LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Thursday, April 15, 1993

 

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

 

PRAYERS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

PRESENTING PETITIONS

 

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Stuart Prince, Cam Brown, Rita Cullen and others requesting the Family Services minister (Mr. Gilleshammer) consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba.

Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Alfred Spence, Alvin North, Earl Sinclair and others requesting the Family Services minister (Mr. Gilleshammer) to consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba.

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Cora Lee Poirier, Emily Duguid, Dawn Bates and others requesting the Family Services minister (Mr. Gilleshammer) consider restoring funding for friendship centres in Manitoba.

* * *

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas):  Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Lawrence Disbrowe, Wallace Everelle, Henry Arvin McKay and others requesting the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) to consider restoring funding of the Northern Fishermen's Freight Assistance Program to the level it was in 1990‑91.

 

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS

 

Mr. Speaker:  I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Leonard Evans).  It complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed]

Mr. Clerk (William Remnant):  The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

       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 Manitoba may be pleased to request the Family Services minister to consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker:  I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Dewar).  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 province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

       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 Manitoba may be pleased to request the Family Services minister to consider restoring funding for the friendship centres in Manitoba.

* * *

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 province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

       WHEREAS Manitoba has the highest rate of child poverty in the country; and

       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 Winnipeg already has the highest number of people on welfare in decades; and

       WHEREAS the provincial government has already changed social assistance rules resulting in increased welfare costs for the City of Winnipeg; and

       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 Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) to consider restoring funding of the student social allowances program.

* (1335)

 

Introduction of Guests

 

Mr. Speaker:  Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from the Churchill High School, thirty Grade 9 students, under the direction of Ms. Terri Gartner.  This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock).

       Also this afternoon, from the La Broquerie School, we have thirty Grades 5 and 6 students, under the direction of Mr. Thiessen.  This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger).

       On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon.

 

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

 

Royal Trust Relocations

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

       In June of 1991, the Premier promised to Manitoba some 200 jobs would be relocated to the city of Winnipeg from the Royal Trust Company, with a payroll of some $6 million.  The announcement went on to say that the government would provide a million‑dollar repayable loan.

       We, of course, have asked this question subsequent to the announcement of the government.  In fact, December of 1992, the Premier said in this House, and I quote:  "We have remained in close touch with the Royal Trust people, have had continuing discussions with them.  They still are committed to an investment in Manitoba.  I assure him that there will be news on that in the not too distant future."

       Could the Premier please advise us of the status of those 200 jobs, some of which were going to be located in the province of Manitoba, actually, in the spring of 1992 and have yet to appear?

 

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is entitled to ask whatever questions he wants to, but in attempting to make political hay on an issue, he is raising a matter that obviously is not one that any of us would want to pursue.

       The fact of the matter is that Royal Trust, through problems with respect to its investment portfolio and massive losses over a space of the last two years, is‑‑[interjection] Mr. Speaker, you know the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) has all the smart answers.  He does not care about Manitoba and about corporations.  He applauds corporations which are in difficulty. He is smarter than everybody else in the world, but that attitude will get him exactly nowhere, as it has to date.

       If I may carry on, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that Royal Trust has experienced serious financial difficulty. Such financial difficulty denied them the opportunity to make a multimillion‑dollar investment during that period of time.

       I have spoken with Royal Trust people as recently as late January and again last month, met with them in Toronto.  They are now, of course, under a restructuring as a result of their new ownership by the Royal Bank of Canada.  The people we spoke to indicated that if it is at all possible they are still looking to improve their presence in Winnipeg, in specific, and looking at alternatives to try and meet the kind of commitments that we were looking at a couple of years ago, prior to their financial difficulties when the announcement was made.

       I cannot make any guarantees.  Obviously, our hope is that company will be able to be restructured in a way that they are on sound financial footing and we can, once again, look at the prospect of them devolving some of their operations into Winnipeg.

