LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Friday, April 29, 1994
The House met at 10 a.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Child Care System
Mr. Harry Schellenberg
(Rossmere): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Chris Woloshyn, Ron Steventon, Steven Moldowan and others requesting the
Legislative Assembly urge the provincial government to consider restoring
funding and accessibility to high‑quality, affordable, non‑profit
child care with decent wages for all child care employees.
Curran Contract Cancellation and
Pharmacare and Home Care Reinstatement
Mr. Conrad Santos
(Broadway): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Don Murphy, Belen Faderon, Kris Faderon and others requesting the Legislative Assembly
of Manitoba 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.
APM Incorporated Remuneration and
Pharmacare and Home Care Reinstatement
Mr. Gregory Dewar
(Selkirk): I beg to present the petition of Josie
Demedash, Elaine Fraser, Ken Strick and others requesting the Legislative
Assembly urge the Premier to personally step in and order the repayment of the
$4 million paid to Connie Curran and her firm, APM Incorporated, and consider
cancelling the recent cuts to the Pharmacare and Home Care programs.
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Bill 207‑‑The Workers Compensation
Amendment Act
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), that leave be given to introduce Bill 207, The
Workers Compensation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du
travail, and that the same now be received and read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Speaker, from 1966 until 1988, full‑time
municipal firefighters sustaining an injury to their hearts, lungs, brains or
kidneys were presumed to have sustained such injury as a result of their
employment as a firefighter. In 1988,
the regulation providing protection was struck down by the courts. Since that time, firefighters have been
without such disability protection. This
bill will restore that protection.
Motion agreed to.
* (1005)
Bill 201‑‑The Health Reform
Accountability and Consequential Amend ments Act
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg), that leave be given to introduce Bill 201, The
Health Reform Accountability and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi sur l'obligation
redditionnelle en matière de réforme de la santé et apportant des modifications
corrélatives, and that the same be now received and read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this bill seeks to plug a huge
gap in terms of the Legislature, in terms of the lack of accountability
relating to health reform. This bill
seeks to provide for accountability by the government in terms of its health
reform process. This bill will provide
for public hearings. This bill will
provide for public consultations. This
bill will provide for an ombudsman or another individual to intervene in
decisions in the health care system.
This bill will provide for the release of information and documents for
the first time dealing with health reform.
Mr. Speaker, it is a very positive bill that will allow the
public to have input. It will allow for
discussion. It will allow for
information and will allow for accountability by this Legislature for the
actions of the government with respect to health care. I am sure all members of the House will join
us in supporting this very positive action, The Health Reform Accountability
Act.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 204‑‑The Regulations Amendment
Act
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), that leave be given to introduce Bill
204, The Regulations Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les textes
réglementaires), and that the same be now received and read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, just briefly, this is actually a
companion piece to The Small Business Regulatory Relief Act that we introduced
a few days ago.
Mr. Speaker, since 1972 the Standing Committee on Statutory
Orders and Regulations has been obliged, in effect, to review regulations
created by government on an ongoing basis.
For a lot of different reasons, that committee has not successfully done
its duty in terms of the review of regulations, and this particular amendment
is going to ensure that small business regulations in particular are sent to
that committee, considered by that committee, and there are a number of
criteria in the bill that will require the government to consider ways to make
sure that regulations are applied to businesses based on their ability to cope
with the regulation. There will be a
requirement to assess the economic impact on small businesses, and it will
require the government and the minister responsible for that regulation to be
accountable.
Mr. Speaker, those are things that I think the small
business community want, and I urge all members of the House to support this
legislation.
Motion agreed to.
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct all honourable
members to the loge to my left, where we have with us this morning Mr. Harold
Taylor, the former MLA for Wolseley.
On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to
welcome you here this morning, sir.
Also with us this morning, seated in the public gallery,
from the Teulon Collegiate we have thirty‑five Grade 11 students, and
they are under the direction of Mr. Al Reinsch.
This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for
Gimli (Mr. Helwer).
On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to
welcome you here this morning.
* (1010)
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Tourism
U.S. Marketing Strategy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier
(Mr. Filmon).
Jobs is a very important issue for all of us. One of our industries that is very important
in terms of jobs is our tourism industry.
We have lost close to 2,000 people working in tourism since
the government has been elected, and we have seen a decline in terms of tourism
visits from the United States from in 1987 and in 1988 over 400,000 visits to a
number now that is below 300,000, a loss of some 100,000 visits from American
tourists.
At the same time that the government has increased its
overall communications budgets in four or five years by 28 percent, they have
decreased their tourism spending in United States markets by some 78 percent.
