LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Friday, April 22, 1994

 

The House met at 10 a.m.

 

PRAYERS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS

 

Curran Contract Cancellation and

Pharmacare and Home Care Reinstatement

 

Mr. Speaker:  I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Ms. Barrett).  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?

 

An Honourable Member:  Yes.

 

Mr. Speaker:  The Clerk will read.

 

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

 

          WHEREAS the Manitoba government has repeatedly broken promises to support the Pharmacare program and has in fact cut benefits and increased deductibles far above the inflation rate; and

 

          WHEREAS the Pharmacare program was brought in by the NDP as a preventative program which keeps people out of costly hospital beds and institutions; and

 

          WHEREAS rather than cutting benefits and increasing deductibles the provincial government should be demanding the federal government cancel recent cuts to generic drugs that occurred under the Drug Patent Act; and

 

          WHEREAS at the same time Manitoba government has also cut home care and implemented user fees; and

 

          WHEREAS the Manitoba government is giving an American health care consultant over $4 million to implement further cuts in health care.

 

          WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly urge the Premier to personally step in and order the cancellation of the Connie Curran contract and consider cancelling the recent cuts to the Pharmacare and Home Care programs.

 

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?

 

Some Honourable Members:  Dispense.

 

Mr. Speaker:  Dispense.

 

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the Province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

 

WHEREAS the Manitoba government has repeatedly broken promises to support the Pharmacare program and has in fact cut benefits and increased deductibles far above the inflation rate; and

 

WHEREAS the Pharmacare program was brought in by the NDP as a preventative program which keeps people out of costly hospital beds and institutions; and

 

WHEREAS rather than cutting benefits and increasing deductibles the provincial government should be demanding the federal government cancel recent cuts to generic drugs that occurred under the Drug Patent Act; and

 

WHEREAS at the same time Manitoba government has also cut home care and implemented user fees; and

 

WHEREAS the Manitoba government is giving an American health care consultant over $4 million to implement further cuts in health care.

 

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly urge the Premier to personally step in and order the cancellation of the Connie Curran contract; and consider cancelling the recent cuts to the Pharmacare and Home Care programs.

 

Introduction of Guests

 

Mr. Speaker:  Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery to my left where we have with us this morning Mr. Parker Burrell, the former MLA for Swan River.

 

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

 

          Also with us this morning we have, from the Lakewood School, eighteen Grades 5 and 6 students under the direction of Mrs. Lindsay.  This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs (Ms. McIntosh).

 

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

 

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

 

Victims' Assistance Program

Funding Reduction

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, there has been a considerable discrepancy between the words of this government dealing with justice issues and the actions of this government.

 

          The Victims' Assistance program is a program that symbolizes, in a very small way, our commitment to those people that are unfortunately victims of crimes.  Many people in our society are saying there is too little balance between those who are committing the crimes and between those who are victims of the crimes.

 

          I would like to ask this government why they have cut the Victims' Assistance program in this year's budget and why they have demonstrated this cut at a time when people are crying out for support for victims in our Manitoba society.

 

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General):  Mr. Speaker, this government is paying a great deal of attention to the concerns of victims.  Certainly in our initiatives in relating to youth crime and also domestic violence, we are looking very strongly to support the concerns of victims.

 

          The Victims' Assistance funding and programs within this budget does fund four programs.  I am not sure if the member is aware of the four programs.  We fund a women's advocacy program.  We fund the child witness support program, the Criminal Injuries Compensation program, the Victim Witness Assistance program, and we also have a fund in which we provide grants for the community.

 

          We continue our commitment, and in fact my department continues to take a more and more active role in terms of the support of victims within this province.

 

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, of course, we know that crime prevention programs were cut by $100,000 a couple of years ago by this government.  We know that Victims' Assistance programs are down again under all the categories.

 

* (1005)

 

Department of Justice

Corrections Initiatives

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  I have a further question to the Minister of Justice.

 

          Since 1989, violent youth crime has increased by 58 percent.  The youth corrections funding has gone down in 1993 by 4.3 percent, and Corrections overall is about zero percent increase.  We have a major increase in people committing the crimes but yet no increase in commitment from this government to deal with those people that are accused of crimes that are disposed of committing those crimes.