       We will continue to work positively with them, Mr. Speaker. I think that is the way in which we can look for better things in future.

* (1340)

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, as I say, we are very disappointed that even though the losses were well known in December the Premier left us with a lot of optimism when he assured us, in this House, that there would be some news on this in the not too distant future, in terms of their investment in Manitoba and the jobs that would come here.

       Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier, what is the status of those 200 jobs that were pending in Manitoba, in light of the Royal Bank takeover of Royal Trust?  What is the corporate plan for that Royal Trust takeover, and what are the specific plans for those 200 jobs that were promised to the city of Winnipeg, in terms of the new principals of the company, the Royal Bank?

Mr. Filmon:  Mr. Speaker, just so the member does not imply that I was misleading him or anybody else in my comments in December, I can tell him that when I met with some specific individuals in late January, the individual who was supposed to be coming here as manager of the new facility was one of the people I met with. So indeed plans continued to be afoot for movement of a significant portion of their operations into Winnipeg as late as January.

       All things have changed as a result of the new ownership and the restructuring.  Our intention is to continue to work to convince Royal Trust, under its new ownership, or indeed the Royal Bank or many of the financial institutions.  We have been meeting with a considerable number of them in the course of our development of our strategy to attract back‑office functions in the area of telecommunications and computers from many of Canada's major corporations here.

       The member is probably aware that our work continues to pay fruit with announcements by Unitel a month or so ago, announcements by Canada Post and yet another announcement to be coming forward within an hour or so today.

 

CN Rail Running Trades

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, we are certainly pleased about the announcement today of the service centre jobs being added to Manitoba in terms of the province.  We have been aware of that situation for some time, and we are pleased the service centre will be amalgamated in Winnipeg.

       We are also concerned about the loss of jobs on the running trades in the same railway.  We lost 110 brakemen in November of '92 from the railway.  We have lost 200 or so maintenance‑away employees.  Mr. Speaker, 170 jobs were announced at Weston, the diesel shops, to be lost, which is now put on hold because the facility apparently in Moose Jaw is not large enough.

       In light of the discussions the Premier is having with the senior officials of the railway today and the good announcement he has today, can the Premier advise us on the status of the running trades in the province of Manitoba and the long‑term status of the running trades, Mr. Speaker, in light of some of the job losses we have had, regrettably, over the last couple of months?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  Mr. Speaker, unlike the New Democrats who, when they were in government, made the bald‑faced statement that they could continue to raise the taxes in Manitoba on the railways to punitive levels because, as his predecessor said when the New Democrats were in office, what are they going to do‑‑tear up the tracks, pull up the tracks?

       The fact of the matter is that by imposing punitive tax levels on both railways, we have seen significant reductions in the operations of the railways in Manitoba.  This government is working to make the operations of the railways in this province competitive and advantageous, Mr. Speaker, and as a result we are finally seeing some positive moves with respect to the announcement today that takes a total turnaround from the situation we were put in by New Democrats who were throwing jobs out of this province by raising our taxes on railway diesel fuel to the highest in the country.  That is what happens.

* (1345)

 

Stubble Burning Health Risks

 

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns):  Mr. Speaker, last fall all of us in this House received hundreds of calls and letters from Manitobans suffering from the effects of stubble burning.  We heard from parents of children with asthma living in fear and worry about the health of their children; we heard from people unable to leave their homes to get to work; we heard from physicians reporting that stubble burning in fact was a health hazard.

       The government promised action and today we have received its response.  In terms of public health, Mr. Speaker, there seems to be little more in this report than band‑aid solutions and cosmetic changes.

       I would like to ask the government, since it would seem that Manitobans may, instead of waking up to smoke, will be coming home to smoke, how does this announcement significantly reduce the health risks from stubble burning for all Manitobans and ensure that the health hazard of last fall is not repeated again this year?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment):  Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the member would reread the announcement.  The fact is that we now have a regulated regime in this province for the control of disposal of waste straw, stubble, and I would fully expect that Manitobans, particularly Winnipeggers, will be able to enjoy the outdoors and the comfort of their yards in the fall as well as other seasons of the year.