I would like to ask the Premier: What has been the impact in the decline in
this priority area in terms of tourism marketing, the decline in the spending
in U.S. tourism marketing and increase in overall communications budgets in the
province?
Hon. James Downey
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism):
Mr. Speaker, I do not accept in any way, shape or form the numbers that
the member brings to this House, but I do say, what this government has done to
encourage tourism to this province have been some major tax relief and some of
the activities that have been carried out by this government in seven budgets
now without increasing any major taxes, sales tax, corporate tax, creating an
environment where people can, in fact, compete in their businesses, whether it
is tourism, manufacturing or anything else.
We look forward to expanding the tourism ministry
significantly over the next year or so.
Tourism
U.S. Marketing Strategy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, and maybe the minister will not
accept the numbers, but he should know that those are his numbers. They were handed out under his signature in terms
of the Tourism Outlook book in 1994.
They were contained in a Conference Board report that his department
commissioned for Manitoba Tourism Outlook in 1994, so I know he does not read
his material, but he should know that they are his own numbers.
The Lotteries budget for advertising in 1987 was some
$350,000. It is now running, at 1992, at
$1.2 million and the government has now added another $500,000 to its
advertising for its latest advertising activity, and even every newspaper in
Manitoba has massive ads from the provincial government.
Why has this provincial government decreased the spending
in advertising to attract people to Manitoba, decreased the number of dollars
being spent by 70 percent on advertising for bringing people to our great province,
and increased by fivefold their advertising in Lotteries to promote the
Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba?
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister
charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Foundation Act): Mr. Speaker, I can advise my honourable
friend the Leader of the official opposition that a significant part of the
Manitoba Lotteries corporation advertising, not government advertising,
Manitoba Lotteries corporation advertising, is directed at U.S. markets on a
joint basis to attract Americans to visit our facilities here in Manitoba.
In terms of the awareness program, as I have indicated
previously, a large number of calls that come to the Manitoba Lotteries
corporation are calls to find out where the money goes. They want to know where the money goes,
notwithstanding the fact that it is contained in the Estimates of the
government.
They still want to know, so as a result, the Lotteries
Corporation is responding to that request to the public by advising them where
it goes.
Tourism
U.S. Marketing Strategy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we have a situation now where
government is spending close to $2 million inside our own province to promote the
good work of the Conservative Party, allegedly, and at the same time we are
spending less than $40,000 in terms of advertising in the United States.
Now, this is a billion‑dollar industry; tourism is a
billion‑dollar industry. We have
lost 2,000 people working in that industry from 1988 to 1994.
Will this Premier reallocate the priorities and spend more
of our marketing dollars on promoting our great province rather than promoting
the Progressive Conservative Party in Manitoba?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will tell you one thing. Nobody is ever going to turn to the Leader of
the Opposition for promotion of our province.
Nobody in the history of this Legislature has ever taken
such a negative, black, critical view of this province and its people as that
member and the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), who runs around the province,
who puts her name out on folders in the United States trying to convince people
not to come to this province, promoting negativism all the time, destroying
jobs, destroying economic opportunities and in every way, shape and form
speaking negatively about this province.
That is a tragedy‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
* (1015)
Point of Order
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): On this potentially auspicious occasion you
would hope that the First Minister would provide some leadership and at least
provide correct information to this Chamber.
He knows full well that the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) was not in
any way connected with the pamphlet that he is talking about. He continues to‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point
of order. That is clearly a dispute over
the facts.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I am doing a service to the people
of Manitoba by pointing out the negative, doom‑and‑gloom approach
of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) and every one of his members.
They have been more critical, they have been more damaging
to Manitoba's interests than any people who have ever sat in this Legislature
by continuing to work against job creation, against investment, and even
attempting to discourage people from coming to this province.
They ought to be ashamed.
They ought to hang their heads in shame.
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, the Premier's attempt to
substitute personal invective for policy is one of the disgraces to Manitoba.
Post‑Secondary Education
Government Policy
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, this government has reduced
operating grants to universities for the last three years to the tune, for the
University of Manitoba, of over $11 million.
Yet, in spite of the Roblin commission, in spite of appointing members
to the UGC, in spite of appointing members to all the boards of governors,
after six years there is no public policy on the future of universities from
this government. The only conclusion
that we can draw is that the policy is to reduce the size and reduce accessibility.
I want to ask the Minister of Education: Will he confirm today that that is their
clear goal for universities in Manitoba?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, I categorically deny the assertion made by the member for Wolseley.