 

          I would like to know why this government is saying one thing about getting tough on crime and doing something else in terms of the resources they are putting in.  Could they not have taken some of the tax breaks they had for business and put those into a real effective fight on dealing with youth crime in our society?

 

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General):  Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak about our efforts in Corrections and our efforts to fight crime in this province.

 

          Let me start with the issues around youth crime, the nine‑point plan that this government released to deal with youth crime and violence.  That nine‑point plan deals with the prevention end.  It also deals with community support, youth justice committees.  It also deals with Corrections.  It deals with initiatives in relation to the federal government.  It deals with councils of experts to be available to assist the citizens of Manitoba and a youth gang line.  So we have a very comprehensive program.

 

          In the area of Corrections, the area of administration, as all areas of government have, we have looked at reductions in the area of administration.  I will remind the member that we have major initiatives in the area of Corrections, particularly in the youth area, where we are moving towards the wilderness camp model and a more rigorous confinement of all people within our institutions in Manitoba.

 

Mr. Doer:  Mr. Speaker, I would invite the Premier to read the nine‑point plan and look at the budget and see where the appropriate funding is in terms of antiviolence programs in schools.  Many of the other programs in the plan are not reflected in the budget.

 

Provincial Courts

Backlogs

 

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition):  One of the areas that is not reflected in the budget is, of course, the whole issue of the backlog in the courts.  Justice delayed is justice denied.  We have cited, and our Justice critic has cited, on a number of occasions the backlogs of 11 and 12 months.  We are hearing of cases being disposed of up to two years after the initial allegations are made in our youth courts.  For young people, immediate consequences are fairly significant as a factor in our justice system.

 

          The court services have been reduced by this government, creating the backlog by 3.4 percent in '93 and '94, and this year they have increased funding .8 percent, less than 1 percent.  We will not even be funding our court services equal to two years ago.

 

          I would ask the government how this inadequate funding and inadequate priority are going to deal with the backlog in our court system and start getting us more immediate justice in our communities.

 

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General):  I am very happy to speak about our court system also because the member has continually quoted dates and periods of time which are inaccurate.  I can say to the member that the courts across this province are functioning very well, that the one court in which we are looking at ways to deal with the backlog is the Domestic Violence Court.

 

          I would remind that member that it was this government that showed the commitment to the victims of domestic violence and to the issues of domestic violence in the setting up of that court.

 

          We now have named a new chief provincial court judge, and I am working very closely with the new chief judge to look at the operations of the courts.  We are looking continually at ways to make the whole system the most efficient system that it can be.

 

* (1010)

 

Bill 22

Health Care System

 

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  My question is for the Premier.

 

          The Premier stated publicly, Mr. Speaker, and I quote:  The effects of Bill 22 only apply to the administration, and we are not talking about patient care people.

 

          It is clear that the overall hammer effect of the government's imposition of Bill 22 will see a reduction in some patient services and probably personnel.

 

          My question to the Premier is:  Why has the government ordered Bill 22 be imposed at health care institutions and nursing homes who have already seen their budgets reduced by over $58 million in the last two years alone?

 

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  As we have indicated, the intention is to try and ensure that we apply Bill 22 equally across the province.  The nurses' union voluntarily took a minus 2 percent in their contractual settlement.  The intent is to have the same kind of application available to other personnel working within all of our areas of government, and so they apply in Crown corporations.  So they apply to agencies that receive their funding from government, and it is the equal application, Mr. Speaker.

 

          It need not reduce services as long as people are prepared to ensure that they live within the means that are available to them and that all personnel take that kind of approach that the nurses took and share the burden of living within the available dollars that we have.  That, to us, was the preferable approach.

 

Mr. Chomiak:  Mr. Speaker, I think the patients of Manitoba have already shared too much of the burden of this government's health care cuts.

 

          My supplementary to the Premier, Mr. Speaker, is:  Why is the government forcing places like Deer Lodge Hospital, which operated in the black last year, to impose Bill 22 when the care‑giving staff in places like the Alzheimer part of the facility are going to be forced to take time off?  Why is the government doing that?

 

Mr. Filmon:  Mr. Speaker, the way in which New Democratic administrations are sharing this burden is to close 52 hospitals in rural Saskatchewan, to close hundreds of beds as well as a major urban hospital in Vancouver‑‑that is how British Columbia is sharing it‑‑to close 3,500 beds in Ontario.  That is how NDP Ontario is sharing the burden.  We think it is preferable to have the staff work co‑operatively with the government to maintain the services by accepting a reduction in their own pay packets as part of the process of trying to maintain the quality health care system that we have in Manitoba.