       The regulation enables us to take particular action if a situation changes, for example if we have burning this spring, that has potential to cause difficulties, we can within six hours notice implement the regulations in a regime that will protect the health of Manitobans.

       So I would ask for her co‑operation, and I would expect that Winnipeggers in particular will reap some considerable satisfaction from the regulations that we put in place.

       Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis:  Mr. Speaker, in January of '92 the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) said, we fully support a review by the Clean Environment Commission of stubble burning.  His head of wellness and health said that although no evidence has existed previously about the health effects of stubble burning, he had since changed his mind due to medical evidence, and in October the MMA clearly called for a review under the Clean Environment Commission.

       I would like to ask the Minister of Health if he is satisfied that the concerns of professionals and physicians in this area have been addressed, and whether he can assure us that Manitobans will be absolutely protected from the health hazards of stubble burning in the future.

Mr. Cummings:  Mr. Speaker, the member chooses to ignore the fact that this is the result of a recommendation of a working group which represented the parents of asthmatics, which represented health interests, also represented community interests, agricultural interests.  The Lung Association was also involved in this nine‑person group.

       The reason that we brought forward the regulations at this time and the reason that we have taken such sweeping powers which we have under The Environment Act, in order to be able to provide the enforcement of these regulations, is precisely the reason that she is asking about, is that we do care about the health of Winnipeggers and Manitobans at large.  Winnipeg is the main concern but the regulations are province‑wide, and under The Environment Act we have exceedingly large and sweeping powers, virtually frightening in the eyes of some people, I would suggest.

       I tell you that those powers will be enforced in order to protect that very issue of the health of Winnipeggers or others in the public who are sensitive to the smoke.  It is a practice that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) has been working very hard to have reduced and eliminated, and what we have here is a coming together of communities.  The agricultural community has been extremely co‑operative in developing a control mechanism, and those who represent the urban issues have also brought their points forward strongly and support this approach.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  Mr. Speaker, in this announcement there is no permit system with tough guidelines and meaningful penalties. There is no Clean Environment Commission review on health.  There is no new research into alternatives.  There is no new education‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  I would like to remind the honourable member this is not a time for debate.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis:  My question, Mr. Speaker, since we remain concerned about how this will deal with the health hazard of stubble burning on Manitobans is:  What longer term contingency plan does this government have in place in the event that this regulation, this announcement does not adequately protect people from the health hazards‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member has put her question.

Mr. Cummings:  Mr. Speaker, I am appalled that that member would put such false and misleading information on the record.  It says right in the press release that the first ticket has fines of up to a thousand dollars under summary conviction.  Beyond that, for repeat offences or for flagrant and very abusive situations, we can go to The Environment Act which, frankly, has fines up to $50,000.

       Now if that is what she says is insufficient, then I suggest that they are talking about draconian government and that is not what this province wants.

* (1350)

 

Violence Prevention Programs

Government Resources

 

Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood):  Mr. Speaker, it is not difficult for any Manitoban to pick up a newspaper or to be in a conversation where there is not talk about the increased amount of violence among our young people, and in fact in our schools and in our society.  The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) said yesterday that families must take some responsibility in managing children with behavioural problems.  No one would dispute that, but governments also have a responsibility to assist families and to assist children in dealing with these particular behavioural problems and certainly with increasing violence.

       I would ask the Minister of Family Services if he could tell this House and in fact tell Manitobans, if a family does have a difficulty with a child, a child who is experiencing behavioural problems, what resources are available to that family so they can be good parents and they can receive the support that they need for the children who are misbehaving and for children where there is increased violence?  Can the minister provide that information today?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, the first response usually comes through the school system where funding is provided for more guidance counsellors today than the school system has ever had before.

