LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday,
April 22, 1993
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING
PETITIONS
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Norman R. Fleury, Dennis Johnstone, Leo Chartrand and many others requesting
the Family Services minister (Mr. Gilleshammer) consider restoring funding for
the friendship centres in
Mr. Speaker: I have been advised by the honourable member
for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) that he no longer wishes to proceed with his
petition, and since his petition now is a House document, is there leave of the
House to remove the petition of the honourable member for The Maples?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Mr. Speaker: That is agreed. I would like to thank all honourable members.
* * *
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 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: 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. Santos). 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: 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
* (1335)
TABLING OF
REPORTS
Hon. Glen Cummings
(Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I would
like to table the Sixth Annual Report of the Manitoba Hazardous Waste
Management Corporation for the year 1992.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the
second State of the Environment Report for
MINISTERIAL
STATEMENTS
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have a ministerial statement
for the House.
Mr. Speaker, today I wish to announce
changes to the Prescription Drugs Cost Assistance Program, commonly known as
Pharmacare. Before I advise the House of
the changes to the regulations, I would like to remind the members of the
reason for Pharmacare, which has been in place since 1975.
It is a program designed to assist
Manitobans with financial costs resulting from prescription drug therapy to
meet medical needs. It was not intended,
Sir, to provide for duplicate benefits to individuals, nor to stimulate
nonmedical increases in the utilization or purchase of prescription drugs or
the demand for more expensive drugs solely for the purpose of attaining
additional financial benefits.
Mr. Speaker, this is a program which cost
the taxpayers of
Today, I wish to inform the House that
Pharmacare receipts will be issued for the cash value of the prescription
only. This will mean the program will
continue to provide Pharmacare benefits to residents of
Pharmacare will curtail the current
practice of providing refunds to employers who may have a negotiated benefit
for 100 percent coverage of drug costs.
Current provisions will be grandfathered to the end of the Pharmacare
year during which the negotiated contract expires. Obviously, this change may have an impact on
future contract negotiations.
Pharmacists throughout the province will
be notified of the amendment which is intended to accomplish the
following: to prohibit duplicate
reimbursement of drug claims by Manitoba Pharmacare; to ensure that the
official Manitoba Pharmacare receipt is issued only for the amount paid by the
eligible person.
A key component of the changes to the
regulation is the information which will be provided on the official
receipt. It will no longer indicate the
prescription price, but will show the amount paid by the eligible person. If the individual pays nothing, then the
receipt must indicate that the amount paid was nothing.
In addition to notifying all pharmacists,
private insurers will be advised of the changes. This will ensure that administrative changes
can be made to eliminate duplicate costs, particularly at a time of scarce
resources to fund provincial drug, health and other programs.
The insurers will be offered two options: 1.
That the official Manitoba Pharmacare receipt can be submitted to and
retained by Pharmacare and will not be available to the private insurer; or 2. If the receipt is submitted to the private
insurer, it is stamped to indicate it has been processed and at what level of
benefit prior to its being sent to Pharmacare.
* (1340)
In conclusion, I want to reiterate there
should be no opportunity for personal gain nor should money from taxpayer‑supported
programs be used to enhance or offset the benefits achieved through
negotiations. Taxpayer‑supported
programs such as Pharmacare can only be maintained, Sir, if they are accessed
fairly and equitably by all Manitobans.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I note that it is somewhat
surprising that the minister should stand up and talk about changes in
regulations in one aspect to Pharmacare.
When the minister delists drugs, when the minister cuts off the
accessibility of the people of
It is a welcome change, Mr. Speaker, that
perhaps the minister from now on, when he changes regulations that
significantly affect the lives of Manitobans and the rights of Manitobans to
health care services and access of those services, maybe he will announce it in
this House and announce it to the people of
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the statement
of the minister, I know it is a change in regulation, something that the
minister‑‑I understand he had the opportunity to do some changes
for several years and did not do that.
We, on this side of the House, look for this government to continue our
Pharmacare program and not to cut it back as they have done in the last little
while.