We are at this time reviewing the recommendations of the
Roblin report. We fully expect to be
making as a government a public statement with respect to a number of those
recommendations, but certainly one thrust particularly dealing with some of
those recommendations that are purely within the area of universities
themselves will be a greater challenge to the university community through our
province to integrate some of their affairs, because we are long past the time
where every institution can offer training in all areas.
Obviously, this will be one of the challenges put out to
the university community within our province.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, the universities do know that
next year they will have no choice but to cut programs.
I want to ask the minister:
Will he tell the House which programs his representatives on the boards
of governors of the universities are expecting to cut? What is the public policy direction to those
members on those boards that is coming from this government?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, what I find kind of strange
about the question is simply that most people in the real world understand that
during these times difficult decisions have to be made.
Certainly, this government has been dealing with that for
four or five years. What I find even
more supportive of our approach is the head of the students at the university
also recognizes that large administrations have to look internally. The only people that seem not to understand
that fact are the members who sit to your left.
So, Mr. Speaker, the real world dictates that all public‑funded
institutions have to look internally to try and deal with the very real
reality, the reality of having to deal with decreased funding during these
periods of times.
Now, this is not Alberta, where there was a 21 percent
reduction to universities over three years.
What we have been dealing with is reductions on the margins. We have had to deal with it as a government. Corporations and households have had to deal
with it across the land, and I dare say, all public‑funded institutions
are going to have to deal with it also.
* (1020)
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, well, we know what public
choices this government has made in education.
Funding
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): I want to ask the Minister of Education now
to take those thousands of education dollars that he has put into Kentucky
Fried Chicken, Pepsi‑Cola, IBM, Budget Rent‑A‑Car, Bob
Kozminski, lottery advertising, take that public money and put it into the
public education system.
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, all the venom in the question of the member for Wolseley will not be
able to distract from the fact that $1 billion dollars has gone into public
education in this province, $1 billion dollars.
That has been on the backs of all of those citizens of our
province who have had to deal with markets and indeed with earnings, who have
had to pay by way of consumption taxes and income taxes, all of that amount of
money.
Mr. Speaker, the reality is, what the member is wanting is
to charge and tax the living daylights out of our citizens, and we will not do
it. We will not do it. That is what the members want.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Are we done?
The honourable member for Wolseley and the honourable First Minister
(Mr. Filmon), if you want to carry on with this discussion, you can do so
outside the Chamber. Right now, we are
going to move along with Question Period.
Post‑Secondary Education
Funding
Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader
of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I was
very interested in the minister's comment that the government is reviewing the
Roblin commission report, because they have already in fact breached it on
fairly substantial areas with respect to their budget.
Mr. Speaker, I want to start by quoting page 92 and the
recommendation under Chapter 11, specifically that report states, "across‑the‑board
undergraduate tuition fee increases be avoided and that the present level of
tuition fees be maintained." The
budget contained a breaching of that recommendation with a 5 percent cap, but
worse, today we learn that the University of Manitoba, through so‑called
student fees, is going to be adding a further $50 on average for a full course
load on the average student at the University of Manitoba.
My question for the minister is: Clearly, this adds insult to injury, Mr.
Speaker, with this further increase. It
exceeds the 5 percent cap, which was bad enough in and of itself.
What is the minister planning to do to deal with the
University of Manitoba on this clear breach, in our view, of the Speech from
the Throne, at least in spirit if not in letter?
* (1025)
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, I am having trouble deciding where the Liberal policy is on this
issue.
I know what the NDP policy is. They want free tuition to students and,
indeed, they want higher and higher salaries for all those who work at the
university. That is the NDP and, of
course, the highest taxes.
As far as the Liberals, we did not dictate that
universities should impose a 5 percent increase on tuition. We capped it for the second year in a row.
I dare say, the student union groups who I have had an
opportunity to dialogue with respect to this issue are very supportive, very
supportive that we put these caps into place.
I am led to believe we are the only province in Canada that
has caps in place, and we did that, of course, because we sensed exactly what
would happen flowing from the question from the member for Wolseley (Ms.
Friesen) that indeed if we did not put these caps in place then, in these times
of reduced funding, what would happen is, the administration would just go and
rip it away from the students.
So that is why we put the caps into place, but we did not
dictate that the university had to increase it by 5 percent. We were hoping that they would freeze it at
zero, but there was a cap in place.
Now, the member says we are outside the bounds of the
spirit of the recommendation. I say, we
are right in keeping with the spirit of the recommendation, because we have
held down tuition to the students of our universities.
Mr. Edwards: This minister has read that report, Mr.
Speaker.
Let me give you one more of Mr. Roblin's statements: Across‑the‑board cuts are the
road to mediocrity. That is what Mr.
