LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Monday, June 20, 1994

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

PRAYERS

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

Bill 202‑‑The Health Care Records Act

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I move that leave be given to introduce Bill 202, The Health Care Records Act; Loi sur les dossiers médicaux, and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for Kildonan, seconded by the honourable member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that leave be given to introduce Bill 202, The Health Care Records Act; Loi sur les dossiers médicaux, and that the same be now received and read a first time.

Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this bill has been introduced in previous form by the former member for St. Johns. It meets with something I am sure that all members of this House can agree with in the new spirit of a new developing co‑operation in health care. This bill reflects our changing health care system by providing for patient rights and self‑determination amongst patients.

It is part of the spirit of the consumer movement and consistent with real health care reform. It provides for a legislative mechanism to enable health care consumers to have access to their own medical records, and it proposes the enshrinement of this principle in the confidentiality of the law. The bill can only mean, in our view, better informed health consumers, more openness and trust between consumers and caregivers and improvement in our health care system.

I hope that all members of the House will join us in passage of this bill. Thank you.

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 with us this afternoon from the Lord Roberts Community School twenty‑four Grade 5 students under the direction of Mr. Bill Miller. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Osborne (Ms. McCormick).

Also, from the Garden Grove School, we have thirty Grade 5 students under the direction of Mrs. Susan Chernetz. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux).

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

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Burns Committee

Report Tabling Request

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier.

Thirty‑one months ago the Premier signed a letter of endorsation dealing with the province paying 50 percent of the operating losses of the Winnipeg Jets hockey team, Mr. Speaker, and just as recently as early June, we found out the full implications with the projected losses that were made public by the Provincial Auditor to the Public Accounts committee.

Mr. Speaker, the government has since that time had a number of committees, the Mauro committee. It has had another committee called the Burns committee which it created December 15, 1993, to assess the private sector lending and investment interests in the Winnipeg Arena and private sector interest in the Winnipeg hockey team.

It is now 10 days before the deadline that the Premier negotiated as part of his Jets loss agreement that he signed in November of 1991.

Mr. Speaker, we would like to know, does the government have the Burns committee report? It is public knowledge that they have been briefed by the Burns committee. Do they have the report, and can we see the options that are available to the public of Manitoba and to this Legislature? We only have 10 days to go before the deadline. We would like to have both the options and the ability to have a public debate as it affects the public funds of the Province of Manitoba.

* (1335)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I repeat for the Leader of the Opposition comments I have made throughout the course of last week in response to similar questions. No, I do not have the Burns report, and yes, I will make it public when I receive it.

Public Accounts Committee

Winnipeg Jets

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Ten days to go on a matter of such serious importance, clearly beyond the deadline that the Premier established for the Burns committee, Mr. Speaker. We are very concerned that we will not have any public debate or any public input or any time for public debate, given the fact that the clock is ticking and we are only 10 days away.

We have had reports already from former MLAs, Ed Connery, from Harold Neufeld, that there was very little information shared with the previous government's caucus. We have Don Mitchelson, a former city councillor, saying, we were told to downplay the potential losses. We had the Auditor today say in committee that the disclosure by this Premier was minimal in terms of the losses that they were aware of as early as October of 1991.

I would like to ask the Premier, how will he ensure that the public is involved in these issues at this last moment, Mr. Speaker? We had last time a secret set of negotiations with numbers that were not disclosed by the Premier. Will the Premier now agree to have all those numbers under the Burns report go to the Public Accounts committee so the Provincial Auditor can review those numbers and the public can be involved in all the options and the implications of those options for the people of Manitoba?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, it is kind of interesting that the Leader of the Opposition is quoting as his authority one individual who acknowledges he was not in cabinet at the time when the matter was decided by cabinet, and a second individual who acknowledges he was not there at the meeting that made the decision.