We are getting dozens of calls in our
office weekly, Mr. Speaker, about the government position with respect to‑‑
Some Honourable Members:
Oh, oh.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, obviously, the government is
sensitive about their floundering in Pharmacare and about the kind of calls
that they are getting on Pharmacare, from their comments that are coming across
the way.
I would welcome this government‑‑if
this minister would now start issuing some public statements about what is
happening in health care, because this is a first, we welcome the opportunity
of the minister actually announcing a regulation in this House, something that
has not been done in the past and has been avoided by this minister time and
time again.
It is also ironic that this government
brings in legislation dealing with contractual arrangements that have been
entered into between parties, when this government is probably guilty‑‑the
first government in Canadian history to remove the rights of people in
collective agreements, to remove their rights in terms of The Labour Relations
Act in the form of legislation that is before this House. This government cannot negotiate so they run
the laws by legislation and by regulations.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to respond
to this announcement.
Mr. Speaker, when the issue of Pharmacare
problems came up about three or four weeks ago, at that time the media brought
to our attention that the issue has been there for a number of years, but the
issue is of fairness to all Manitobans.
We are very pleased that the government
has come up with this proposal, because that will finally establish a fairness
for all people. As the minister has said
in his conclusion, the Pharmacare program, any socially funded program, is
based on the premise that taxpayers are paying so that each one of us has equal
access on an equal basis. So we are very
pleased. Also, we are very pleased that
the government is going to honour their commitment for the present
contract. When the new contract is going
to come, then the union can negotiate that part.
Mr. Speaker, this announcement really
tells us that things are changing. Now
we have seen by this move, plus the triplicate prescription program, the new
program the services commission is going to start with the
Mr. Speaker, it is a very positive
announcement. It was overdue and the
minister and the government have finally come up with it. I think other provinces are having a good
look at how we are dealing with health care in
* (1345)
Mr. Speaker, we have to make sure that we
protect our program. We have to make
sure that all people of
INTRODUCTION
OF BILLS
Bill 207‑The
Environmental Bill of Rights Act
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 207, The Environmental Bill of Rights Act;
Loi sur la declaration des droits en matiere d'environnement, be introduced and
that the same be now received and read a first time.
Motion presented.
Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Speaker, I have been looking forward to
introducing this bill, and I have a draft with me. The purpose of this environmental rights
legislation is to ensure that citizens can act on behalf of the environment. A lot of thought has gone into this bill to
ensure that responsibility is placed where it belongs.
One of the provisions in the bill that is
most important will be whistle blowing, strengthening the provisions that will
allow workers to have action taken when their health in the workplace and in
the community generally is threatened.
Mr. Speaker, many people do not realize that already our environmental
legislation is reactive to complaints, and this would strengthen people's
ability to act on behalf of the environment.
The purpose of the bill is to shift the balance of power which is so
necessary to put power into the hands of citizens who are taking leadership and
setting the stage for change in our economy.
In closing, just let me say that this is
an important piece of legislation. It
has been introduced similarly in other provinces, and it is time that this
provincial government would take steps to lead on environmental legislation and
not follow. I hope all members of the House will give the bill serious
consideration and support.
Motion agreed to.
Introduction
of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the
attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have this afternoon
from
Also this afternoon, from the
Also this afternoon, from the
On behalf of all honourable members, I
would like to welcome you all here this afternoon.
* (1350)
ORAL
QUESTION PERIOD
Immigrant Investor Fund
Audit
Release
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): My question is to the Deputy Premier (Mr.
Downey).
Mr. Speaker, in March of 1991, we asked
the government to investigate the situation with the Immigrant Investor Fund in
the
Mr. Speaker, the report that the minister
released in early January of this year indicates that: The provincial government is charged with the
responsibility of determining economic benefit and impact for the proposed
investments. Our review has indicated a
general lack of hard economic analysis and documentation on the specific
investment proposals outside of the information provided by the promoters.
My question to the Deputy Premier is: They have asked for five more audits of five
specific funds. Will the government release
those audits today and let Manitobans know the status of those investigations?
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): As I have responded on previous occasions
in this House to a similar question, I indicated that once we receive all five
audits, we will be making a public statement at that time and making
appropriate information available.
