stated that 380 positions would be lost between Health
Sciences Centre, St. Boniface, and less than a hundred people would actually
lose their jobs as a result of reform.
Are
these additional 141 layoffs announced today part of that total or are they in
addition to the layoffs already announced? Where are the community jobs to
replace those laid‑off jobs?
*
(1400)
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the
layoffs that were shared with the provincial government and with the respective
unions this morning by St. Boniface Hospital are part of their ongoing downsizing
and restructuring within that facility.
It is anticipated, and I think it might be appropriate to read for my
honourable friend the communication that St. Boniface made in conjunction with
advising my colleague the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik) about the layoffs.
I
will quote from their letter: "The
hospital has an established local Workforce Adjustment Committee. Mr. Asselin of Industrial Adjustment
Services; Mr. L. Schoomski, Department of Labour, and all unions are part of
the committee. Employer representatives
on the committee include C. Savard, S. Shofer, S. Macdonald and D.
McMorris."
Mr.
Speaker, clearly no one takes any particular joy in having a number of layoff
notices go out, but St. Boniface is continuing internally to try and minimize
the actual number of people affected by those layoff notices, as well as
participating, Sir, with the provincial redeployment committee.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, the minister did not answer the
question.
I
will try another question. Can the
minister advise if the positions, the cuts at St. Boniface Hospital are as a
result of the nearly $30‑million cut in funding to hospitals, personal
care homes, et cetera, by this provincial government in its regressive budget?
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, without naturally accepting any of
my honourable friend's rhetorical flourish around the question, I would
indicate to my honourable friend that certainly St.
I
note my honourable friend seldom mentions that there were a significant number
of new jobs and employment opportunities at
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I do not have to talk about it
because the minister mentions it. That
is the only thing he can positively mention in this House and has been doing so
for the past four years.
Mr.
Speaker, my final supplementary to the minister: How can the minister justify forcing St.
Boniface Hospital to pick up the expenses, hundreds of thousands of dollars in
expenses, of American consultants to fly to
Mr. Orchard: I appreciate my honourable friend's, again,
rhetorical flourish. My honourable
friend has yet to say that he disagrees with the process of restructuring at
St. Boniface and Health Sciences Centre, that the boards and the senior
management of those hospitals urged us to engage APM so they could
undertake. My honourable friend's
seeming concern is that it is an American firm, and maybe my honourable friend
would like to explain why the government that his front bench was all part of
so embraced American consultants that they hired Drs. R.L. Kain and R.A. Kain
of the
Education
System
Federal
Strategy Paper
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.
Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Education. In today's Globe and Mail there was an article
with respect to an increased role to be played by the federal government in the
area of education. I find that somewhat
ironic in that in a referendum debate just last fall the federal government was
willing to turn over responsibilities for all manpower training and education
to the provinces. It now appears that
they have put their other foot down and now they would like to in fact play a
role.
The
paper has apparently been distributed to the Council of Education Ministers for
the provinces and the territories. Can
the Minister of Education tell this House if she has indeed a copy of this
strategy paper, and will she share that strategy paper with the members of this
House?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, the member has spoken about what she has read in a Globe and Mail
article, and that article did not give the complete tone of the paper. The paper did in fact stress the issue of
federal‑provincial relations and the co‑operation and the national
perspective which Ministers of Education are extremely interested in. I do not have a copy at the moment, but when
we receive a copy I will look at giving the member some information.
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, if in fact the article does not
reflect the complete tone of the paper, then presumably the Minister of
Education has read the paper. If she has
read the paper, presumably she has the paper.
If she has the paper, why will she not distribute it today?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, at the last meeting of the
Ministers of Education some of the information that was related to the paper
was discussed by the ministers. I do not
have the paper at this moment.
However, as I have said to the member, one of
the issues of discussion was an issue of national perspectives. I am aware that is of interest to that
member. I can tell her, too, that within
education, Education ministers and those of us who are also responsible for
labour market development as well are particularly interested in some of the
issues of national perspectives.
As
many in this House know, we are also participating‑‑Manitoba is one
of the participating provinces‑‑in an exam, the Student Achievement
Indicators Project, and we will be looking at some of the national achievements
of students across
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, it would appear that the Council of
Ministers, of which this Minister of Education is indeed a member, sent a
response to the federal government on this strategy paper. If they sent a response, presumably they have
the paper, but they must also have a copy of the response.
Will the Minister of Education transmit to the
members of this House the response of the Ministers of Education to the federal
strategy paper on education?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, a number of the issues that were
covered in response were in response to the federal prosperity paper which the
federal government has spoken about.
Within that, we did want to look at the participation and the co‑operation
between provinces and the federal government on issues such as labour market
development, the Stay‑in‑School Initiative, the Official Languages
program and literacy programming.
In
addition, other issues, this province has already taken a leading role in terms
of looking at education legislative reform in our Task Force on Distance
Education.
Education
System
Federal
Strategy Paper
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, as has just been discussed, the
federal Conservative government is now indicating that it wants to assume a
greater role in education, stick its nose into another area of the Canadian
economy after making a mess out of almost every other area that it has
jurisdiction‑‑and education at the post‑secondary level at
this time.