 

Mr. Chomiak:  Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary to the Premier.

 

          I will table copies of a letter from a hospital administrator which says, and I quote:  " . . . implementation of Bill 22 will mean we have no option but to replace almost 100% of the staff affected.  We are unable to impose Bill 22 in a cost effective manner without compromising on standards and quality of care."

 

          How can the Premier talk about patients after they have cut $58 million from health care facilities and personal care homes and say we are not compromising?  This is unfair, Mr. Speaker.  How does the Premier justify it?

 

Mr. Filmon:  Mr. Speaker, since we have been in office, this government has increased funding in six years to health care by a half billion dollars, a half billion dollars.  This government has increased not only total dollars on health care to a much higher level than they were when we took office, but as a proportion of our budget at 33.9 percent, it is the highest that it has ever been in the history of this province.  This government has made its commitment.

 

          If the workers would do as the nurses did and accept a voluntary rollback, maybe some of these measures would not be required.  That is the way in which these things can be shared and can be done in an effective manner.

 

* (1015)

 

Home Repair Industry

Standards/Regulations

 

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition):  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

 

          This government has committed $10 million under the Home Renovation Program announced in the budget two days ago.  That $10 million at a thousand dollars grant per renovation equates to approximately 10,000 additional home renovation contracts that will be signed in this coming year, the government predicts.  The Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, I believe, has from time to time recognized and acknowledged that there are in fact no regulations in the home renovation industry, that in fact it is a wide‑open industry, there are not standards in place, and that in fact the home renovation industry themselves have repeatedly asked for those standards and some form of regulatory regime.

 

          Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister:  Currently on the Order Paper at No. 32 is a resolution from our caucus calling for those standards to be put in place.  Will the minister today bring that forward so that we can ensure that the consumers are protected from unscrupulous home renovators and also recognize that that is in fact what the industry has been asking for, for some time?

 

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):  I can advise firstly to my honourable friend that there is a requirement, I believe, under this program to have at least two quotes, two separate bids, from contractors so that there is one to make a comparison with the other.

 

          Secondly, there are laws in The Business Practices Act, The Consumer Protection Act contained in this province which will and can deal with unscrupulous operators.

 

          The member also is aware in terms of bringing his resolution forward that we are for the next seven days involved in budget speech debate, and the rules of the House do not permit that to come forward.

 

          Mr. Speaker, I understand the member's concern.  We have the Consumers' Bureau.  We will be on the lookout for unscrupulous activities amongst those few contractors who might choose to do that kind of activity, but I think, by and large, that there will be enough protection built into the program itself that we should not have a major problem with respect to contractors who do not wish to follow the rules.

 

Mr. Edwards:  The minister mentions the current legislative regime.  That legislative regime can only protect consumers if in fact there are standards, if there is some form of regulatory regime in place for this particular industry.

 

          My question again for the minister:  Is this government actively considering in fact putting those into place in this session?‑‑because that is important as thousands of people, they hope, will take advantage of this program.  Is this government going to come forward with some form of regulatory regime for the home renovation industry, which I remind the minister the industry itself has repeatedly asked for?

 

Mr. Ernst:  Mr. Speaker, 99 percent of the problem in this area has occurred in the past by door‑to‑door salespeople coming to the door and trying to convince people, particularly those who perhaps are not well acquainted with how these matters work.

 

          Mr. Speaker, we have licensing of door‑to‑door salespeople.  They are bonded, and they are monitored very closely to ensure that those kinds of unscrupulous activities are kept to a minimum.

 

          Mr. Speaker, The Business Practices Act also deals with people who are unscrupulous in their activities.  The fact of the matter is that by having programs with requirements for two quotations from contractors submitted to the people who are going to be having the work done and then filing that with the department as it is dealt with, should reasonably, adequately protect the people.

 

          As well, of course, there is an association of renovation contractors who do follow a code of ethics and practice.  People would be well advised to seek out those contractors who belong to that association or other reputable contractors and to check that out before they accept any offers, before they have work completed.