To date, we do not have all five audits,
Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Doer: I would ask the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey)
whether the scope of the audits and the scope of the information will be
released to the public of
Will it include the disposition of funds
produced by the provincial or federal government to the various projects that
were co‑sponsored by the Immigrant Investor Fund, for example, grants
made by the provincial and federal governments through the federal‑provincial
tourism grants? Will it include the
disposition of those public funds in those audits, and will we know how the
disposition of those funds have taken place when the minister releases his five
audits?
Mr. Stefanson: I believe, Mr. Speaker, as the Leader of the
Opposition well knows, the five audits‑‑and I have outlined the
five programs that are being audited to this House before‑‑revolves
around the distribution of the Immigrant Investor proceeds, all aspects, from
the original approval right through to the final distribution and completion of
the project.
So the short answer is, the focus is
clearly on the distribution of the Immigrant Investor Program funds, Mr.
Speaker.
Code of
Conduct
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): I am very disappointed in the minister's
answer, that he would not say or give us the assurance today that the
disposition of public funds in projects that were involved with the Immigrant
Investor Fund, the disposition of those public funds would not be also released
to the public.
I think the public has a right to know the
status of the money in the various investments that the government is
reviewing. I would encourage the
minister to change his position and release the disposition of those funds so
the public can be assured.
A final question to the Deputy Premier
(Mr. Downey): The Hong Kong Securities
Commission, in late February of 1993, has released a new code on the immigrant
investment schemes, Mr. Speaker. They
have released a new code of conduct, and it deals with various aspects of
Immigrant Investor Funds. It deals with
the issue of promoters who are out selling citizenship through visas and
investments on the one hand, and these very same promoters putting that money
in their own projects, on the other hand, and at the same time taking fees at
various different levels of those investment decisions.
I would like to ask the minister: Has he reviewed the new guidelines or code of
conduct produced by the Hong Kong Securities Commission, and what advice can he
give us on the value of these codes of conduct for investors outside of the
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, I want to go back just very
briefly to the preamble of the Leader of the Opposition, when he talks about
the distribution of funds under other government programs. He well knows when that occurs, it is made
public at that particular point in time, whether it is a distribution under a
manufacturing industrial opportunity program, whether it is under any other
government program or whether it is under any of the federal‑provincial
agreements, whether it is tourism, forestry or whatever the case might be.
So those individual allocations are made
public at that time, and clearly the terms and conditions are made public as
well, Mr. Speaker. So if he has specific
questions on any project at any point in time, we are more than pleased to
answer that. I am not sure where he is
heading or what suggestion or allegations he is making.
On the issue of the Hong Kong Securities,
Mr. Speaker, again, I believe, as the Leader of the Opposition well knows, this
review of the Immigrant Investor Program has three main issues attached to
it. It has the five individual
audits. It has the overall audit that
was tabled in January of this year done by Deloitte and Touche, which we are
dealing with the federal government on in terms of building strength around the
Immigrant Investor Program. As the
Leader of the Opposition well knows, until those issues are addressed, there
will be no approval of any Immigrant Investor programs in
A part of that review is the information
he referred to as it relates to the current announcements of the Hong Kong
Securities Commission. A third issue
that is being addressed, Mr. Speaker‑‑it is the five audits; it is
the Immigrant Investor Program, and it is the issue of the freeze on the
Lakeview funds, on which again, an announcement should be made shortly.
* (1355)
Children's
Advocate
Recommendations
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Mr. Speaker, in Family Services Estimates on
April 20, earlier this week, as recorded in Hansard on pages 1871 and 1872, I
asked the Minister of Family Services three times if the new Children's Advocate
had made any recommendations to him about any area of concern in his
department.
I would like to ask the minister
again: Has the Children's Advocate made
any recommendations to this minister concerning cuts in the Department of
Family Services or any government policy in his department?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer
(Minister of Family Services): Mr.
Speaker, yes, I acknowledge that the member did raise the question in Estimates
the other day, and the answer is yes. The
Advocate, in conversations with me on a number of occasions, has raised a
number of issues.