       School guidance counsellors are often the first line of defence in terms of working with those children who are finding difficulties in the school system, and working with those families and with the teachers who deal with those children on a day‑to‑day basis to resolve the issues there.

       The school counsellors not only work within the school setting but from time to time work with the families in their home as well.  I know from personal experience that many of those fine professionals do some tremendous work in alleviating the problems that students have in the school setting.

 

Child and Family Services

 

Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood):  Mr. Speaker, with a supplementary to the same minister:  For families and children who are experiencing those problems, the school personnel, teachers are telling us that when they make referrals for severely disturbed children to Child and Family Services, that in fact if you are 14 years of age and over, the chances of your receiving service are very, very low.

       Can the minister tell us, given that he has increased the workload of the Child and Family Services personnel and given that they have eliminated the family counselling program since 1988 with the government, what resources are really available there for these families and for these parents?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member, in doing her research on this particular question, talked to members of the media who contacted the executive director of Child and Family Services and he informs me that is not the case.  They do work with children who are over 14 years of age.

       Ms. Gray:  Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Family Services then tell this House if Child and Family Services, which comes under his jurisdiction, is working with children who are over 14 and is accepting all the referrals?

       Why do we have qualified teachers in these schools who are in fact saying they are not picking up the referrals and there are no services for the children?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, certainly there are difficult children in the school system that parents have difficulty coping with at home, the school system has difficulty coping with, and they in turn do access services provided by Child and Family Services.

       In a conversation with the executive director earlier today, I am sure prompted by the member asking the question, I am given the understanding that they certainly provide services for children who are over 14.

* (1355)

 

Child and Family Services

Reduced Workweek

 

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows):  Mr. Speaker, as we have seen, there is increasing concern across the country for the interests of children and the increasing caseloads of different provincial governments and cutbacks which are reducing services.

       In the province of Manitoba we have seen the street children and youth program closed, cuts in staff to Indian and Metis friendship centres as a result of budgetary decisions, 10 percent reductions in agency budgets.

       Can the Minister of Family Services, in follow‑up to statements that he made in Interim Supply, tell the House if he has had a chance to meet again with the chief executive officer of Child and Family Services and other agency heads to see how they are going to implement provision of services when there are 3,000 hours less service to provide to children?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, if the member had listened to my previous answer, I had discussions with the executive director this morning.

Mr. Martindale:  Mr. Speaker, my question is:  What have the agency heads said and what are they going to do?  How does this minister account for the discrepancy between what the CEO of Winnipeg is saying about less hours of service, underfunding, understaffing now, and an increasing caseload?  What is this minister going‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member has put his question.

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, I am sure many of us read the same articles in the local papers today, that governments in Newfoundland, Saskatchewan and Ontario were finding some difficulties in this area.  Manitoba has the most comprehensive and most numerous Child and Family Services agencies across this country.

       Certainly, executive directors and board chairs have acknowledged the challenge that lies ahead of them in working with children who are having difficulty, and they have worked co‑operatively with us and accepted that challenge, and are in the process of finding those solutions.

Mr. Martindale:  Mr. Speaker, we want to know from this minister what the specifics are, other than the rhetoric about meeting the challenges, because we cannot count on this minister to protect the interests of children when there are fewer resources, when there are budget reductions, when there are fewer staff, fewer investigations‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member, there are more resources there today than there were in 1988 when we came to government.  We have dramatically increased the funding in most of the social areas, and the plans that the member is asking for are now being formulated by the executive officers of those agencies and their staff.  I know that later today, some of these decisions are being communicated to staff.  When they become public, we will make them available for the member.

 

Child Care-The Pas

Funding Reduction

 

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas):  Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Family Services.

       Mr. Speaker, this government, through Northern Affairs, likes to talk about the work that the Northern Economic Development Commission is doing in the North currently.  The Minister of Family Services I am sure is aware that one of the themes that has already emerged from those hearings so far is that northern people, particularly women, be given every opportunity to access employment, training and business.

       Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services whether he can table in this House today a study, a report, any research material or criteria that he used to justify those cuts to the daycare program in The Pas.

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services):  Mr. Speaker, some weeks ago we announced the changes in daycare. This comes after a dramatic increase in funding over the last number of budgets.  When we came to government, the Day Care line was $26 million or $27 million.  We have virtually doubled that amount of money.

       I do not know whether the member heard the other day, I did leave some misleading information in the House when I said that our program was three times as big as Saskatchewan's.  In fact, it is four times bigger than Saskatchewan's.

       So we this year will show, and I am sure the member has already noticed that, an increase in our daycare budget, but we have certainly brought in some changes which freeze the licensing of new spaces and also caps the subsidy at 9,600 spaces.  Mr. Speaker, we are going to work with the daycare community to see that it has a minimal impact on any particular daycare.

* (1400)

Mr. Lathlin:  Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can ask the minister to answer my supplementary question, because he never did answer my first question.

       Mr. Speaker, can the minister explain to this House today why the daycare program cuts in The Pas represented 13 percent of those cuts made across the province‑‑13 percent?  Can he explain or point out to members here where the fairness is in those cuts that were made?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that his information is wrong.  The change that we are making in the daycare is bringing down the number of subsidized spaces from 10,000 spaces to 9,600 spaces, some 400 spaces.  With the number of centres and daycare operations across the province, we are trying to manage these changes so that no particular daycare centre would lose more than one subsidized space.

Mr. Lathlin:  Mr. Speaker, my last question to the same minister is:  Will the minister reconsider those cuts his government made to The Pas daycare program until such time that he has come to The Pas, met with those people who are involved in the daycare program and after he has adequately studied the daycare situation in The Pas?  Will he consider his decision?

Mr. Gilleshammer:  Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in a previous answer, the member's information is wrong.  I would offer to meet with him later today or tomorrow to look at the numbers that he has before him to indicate that the changes we are making in the daycare do have a fairness about them.

 

School Tax Levy Fairness

 

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster):  Mr. Speaker, on every city property tax bill, you have a city tax that you pay, you have a school tax portion that you pay.  The city tax is applied equally throughout the city of Winnipeg.  The school tax, on the other hand, is not.

       Because of the current structure of the school divisions, if you happen to live in a $70,000 home in Winnipeg School Division No. 1, you would pay $1,034 in property tax.  If you happen to live in St. James or Winnipeg No. 2, on a $70,000 home, it would be $756.

       Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Finance is:  Can the Minister of Finance tell me, is that in fact a fair tax when up to 25 percent more is being paid from some residents in the city of Winnipeg than others?  Is that fair?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, now that the member for Inkster has done his research and he now understands that there is a difference as per tax rates, I would indicate to him that the provincial levy applies equally to those two homes, regardless of where they are in the province of Manitoba.

       Mr. Speaker, if the member then wants to draw into the debate to what extent the local school divisions should have autonomy and should have the freedom to make their own budgetary decisions and consequently reflect that in different special levies as between one school division and the other, then I say to him, that is a big issue.  If the member is saying collapse the school boards and the big power of government come in and ultimately make everything uniform, then let him say that.

Mr. Lamoureux:  Mr. Speaker, there is only one way this inequity can be resolved, and that is if this government brings in the necessary legislation‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  This is not a time for debate.  The honourable member for Inkster, with his question, please.

Mr. Lamoureux:  Mr. Speaker, how can the Minister of Finance justify, in Weston you would pay $443; in Brooklands, right across the street from Keewatin, you would pay $324?  That is a significant difference.  How does the minister‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member has put his question.

Mr. Manness:  Mr. Speaker, as I say to the would‑be leader of the Liberal Party, I have agriculture land in the School Division of Morris‑MacDonald and I have agriculture land in the School Division of Seine River.  They are bounding each other in two different school divisions.