 

* (1020)

 

Consumer Education Program

 

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition):  The minister appears to be relying on the two‑quotation system.  That is going to be small comfort for the many individuals out there who have in the past been taken advantage of.  When the RRAP program was in place in prior years, this was a serious problem which in fact Consumer and Corporate Affairs advocates recognized, the Consumers' Association and others recognized; indeed, the association recognized it itself.

 

          Mr. Speaker, my final question for the minister:  Given that apparently his answers would indicate that there is not going to be some form of regulatory regime coming into place, will the minister at least agree to embark on an educational campaign to educate consumers about what they should do, the questions they should ask and the type of investigation that they should do as they move to enter into this period where we are going to see a massive increase in activity in this area?

 

          They have money for promotional campaigns, for their own political purposes.  Will they now educate the public about what needs to be done to ensure that these are reputable people getting business at fair prices?

 

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):  Mr. Speaker, the Consumers' Bureau today has all kinds of literature related to ensuring that people understand what is going on, the kind of practice that they should follow to ensure that they have fair and reasonable work done by others on their behalf.  That information is available to people.  We can provide it to the appropriate departments, either Housing or Finance, if people are interested in having that information.  The Seniors bureau has a videotape and contained within that videotape, which is widely spread, deals with issues like home renovation contractors and what people should look for and how they should conduct themselves when dealing with those kinds of people.

 

Port of Churchill

CN Rail Commitment

 

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River):  Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation.

 

          Canadian farmers continue to face financial problems because the Canadian grain transportation system cannot meet its commitments to ship grain, yet each year in Manitoba the Port of Churchill remains underutilized.  Last week the Minister of Transportation said he would meet with CN Rail to ask that they maximize the Port of Churchill shipping line and ship grain to Churchill.

 

          Can the minister tell us today if CN is committed to fully utilizing the Hudson Bay line and to ship the maximum amount of grain through the Port of Churchill this summer?

 

Hon. Albert Driedger (Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation):  Mr. Speaker, most of the question I will take as notice on behalf of the Minister of Highways and Transportation, but I want to say that if the member had listened very carefully to the budget speech that was made the other day, there was a further commitment for assistance for the rail lines to make them more competitive.  I think this is a good indication of the position that we provincially take in terms of our concern for the rail industry in Manitoba as well as Churchill.

 

Ms. Wowchuk:  Mr. Speaker, since the NDP along with many organizations has asked CN to use hopper cars and move grain on the bayline for many years, and since there are tanker fuel cars going to the Port of Churchill at the present time and since Keystone Agricultural Producers have passed a resolution calling for the testing of hopper cars on the bayline, what steps will the minister take to ensure that CN will start using hopper cars to haul grain to the Port of Churchill?

 

Mr. Driedger:  Mr. Speaker, I feel as if I have not even left the Department of Highways and Transportation, because for five and a half years, this is the regular debate that took place in terms of what the government is doing.

 

          The member should be well aware of all the players that are involved in this thing, the first one being the Wheat Board basically that sells the grain.  If you are not going to have customers to take grain through the Port of Churchill, then there is no sense shipping anything through there.  But I have to tell you there are other players involved as well, not just CN.

 

          If the member wants to take some time, maybe go through the records of what has happened, not only during our administration of six years but also when the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) was the minister there, I mean, go through the whole history of it, I just want to say that I think there are positive things that are developing in Churchill that will ultimately, I think, assure the fact that we will have the line there.

 

Swan River, Manitoba

Rail Access

 

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River):  My question is to the First Minister.

 

          Since the federal Liberal M.P. for the Dauphin‑Swan River area has indicated that she feels no responsibility to keeping the Cowan subline open, which is very important to the area both to farmers and other users of the area, will this government give a commitment that they will stand behind the people of Swan River and ensure that the Cowan subline, which is protected till the year 2000, will be reopened?

 

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier):  The people of Swan River certainly know that this government stands behind them.  This is the government that is working with them to ensure that they attract and are able to have 450 jobs as a result of a forest products business that members in the New Democratic caucus are opposed to.

 

          This is the government that is working with them to protect hundreds of jobs in the PMU industry with the Ayerst plant that members in the NDP caucus are opposing.

 

          This is a government that is working to keep taxes down to ensure that the people of Swan River have a better quality of life and a better ability to maintain all sorts of things that are important to their families.

 

          This government will stand with the people of Swan River at all times.