Roblin said.
This government did not just put in their so‑called
2.7 percent cut; in fact, it was 3.7 across the board to those
institutions. They breached it when they
put those cuts into place, and they put us, clearly, on the road to mediocrity.
Now, I would like the minister to stand up and tell the
students of this province how they are going to maintain access to post‑secondary
education, which every rational economic growth plan tells us is essential to
economic growth, how this government is going to achieve that with across‑the‑board
cuts to these institutions which clearly result in increases of at least 5
percent and in excess of 5 percent this year to the students.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, what we have here then, we have
a Leader of one of our provincial parties saying that money guarantees
excellence. That is the essence of the
question.
If he would read all the recommendations, what Mr. Roblin
said was: Until the universities come to
grips with their own problems internally, freeze the level of funding. That is the essence of the question. The member purposely leaves that out.
Mr. Speaker, our global funding to universities was down
0.6 percent. It was flat, in keeping
with the recommendation of the commission.
So the member purposely selects one of the recommendations. If he wants to take all of them into context,
he will see, basically, we have kept everything that is in place, and we will
be coming out with a policy statement and indeed a charge to universities
flowing from the recommendations that are contained within the report.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, that is right. Monies available for students do deny access
to education. That is what this is
about, and it does come down to money when students cannot afford to go to post‑secondary
education.
Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister: Why, if he is reviewing this report, did he
specifically go against Mr. Roblin's recommendation and statement that across‑the‑board
cuts are the road to mediocrity? Why has
he put us on that road?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I look at the recommendation
that said that funding to universities, until we come to grips with the
reality, that we are offering too many courses, that we had to, firstly, ask
our universities to integrate their services.
I put the focus on there.
If the member says that 0.6 percent down is across‑the‑board
cuts and if he is saying mediocrity will result from that, I say to him that
his definition that mediocrity as a result of a fraction of a percentage down,
then I dare say that he is trying to make political gain with respect to a
number dealing with a fraction.
Mental Health Care
Emergency Services
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, when a recent documentary and
public outcry was heard respecting the line‑ups at emergency rooms,
particularly as they relate to psychiatric patients, the minister promised
action.
I would like to ask the minister today: What action has he taken to alleviate the
problem, particularly as it relates to psychiatric patients in the line‑ups
in emergency rooms?
* (1030)
Hon. James McCrae
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have been very pleased over
the course of the last few months to be involved with consumers and providers
of mental health services in a number of announcements which indicate a change
in direction in mental health in Manitoba.
We have been providing in communities in Manitoba a variety
of services that have never existed before in places in Manitoba where people
have never had mental health services before.
The honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) will
recall, we announced acute care beds for Thompson as well as services in the
community. I believe there were about 40
health care jobs involved in Thompson.
The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) and the member for
The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) will recall an announcement for the Norman region
respecting acute care beds in that area and other community services, I think
in that case amounting to about 20 jobs.
In the Eastman and Interlake area, we were pleased to
announce Crisis Stabilization and other community‑based mental health
services, amounting to some 28 jobs.
The honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) will recall a
visit I made to the Selkirk Mental Health Centre and talked about the future of
that centre and the fact of how pleased we are that we are going to finally in
Manitoba have a secure forensic unit.
Throughout the city of Winnipeg we have been announcing
changes in partnership with the Canadian Mental Health Association, the
Salvation Army and many other consumer groups in provision of community‑based
mental health services.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I can advise the minister, I
read all those press releases over and over again and those photo ops that he
attempted.
But how can the minister say action is taking place when as
recently as the day before yesterday three psychiatric patients were lined up
in the hallway of St. Boniface Hospital?
One was in the grieving room, one was in an office and one
had been there for at least two days, Mr. Speaker, waiting for service and
waiting for a bed.
Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for bringing
those issues to my attention. I will
look into them immediately and make inquiries as to how those circumstances
occurred, but I do say to the honourable member that part of the whole thrust
here is to try to ensure that consumers of health services and mental health
services are aware of the community‑based services that are available.
Attached to Sara Riel, we have, Mr. Speaker, a crisis
stabilization unit in St. Boniface that is also there to help to take pressure
away from emergency rooms, but I will be glad to take under advisement the
specific cases to which the honourable member referred.
Mr. Chomiak: I thank the minister for that response. It is the same one he gave to a radio station
that did a documentary on this issue at least three weeks to a month ago, Mr.
Speaker, and obviously nothing has been done.