We
think it is probably to implement their very frightening agenda that they have
outlined in An Action Plan for
In
light of the federal government's cutbacks in education for post‑secondary
education and transfer payments, and its dubious record, Mr. Speaker, I want to
ask the Minister of Education to tell us what specifically is her government's
position with regard to the federal government's announcement?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker,
as I said in earlier answers, we are interested in looking at working co‑operatively
and also consultatively, but we would like to work through the Council of
Ministers of Education because we are interested in the national perspective.
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, I do not know how this minister,
first of all, can put any confidence in a national government that has made
such a mess out of education up to this point in time.
I
want to just follow up on the earlier question and ask this minister if she
will now table a copy of the response‑‑[interjection] It was asked
of her, and she did not answer the question.
The Premier (Mr. Filmon) is chirping from his seat.
We
simply want a copy of the response that was given to the federal government by
the Council of Ministers. Will that
minister now table that response?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, the member speaks about a national
perspective. The national perspective is
one which is developed in consultation with the Council of Ministers of
Education, representing provincial interests across this province in co‑operation
and consultation with the federal government and each of our own
provinces. He, I believe, is alluding to
a federal perspective, and that is different.
Mr. Plohman: We have all been at these ministerial
conferences, and we all give provincial positions. What is wrong with this minister?
I
want to ask the minister what assurances she can give the education community
in
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, the member speaks about having
been at conferences representing the provincial government where there has been
a federal minister. There is not a
federal Minister of Education. Ministers
across
*
(1410)
Canadian
Wheat Board
Barley
Marketing
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Once again, farmers in western
I
want to ask the Minister of Agriculture if he has seen the report and whether
or not he supports the dual system of barley sales or whether he supports the
Wheat Board's control of barley sales.
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister
of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, no, I have not seen the report
because it has not been published. I can
tell the member that 19 people have been appointed to the commission of study,
seven of whom happen to live in the
Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, will the minister admit that
changing to a dual system will reduce the board's power and it will reduce the
overall value of Canadian barley, and
Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, it is rather interesting. That member has already formed an opinion,
and she has not seen the results of a group of experts from across western
I
will tell the member what I will be looking for. I will be looking for maximizing the
opportunity of
Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the minister
has not seen the report. It is the worst‑kept
secret that there is.
Will the minister admit that if we go to the
dual sales, it is going to be remote farmers in northern
Mr.
Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I am really
disappointed. That member is
fearmongering, interested only in a few people.
She is not interested in the broad spectrum of opportunity for people
producing barley in this province. One
of the greatest markets we had for feed grains in, particularly,
The
mission of the commission was to see if we had maximized our opportunities
selling in the North American market, and I will await the results of that
group of experts who have analyzed the whole question for an average of all
farmers in western
Residential
Tenancies
Branch
Staffing
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Mr. Speaker, due to funding cuts by the
provincial and federal governments in housing, the number of units of new
construction of public housing has declined from a thousand units in 1990 to
200 units in 1993, and now the Department of Housing is considering reductions
in staff because they claim that the workload is not there.
Meanwhile, numerous families in the inner city
have a very high migrancy rate which has a detrimental effect on children in
inner‑city schools.
I
would like to ask the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, would she
talk to her colleague the Minister of Housing (Mr. Ernst) and instead of laying
off staff, would they give serious consideration to transferring staff to the
Residential Tenancies Branch so that tenants who request work orders can see
that those work orders are speedily processed and the work orders enforced so
that families are not forced to move in order to find better accommodation in
the private rental market?
Hon. Linda McIntosh
(Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, the new Residential Tenancies
Act, as you know, was brought into place last year. Always as that act is being put into the
marketplace and we are living with it, we are refining and enhancing it at all
times. We have had tremendous co‑operation
from landlords and tenants and excellent feedback.
As
far as the Minister of Housing is concerned, I think he is handling his
department in a very good way. We are
always in communication with each other on areas of interest to Manitobans and
will continue to be.
Public
Housing
Inspection
Program
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Would the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs
give
consideration
to allocating staff to a housing inspection program, whether it is in the
Department of Housing or in the Residential Tenancies Branch, since, with the
demise of the Core Area Initiative and the termination of the Core Area Residential
Upgrading and Maintenance Program, there is no housing inspection program.
The
current system is entirely complaint driven.
Would this minister consider allocating staff to a housing inspection
program?
Hon. Linda McIntosh
(Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and the
Residential Tenancies Branch work in close co‑operation with the
Department of Housing, indeed with many other departments in the government as
well. Ministers are in close co‑operation
and communication with each other on the needs of their various departments and
will continue to be in that kind of co‑operation.
Residential
Tenancies Act
Enforcement
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Would the minister who is responsible for The
Residential Tenancies Act see that this act is enforced since tenants
frequently complain to us from our constituencies including in Burrows that it
takes an inordinate amount of time to have repair order requests processed and
the repair orders enforced?
Will the minister talk to her colleague, the Mi