 

* (1025)

 

CN Rail/CP Rail Merger

Impact on Employment

 

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona):  My question is for the Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation.

 

          Despite the promises by the federal government that Manitoba would be restored as a rail transportation hub, 30 northern rail maintenance employees have received layoff notices.

 

          The announcement that CN would cut 10,000 jobs has not been rescinded to this day, Mr. Speaker.  Since both CN and CP are planning to merge operations from Winnipeg east, what studies has the Department of Highways and Transportation undertaken to determine the impact on rail jobs and rail service in the province of Manitoba.

 

Hon. Albert Driedger (Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation):  Mr. Speaker, that question was raised to some degree in the last day or so.  The Minister of Transportation (Mr. Findlay) at that time indicated that he had been corresponding with CN on the issue.  This question is also not a new question.  This has been going on for a long, long time, and we have made our position known very clearly.

 

          I again want to repeat, part of the issue that was raised in the budget was a further reduction in the diesel fuel tax to make us competitive.  I would suggest that the member for Transcona, who is the critic of Highways and Transportion, support the budget which basically puts them in a more positive, competitive position to deal with these issues.

 

Mr. Reid:  Since this government has given back vital revenue to the province, back to the railways by way of fuel tax reductions, what assurances did the Minister of Highways and Transportation receive from the railways since he has met with them that no more railway jobs would be lost in Manitoba?

 

          What assurances do we have that no more railway jobs would be lost since you have given up this vital revenue?

 

Mr. Driedger:  Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the member, just to give him an indication how this system works a little bit, by the reduction that this government put on the diesel fuel tax last year, we ended up getting a whole bunch of jobs through CP when they set up their system out here.

 

          Mr. Speaker, he claims that we are giving away money to the railways.  If we are not going to be competitive, we are not going to have the railway here.  So it is a matter of taking and working together with the railways.

 

          The concerns about jobs being gone and being moved, it has been in the mix for a long time.  We have constantly during my tenure as well as the minister who is responsible right now‑‑we have been working with the railways to make sure that the impact is going to be as minimal as possible.

 

VIA Rail Purchase

Impact on Employment

 

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona):  Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary is to the same minister.

 

          Considering today's report that Railex wants to buy VIA Rail, lay off all its employees and abandon nonprofitable service in western Canada, what action has the Minister of Highways and Transportation taken to protect VIA jobs and routes in Manitoba?

 

Hon. Albert Driedger (Acting Minister of Highways and Transportation):  Mr. Speaker, I took the privilege of speaking with the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Findlay) this morning.  As far as he can establish‑‑and we are trying to establish whether there is some validity to do it‑‑it is just a rumour.  I am not prepared to take and answer a question on rumour.

 

* (1030)

 

Department of Education

Curriculum Development

 

Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin):  Mr. Speaker, people involved in education were shocked by this minister's flip‑flop on a major issue involving curriculum development in this province of Manitoba.  I want to ask the Minister of Education a question in light of the fact that over the last year at least, he has literally destroyed‑‑he and his predecessor, the former Minister of Education, have literally destroyed the Curriculum Branch with the co‑ordinator, the director, either leaving or being fired.  Many of the assistants that were there‑‑Joanne Bevis, the gifted consultant, has left.  The guidance and child abuse prevention person, physical education consultant, industrial arts consultant, the co‑ordinator for heritage languages‑‑all of these professional people have left.

 

          Now this minister says that he is going to make curriculum development a major priority in this province.  I want to know how he thinks he can have any credibility in developing curriculum after the record that he has in curriculum in this province.

 

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training):  Mr. Speaker, when members want to talk about credibility, our Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) brought down a budget dealing with $5.5 billion giving a global fiscal picture of the province last year and the future and, the second Question Period, not one question with respect to the budget from the benches opposite.  It shows you how good the budget was.

 

Some Honourable Members:  Hear, hear.

 

Mr. Speaker:  Order, please.

 

Point of Order

 

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan):  Mr. Speaker, the $58‑million reduction in hospitals and personal care nursing homes that I talked about in my question is partially as a result of this budget.

 

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

 

                                                                                         * * *

 

Mr. Manness:  Mr. Speaker, the curriculum development branch certainly has gone through a period of change.  That was by design.  I know members opposite do not take the view that sometimes you have to begin to build in efficiencies.  You have to make some structural changes internally and then build up from there.  That is what this government has been practising over the course of the last two years.  It is part of the plan.