(Mrs. Louise
Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair)
My final supplementary, Madam Deputy Speaker, is: Does the minister not realize that these five
patients who are waiting in the hallway, one for at least two days, require
full‑time, 24‑hour care by extra staff after this government has
closed beds, laid off nurses, require full‑time, 24‑hour care,
constant care by additional staff to look after these patients?
This no way resembles any kind of health reform. Is the minister aware of that fact?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Deputy Speaker, in a health care system
which deals with crisis circumstances day in and day out in our province, I am
sure the honourable member will be bringing to my attention specific incidents,
but those specific incidents need to be looked at and reviewed and steps taken
to try to prevent problems from occurring in the first place.
But, Madam Deputy Speaker, the honourable member cannot
support mental health reform on the one hand and then use a situation of the
kind he has referred to, to try to bring discredit to a system that is
changing, and changing for the better for consumers of health care in Manitoba.
For 20 years, governments in this province hesitated and
did not move with respect to mental health reform.
Thanks to my predecessor, the people in the mental health
system in Manitoba and the consumers involved, we are working toward a far, far
better system of mental health delivery than we have ever had before and,
without doubt, the best in the country.
Youth Crime Summit
Recommendations
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St.
Johns): Madam Deputy Speaker, my question is to the
Minister of Justice.
Following the minister's summit on youth violence and crime
about five months ago, the minister accepted just nine proposals of over 700
recommendations from that summit. She
apparently rejected the dominant message from that summit, which is that there
has to be a new era of youth and family supports and that government policies
have to be measured by their impact on families.
Once again, as she did with the task force on drugs, the
minister turned her back on hundreds of volunteers who gave freely of their
time and advice.
My question is: How
can this minister justify her comments at the conclusion of the summit when she
said to Manitobans, please watch and listen, you will hear again what you said
today, in government announcements you will hear what you said today?
How can the minister justify those comments, given the mere
nine points that survived at the hands of this government?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
Madam Deputy Speaker, the issue here is youth crime. This government has a nine‑point plan
for youth crime, and I ask both other parties:
Where do you stand?
We have not heard one word of support from these other
parties. I took to Ottawa on behalf of
this government and the people of Manitoba the toughest‑‑[interjection]
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The clock is running. Whenever you are ready.
The honourable member for St. Johns, with his subsequent
question. I apologize. The honourable Minister of Justice, to
complete her answer.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Deputy Speaker, again, I pick up where
I left off before the members attempted to simply continue shouting and failed
to take a stand on the issue of youth crime and violence.
At this point, I challenge the critic for Justice from the
New Democratic Party, the critic for Justice from the Liberal Party. Both of their Leaders, stand up. Tell us where you stand on youth crime and
violence and tell the people of Manitoba where you stand on the Young Offenders
Act.
Point of Order
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Opposition House Leader): Madam Deputy
Speaker, we did not rise on a matter of order when the minister was given a
second chance to try and answer the question, but our rules do require that
answers be brief and relate to the matter raised. This minister is consistent and has refused
to answer any of the questions asked by our member.
We would like the minister to follow the rules and finally
answer some of those questions.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson does not
have a point of order.
Youth Crime
Prevention Programs
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St.
Johns): It is unfortunate, Madam Deputy Speaker, that
with such a serious issue as rising youth crime in this province, we have yet
to see any program put in place by this minister following her announcement of
the nine‑point plan.
I ask the minister:
Will she please get on from her talk and just start taking care of
business and restore Manitobans' confidence in our justice system?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
Madam Deputy Speaker, of course, as the member well knows, the nine‑point
plan dealt with the major issues that were brought forward by Manitobans at the
summit for youth crime on violence. As
the member knows‑‑but, of course, he did not attend‑‑we
already have held the ASAP conference that was held April 7.
That was a program in which front line workers, teachers
and community services workers were trained to deal with these issues in the
front line. I come back to challenge the
members on the other side.
This government, Madam Deputy Speaker, has moved and moved
quickly in the area of youth crime and violence. We have had the toughest position on the
Young Offenders Act, and we have taken a position in the area of corrections.
The member for the Liberal Party suggested that our tough
positions in the area of boot camp were simply an immoral attempt to pass it by
voters. Well, we know that the people of
Manitoba support a tough stand, and the members on the other side all voted
against it.
We know where they stand, Madam Deputy Speaker. They voted against the throne speech.
* (1040)
Youth Court
Backlog
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St.
Johns): It is no wonder Manitobans are fed up with
talk, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Just to correct the record, the minister should know that I
took full part in the summit deliberations and, indeed, the nine‑point
plan really was at the periphery of the discussions. I was there, unlike the Minister of Family
Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), who did not even register for the summit.