At the present time, as the member knows,
the office is just being set up, but in the meantime, the Advocate has met with
many groups, foster parents, agencies and others in the community. I meet with the Advocate on a regular basis,
and he has relayed the substance of those conversations to me.
Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, I specifically asked if he made any
recommendations. The minister refuses to
answer that. In fact, he answers in the
negative.
Foster
Family
Recommendations
Mr. Doug Martindale
(Burrows): Will the minister admit that he has a letter
from the Children's Advocate in which the Advocate says, I have made a
recommendation to the minister recommending that cuts to basic maintenance fees
for foster families be reconsidered?
Will the minister acknowledge that he has received a copy of that
letter, and what is he going to do about this recommendation‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order please.
The honourable member has put his question.
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer
(Minister of Family Services): Mr.
Speaker, I answered in the affirmative that yes, the Advocate has made
recommendations to me and brought me up‑to‑date on many of the
conversations that he has had.
In the letter that the member is referring
to, he has summarized conversations he has had with a number of foster parents
over their concerns. They are the same
concerns that foster parents have raised with me through their organization.
They are the same concerns that the foster
parents raised with me when I met with them on the steps of the Legislature.
Yes, the Advocate has indicated that it is of concern to him, the feelings that
foster parents have about our new financial relationship with them. It is a subject of ongoing discussions.
Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister
of Family Services what specific actions is he going to take to respond to
these recommendations from the Children's Advocate, in light of the fact that
he says that he is concerned that the needs of children may not be fully met
with the recent cuts and that he is concerned that if foster families do not
accept children, it will do irreparable damage to the Child and Family Services
system.
What action is this minister going to take
to correct the current situation in response to the recommendations of the
Children's Advocate?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, the issue is about rates, and I
would point out to the member that the rates have been dramatically increased
since the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) and some of his fellow travellers
were in cabinet, dramatic increase in rates since then. Our rates are $3 or $4 higher than some other
jurisdictions, amongst the highest in
Irrespective of that, there are issues in
the Child and Family Services area‑‑we have a number of initiatives
on the way. We had an opportunity to
talk the other day in Estimates about some of the reform issues that we are
proceeding with, and I tell the member again that
* (1400)
Bill 24
Consultations
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
My question to the minister responsible
for the Taxicab Board is, or can the minister tell this Chamber whom has he
consulted before bringing in this so‑called piece of legislation?
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the debate
on this bill when we move further with the discussion on that. The Taxicab Board is a quasi‑judicial
board which has basically been dealing with the many complex problems in the
taxicab industry, under the chairmanship of Don Norquay, who is also the Chairman
of the Motor Transport Board.
There have been all kinds of hearings and
input into the whole system of the taxicab industry over the past number of
years. I would like to think that under
the capable chairmanship of Mr. Norquay we have had a relative calm in the
taxicab industry for some time.
I have all the confidence in the chairman
that the proper consultation has taken place in terms of developing the act
that is before the House right now. I
would ask the member to wait until I give second reading to the bill to give
clarification to it and give the spreadsheets to the critics so they can look
and see what it is all about.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, under other circumstances, there
would have been a consultation that would have been done. This industry has been singled out time after
time‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for
The honourable member for
Justification
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I find it sort of ironical
that this member is getting so agitated and excited when he does not even know
what actually is happening in the bill.
If he has a little bit of patience, I
think maybe tomorrow, I can give second reading and maybe take and allay some
of the fears that he is sort of drumming up in his own mind right now.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, unlike the minister, I have read‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is:
Another aspect is that we are asking certified mechanics‑‑certified
mechanics are not good enough for the Taxicab Board. They have to be approved by the Taxicab
Board.
Again, are we going to see Workers
Compensation‑‑and now we are going to have Workers Compensation
saying if you are a doctor, you have to be on such and such a list? Why is that necessary?
Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I think the member has a bit of a
hearing problem. I have tried to
indicate in the two previous answers that the moment we have second reading, I
will clarify these things and explain this to the member.