 

          I dare say in Estimates I will have an opportunity to give greater explanation to the increased funding that is presented in this year's budget.

 

Mr. Plohman:  Mr. Speaker, that was precisely a budget question.

 

Distance Education

 

Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin):  I want to ask the minister another budget question.  He also says that distance education is a major priority, and they are going to pump more money into‑‑and he has just finished destroying the Distance Education Branch.  As a matter of fact, it is not even listed in the Estimates for the Department of Education any further.  The director has been dismissed.  The administrative officer, the co‑ordinator for educational television have all left in the last year.

 

          I want to ask this minister, once again, how he thinks anyone is going to believe that he has credibility in establishing this as a major priority after he has destroyed that branch of that department.

 

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training):  Mr. Speaker, I am not going to embark upon a debate on credibility with the member for Dauphin.

 

          The member is mindful of the initiative this government is taking with respect to Dr. Beth Cruickshank, who is dialoguing with all the school divisions in the province, trying to lay into place for government a blueprint with respect to the provision of educational technology services.

 

          The member and indeed the education community will be hearing much more about this issue over the course of the next number of months.  I say to the member, as I have said to school divisions throughout the province, this government has embarked upon a significant new approach to the provision of education services in rural Manitoba, and it will be based significantly upon the advances within the area of technology and education.

 

Staffing

 

Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin):  Mr. Speaker, is it not a fact‑‑I want to ask this minister‑‑that he has dismissed long‑standing professionals and replaced them with people hired under untendered political contracts, like Beth Cruickshank, at $270 a day in an untendered contract?  Is that not a fact?

 

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training):  Mr. Speaker, the member may have done his own calculations.  I am not certain as to what the per diem rate is, but I can tell the member one thing.  I am certain‑‑

 

An Honourable Member:  Table her contract.

 

Mr. Manness:  I will.  When you formally ask for it, I will.

 

          What I can say?  At least something is being done.  There is a co‑ordination in place.  We have a plan.  We are working towards a plan, not like what we inherited from the former government, where there was disorder and chaos.

 

* (1035)

 

Department of Education

Student Services Branch

 

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster):  Mr. Speaker, this government in its budget is talking about sharing the pain.

 

          I would ask the Minister of Education to look at the Student Services branch, where there was a cut of 22.5 percent.  The Student Services branch is there to provide programs for specialized support through the services for consultants for hearing impaired and visually impaired, to ensure students with special needs have access to specialized equipment and materials, to facilitate interdepartmental co‑ordination of services for students with special needs.  That is a 22.5 percent cut.

 

          Do we need less to co‑ordinate these services?  Do we need less for equipment and material?  Do we need fewer consultants for the hearing and the visually impaired?  Why did this government cut 22.5 percent from the people that need it the most in the Department of Education?

 

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training):  Mr. Speaker, what I have noticed over the course of many years being involved in Budget Debates, when you do not have the intellectual capacity and an understanding of the larger picture, what you do is you pick out a line in an Estimates book that is that thick, you try and look for a reduction and then you make it the essence of a question during Question Period.  That is the approach.

 

          I say to the member, the approach for this government for a long period of time is try to reduce administrative costs, try to reduce the inefficiencies and provide the same level of service for fewer dollars.  That is the approach that has been practised.  That is why this party will stay in government on this side of the House, and that is why the members that are over there now will stay there.

 

Mr. Lamoureux:  Mr. Speaker, what balderdash.  This government is talking about sharing the pain.  What is this government doing to the people that need it the most in education?

 

          I will ask the question to the Minister of Education.  How does he determine that this is fair, this is sharing the pain when you are penalizing the individuals that need to have the consultants, need to have the material?  Why do you penalize them by cutting 22.5 percent?

 

Mr. Manness:  Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend the member for Inkster can scream and holler as loudly as he wants.  The path that this government has followed in all its decisions is to try to reduce overlap and duplication and inefficiency and maintain the levels of services.  That is what I am saying in respect to this detailed question for the member opposite.  That is the course we have been on.

 

          Estimates review, which will probably last six or seven weeks, will provide the member an opportunity to ask all of the detailed questions.  I dare say to him, the answer to almost all of the questions posed will again talk about the way we have restructured internally to save taxpayer dollars and yet to maintain the level of service to the education community in our province.