       I dare say, although the same productivity is there, the mill rate, as a result of the special levy in one school division, is an additional five mills as compared to one school division to the other.  That is on the basis of the fact that one school division has decided to offer greater programming and charge its people accordingly.  It is not an assessment issue.

Mr. Lamoureux:  Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Finance tell me why the poorest people in the city of Winnipeg have to pay the highest property tax because this government refuses to act on this issue?  Explain that.

Mr. Manness:  Mr. Speaker, I do not need to explain the decision of trustees duly elected under an autonomous system, to make decisions in council which obviously, in some cases, cause a greater cost to be applied against ratepayers in one school division versus another.  It is not my role. [interjection] No, no.  The member said two different school divisions.

       So, Mr. Speaker, if that is the question and it is between different school divisions, it is not my role to stand here and answer that question.

 

Income Tax Act

Dr. Connie Curran Exemption

 

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  Mr. Speaker, Clause 31(f) of the Connie Curran contract allows her to apply for exemptions from Canadian tax and Manitoba tax.  The Minister of Finance refused to answer the question yesterday, but he did tell the newspaper his department is going to or is looking into the matter.  Connie Curran looked into the matter before she signed the contract. Now the province is looking at the matter as to whether or not she will pay taxes.

       Why is the province only now looking at the matter, Mr. Speaker, about her tax obligations on a $3.9‑million contract to the people of Manitoba?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance):  Mr. Speaker, this is not the country of Manitoba.  This is the country of Canada.  I dare say decisions on taxes with respect to a situation such as this are made completely and totally and entirely within the Department of Finance federally.  We do not, as the Province of Manitoba, have any jurisdiction as to determine residency of any individual.  I dare say we were not consulted by the federal government with the development of their laws.  At this point in time we are not ever consulted by Canada with respect to a judgment that is being rendered.

       Now we understand that APM has sought a judgment from Canada.  Our thinking at this point in time, at least of what we know, is that if they are not resident they will not be paying tax‑‑like every other consulting group from outside of the country.

Mr. Chomiak:  Mr. Speaker, the minister had the ability to negotiate this contract.  There are clauses in this contract dealing with tax and nonliability for tax.

       My question to the minister is:  Could not the minister put a clause or clauses in this contract that would have specified that she meets the criteria so that she would be entitled to pay taxes and that there are basically three elements to that criteria, from the tax advice that I have received?

Mr. Manness:  Mr. Speaker, we followed the same format that the member's party did when they were in government and engaged themselves in the contract also with consultants from the U.S. Furthermore, what the member is saying is, well, you should have twisted the arm off of APM and got them to concede that they would voluntarily pay taxes in the province of Manitoba.

       I would say, Mr. Speaker, to the member, live in the real world.  That does not happen.  It is just like if I were to ask the member to voluntarily pay more tax than he is now as a citizen of this province, he would probably tell me to go somewhere else.

* (1410)

Mr. Chomiak:  Mr. Speaker, in the real world people do not get paid $3.9 million a year.

 

Income Tax Act

Dr. Connie Curran Exemption

 

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  My final supplementary to the minister.  Does he think it is fair‑‑[interjection] That is right, Mr. Speaker.  Teemu opens hospitals, not closes them.  We hear the shot from the Premier.

       My final supplementary to the Premier, since he is saying so much on this issue from his seat:  Does he think it is fair to allow a U.S. consultant to earn $3.9 million in one year from the Province of Manitoba, plus expenses, tax free?  Does he think that is‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member's question is clearly seeking an opinion and therefore out of order.

       The honourable member for Kildonan, would you want to kindly rephrase your question, please. [interjection]

       Order, please.  I had advised the honourable member for Kildonan that it was seeking an opinion and was therefore out of order.  Kindly rephrase your question.

Mr. Chomiak:  My final supplementary is to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness).