Lest he has some kind of a health
condition developing with his agitation, I suggest that he maybe wait, and I
think possibly tomorrow, I will give second reading, and then I am prepared to
debate it with him.
Sugar Beet
Industry
Federal
Tariff Policy
Mr. Jack Penner
(Emerson): Mr. Speaker, as you know, the sugar beet
industry is an industry that has been of long‑standing duration in this
province, which came into existence some time in 1945. The reason it was brought into this province
was because this area lends itself well to sugar production, and the country of
As of the last number of years, the
federal government has refused to abide by the same rules, Mr. Speaker, as all
other 42 sugar‑producing nations in the world do, and has not allowed a
tariff to be applied on sugar coming into this country.
I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture
today, what action he has taken and what points he has raised with our federal
government, mainly the Minister of Agriculture and the Department of External
Affairs, to convince them that because of their unilateral action, we need the
federal government to take on the responsibility of ensuring that we will have
a sugar beet industry in this province and in
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, the
member raises a very valid point. This
is the only country of 42 in the world that does not have a degree of sugar
policy on its border. What happens is
that cheap sugar gets dumped into the country, and it depresses the market
price for our sugar beet producers here in
Going back now over two to three years, I
have continually raised this with the federal minister. The federal minister had a special measures
committee, which we were represented on, which the growers were represented
on. Again, we advocated that a sugar
policy was important to maintain and stabilize the sugar industry in
To this point in time, no matter how many
times I raise it in meetings, federal‑provincial meetings, no matter how
many times we write letters, no matter how many times the growers ask the same
question, the federal position has been not to have a sugar policy‑‑in
other words, allow cheap sugar into the country and keep our market prices suppressed
here in western
Mr. Penner: Mr. Speaker, the federal government and the
provincial government have some responsibility to ensure that there is an
ability for farmers to maintain this growth industry and a very viable industry
as far as diversification is concerned.
I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture
whether he has tried to convince the federal government to apply the same
tariffs that the Americans apply, the 16‑cent‑a‑pound tariff,
on sugar coming into their country, and that we abide by the same rules in this
country that the Americans abide by under the Free Trade Agreement.
Mr. Findlay: Yes, I have, Mr. Speaker. I have constantly said that if we are going to
have a sugar policy, you should treat the country coming into here with sugar
the same way as they treat us going into their country, and that, most
particularly, applies to the
Taxicab
Industry
Consultations
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): Mr. Speaker, in 1991, Judge Monnin ruled that
with respect to a study that was conducted by the Taxicab Board, and I will
quote from the judge's ruling: That the
compensation fund was clearly a significant component decision, and it would be
unfair to allow the board to now sever its decision and proceed only with the
increasing of quotas for taxis without having to implement at the same time its
compensation recommendation.
The minister and his department and the
Taxicab Board have refused to implement that recommendation, Mr. Speaker, for a
significant period of time.
My question for the Minister of Highways
and Transportation who is responsible for the board: Why has the minister refused to consult with
the industry on any changes that they may be bringing forward? Why has this minister refused to implement
the recommendation of Judge Monnin in his earlier decision?
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I think it would be totally
irresponsible if I interfered with the board and started dictating and by‑passing
the jurisdiction of the board in terms of what its responsibilities are.
I have all the confidence that the
chairman and the board that we have dealing with the taxicab industry are doing
a very capable job under very difficult circumstances, and I do not intend to
take and override the decisions of the Taxicab Board and start interfering from
my perspective.
Taxicab
Board
Court
Challenges
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): My question for the same minister, Mr.
Speaker: Why is this government now
changing its policy to restrict the taxicab industry members from going to
court to challenge Taxicab Board rulings, as we see by the new legislation that
this minister has brought forward to this House where the members challenging
now will only be able to challenge on the question of jurisdiction or law? Why is this government changing its policy?
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that
it is taxicab day in Question Period today.
The same answer would apply to this member as it applied to that member,
that when I bring forward second reading‑‑it is unusual that after
the first reading, we start having Question Period on a bill.
That is what second reading is about, and
that is what the debate is about. When I
bring in second reading, I will clarify those positions.
Bill 24
Intent
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): I am surprised the minister is getting so
worked up about this, Mr. Speaker. I am
sure it is an important issue to him as well.
Can the minister explain, is it the intent
of his new legislation to change the current Taxicab Board legislation to give
power to the Taxicab Board to permit it to have a show‑cause hearing
calling into question Unicity's right to exist as a business? Is that the intent of this legislation?
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, my answer is chekay, chekay
(phonetic), wait until second reading, and then I am prepared to go through the
whole issue.
* (1410)
Manitoba
Public Insurance Corporation
Reduced
Workweek
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the
Minister responsible‑
Some Honourable Members:
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, the repercussions of this
government's policy of arbitrarily reducing the workdays of the public service
this year will soon be felt by the people of
This will not be the case this year, I am
afraid. As a result, there will be
considerable inconveniences and additional costs to the public.
Mr. Speaker, can the minister of Autopac
confirm that all Autopac claim centres will be shut down tomorrow as a means of
meeting the government's directives to reduce the workweek of provincial
employees?
Hon. Glen Cummings
(Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Public Insurance
Corporation Act): Well, Mr. Speaker, the corporation has struck
a schedule of closings. As to each
individual centre, I could not apprise the member of the explicit situation
that he might be referring to, but the services, yes, will be shut down on
periods so that we can acquire the savings that we originally set out to
achieve.
I would hope that you would be encouraging
the public to work with us in acquiring that.
Manitoba
Public Insurance Corporation
Reduced
Workweek
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister does not
realize it, but all centres are shut down tomorrow throughout the province.
Will the minister tell us how many more
days of complete shutdown of all centres will occur this year, because I find
it ironical, Mr. Speaker, that the government is promoting Sunday shopping so
retail stores can open seven days a week, while at the same time, it is
depriving the public of basic insurance services by reducing the days of
operation from five to four days, and in one case, from four to three‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I look
forward to the member's contribution on Bill 22. He will have an opportunity tomorrow to
debate that bill.
Mr. Speaker, Crown Corporations Council
has asked all the Crowns to file with it a plan as to how it will be that they
will achieve certain savings following the model introduced under Bill 22. I do not believe that the Crown Corporations
Council has seen the plans of all the Crowns and specifically MPIC in this
case, so members of the Treasury bench will not know that as of this point in
time.
Manitoba
Public Insurance Corporation
Reduced
Workweek
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): Well, perhaps the Minister of Finance can
answer the question, if not the minister of MPIC.
Mr. Speaker, would the minister explain
what is the rationale of arbitrarily imposing a reduction of 10 working days on
a commercial Crown corporation which has to function in such a way as to
maximize its revenues and services to the customers of
Hon. Glen Cummings
(Minister charged with the administration of The Public Insurance Corporation
Act): Mr. Speaker, no matter how the member across
the way would like to slice it, or no matter how we would like to portray it,
the public sees this as a government being the main shareholder. It is a public service; in other words, a
Crown corporation. It is clearly linked
in the minds of the public, in my opinion, to the operations of government.
Yes, there will undoubtedly be some
concerns or inconveniences that may be raised as a result of this action, but
we are in very difficult and trying times and trying to achieve the savings that
we need in order to make this province competitive, and I am talking about
competitive in terms of the cost of the operations and the cost that we impose
on the public as requirements of mandatory insurance, and all of the other
services that government is involved in.
I really would encourage the member,
rather than to be critical, to be providing us with ideas that can help us
achieve those goals.
Community-Based
Role
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Health. There are some misconceptions
about the future role of
Mr. Speaker, there are discussions going
on between the hospital and the community at large to develop and redefine the
role of this hospital.
Can the Minister of Health tell this House
if his officials had any specific discussions about the new definition of the
role of
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker,
specifically as to whether the ministry had discussions with Misericordia as to
their emerging role, no.
Mr. Speaker, in answer to the larger
question of some of the program investigations like ophthalmology and some of
the other major programs and how they can be delivered in the city of
I share my honourable friend's concern over some of the rumours which do not have substance to them that cause concern amongst employees, a concern amongst those who use