       Will the Minister of Finance reveal in this House what the per diem rate is for Connie Curran, the per diem rate that we are paying this woman and these consultants to come in from the U.S.?  Will he reveal it, since she has apparently no competitors and she has no‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member has put his question.

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend is really attempting to malign a process which two hospitals, their boards, their administration urged government to engage in.

       Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my honourable friend the New Democrat in opposition that this is the most open sharing of information.  My honourable friend would not have a single question around this engagement of APM if we had not given him the contract, for the first time I think probably ever that consultants' contracts‑‑prior to them being engaged, has been tabled at a news conference.

       Mr. Speaker, that contrasts quite significantly to the circumstance that I discovered when I became Minister of Health that the NDP, through the back door with no one knowing, engaged U.S. consultants to study home care.  There was no contract tabled.  There were no details.  There was no tendering.  There was only a unilateral decision behind closed doors by New Democrats in government.

       They, Sir, are hypocritical in opposition.  They do exactly the opposite they do in government.

     

Point of Order

 

Mr. Chomiak:  Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the Minister of Health ought to know that what he says is patently wrong‑‑

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.  The honourable member does not have a point of order.  That is clearly a dispute over the facts.

 

Children's Dental Program

Funding Reduction Impact

 

Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake):  Mr. Speaker, over the past three years it has become obvious that the commitment to job creation and services for rural Manitobans has become again another broken promise by this government.

       I would like to ask the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), does the minister have any reports or studies stating that the cuts to the dental program for rural children will not negatively impact on the 60,000 children, including 700 children from the Interlake alone?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health):  Mr. Speaker, I presume my honourable friend is posing a question about the Children's Dental Health Program.

       As I have indicated to other questions from members opposite and in response to questions about the budget, yes, we did make the decision to remove the treatment component in the Children's Dental Health Program, which is available to children going to school outside of Brandon and Winnipeg, but we have maintained, Sir, the most significant and important, however less costly, part of the program, that being education and treatment.

       In addition to that, Sir, I want to tell my honourable friend that since we have come to office we have expanded the fluoridation grants to a number of communities in rural Manitoba, so that a significant number of additional children in Manitoba now drink fluoridated water, which has been proven to substantially increase dental health.

Mr. Clif Evans:  Mr. Speaker, did this minister consult with the health specialists, the rural municipalities and the officials? Did he consult with these people as to the effect and the impact this would have on the communities and on people in rural Manitoba with children?

Mr. Orchard:  Mr. Speaker, when you are making budgetary decisions, there is some inability to go out and consult and communicate, et cetera, as to what some of your program decisions are.

       Sir, I want my honourable friend to understand that we did not make this decision with any particular joy, and I simply say to my honourable friend, neither did the government of Saskatchewan that made a similar decision.

       These are very difficult times for all governments in Canada, and in formulating a budget which attempts to protect prevention and target services, Sir, we had to make some difficult decisions.  In my ministry this time around, one of the difficult decisions was the treatment portion of the Children's Dental Health Program, while maintaining the integrity of the prevention education program.

 

Lakeside Camp

Proposal for Use

 

 Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake):  Mr. Speaker, further on rural development and creation in economic development, I want to ask the minister and this government why do they not support the application of Mr. R.J. Moore to purchase and reopen the closed Lakeside Camp?  Do they not believe this is an important step for the future?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources):  Mr. Speaker, the honourable member is referring to a facility that is known to us as the Lakeside Camp, and it was formerly operated by the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities.

       There has not been a satisfactory alternative user for that property found, principally because the terms and conditions that we have laid down, namely, that if at all possible the facility be maintained in such a manner that it can still provide the service to the community, including the school children in that community, there just simply has not been an acceptable proposal call made to government.

Mr. Speaker:  The time for Oral Questions has expired.

 

House Business

 

Mr. Speaker:  Prior to getting into Orders of the Day on the debate on the budget, I will recognize the honourable government House leader, I believe, on House Business.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader):  Mr. Speaker, I apologize for not rising sooner.