So he has engaged in what he said he would not do in the weekend paper, which is speculation based on speculation‑‑absolutely foolish, but that is the basis on which this Leader of the Opposition deals in very important issues. He speculates on speculation, and that forms his definitive position, Mr. Speaker.

I have said, Mr. Speaker, that the information of the Burns report will be made public, and he can then base his decision on that.

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we are not speculating on the fact that the Premier had the numbers and the projected losses in October of 1991, and he withheld them from the public debate. He withheld them from this Legislature. He withheld them from the debate on the options available about the hockey team until the Auditor was able to obtain those numbers in June of 1994.

We had called for a public debate on the issue of the Jets hockey team as early as September of 1991, when then we knew the government was conducting secret negotiations. We are now pleading with the Premier. These are public losses that are at stake, Mr. Speaker. We want the public to be involved. We want the Legislature to be involved. We do not want any more secret last‑minute deals.

Will the Premier now assure this House and the people of Manitoba that this matter will go to the Public Accounts committee so that we may debate the merits of what the government is going to do on the basis of the facts that will be before the public, facts we did not have until just recently on the Premier's former deal on the Jets losses?

* (1340)

Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the information that we had in 1991 was highly speculative information. It was best‑guess predictions as to what might happen with a whole series of potential changes and variables that were out there. At this point in time, the only thing the provincial government has put out is $2.5 million towards losses.

What we do know is that our best advice continues to be that the direct revenues to government will be more than double what the potential losses to government will be. That is the best information we continue to have, and it is as valid today as it was at the time the decision was made.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, as I have said to him, when the Burns report, with all of the information which it may contain, whether it be best‑guess information, whether it be firm information, whether it be speculative information, will be put forward, that will be known to the public, all of the public, just as it will be known to the Leader of the Opposition, and they will make their judgments based on it.

Department of Health

Political Interference

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, one week ago we tabled in this Chamber a letter from the head of the largest hospital in the province indicating a major contradiction in terms of what the government had said about health care. On Friday we raised in this Chamber a statement raised by Manitoba's chief medical officer suggesting political interference which was later apparently contradicted by the deputy minister. Public health care is too important to leave these questions unanswered.

My question today for the Premier is: Will the Premier announce an independent third party in the guise of someone like Ted Hughes to investigate political interference and contradictions at the Department of Health immediately to deal with these serious issues?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, there has been no allegation of political interference and, in fact, the deputy minister has taken full responsibility for the‑‑[interjection] Members opposite find it foolish to be told the truth. They laugh about it.

Because of the concern, legitimate concern, of a contradiction between‑‑[interjection] Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman), who is not allowed to ask questions because he is an embarrassment to his party, I wonder if he would at least please be quiet and let me respond.

Mr. Speaker, because of the concern that we have, as well as members opposite, as well as members of the public, about the contradiction in testimony between two members of the senior staff of the Department of Health, it is my understanding that the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), who is on his way back from a funeral in Brandon, has drafted a letter to the Ombudsman asking the Ombudsman to investigate this matter and to determine just exactly what the facts are in the situation.

Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, will the First Minister ensure that the documents in question, the August 20 memo, the August 22 memo and the other documents relating to this matter, will be tabled in the Legislature so the public can have access and be able to examine this information first‑hand?

Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, is the member suggesting he does not trust the Ombudsman to review that situation? If he is, then I think that his desire for his own political interests exceeds his desire to find the facts out in a situation, and that is reprehensible.

Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, the Premier is particularly sensitive on this. No one has ever suggested, least of all members in this House, the Ombudsman cannot be trusted. We do have questions about some of the issues arising with this government.

My final supplementary to the Premier: There are more issues than just this that are in question. I have a series of memos of things approved by the deputy minister during the last provincial election that were never instigated, and these may have been politically involved. How do we go about investigating those? Should we send those to the Ombudsman, or are we going to have another independent‑‑

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

Mr. Filmon: I repeat, Mr. Speaker, we will have the issue that was raised before the Krever inquiry referred to the Ombudsman for his investigation and report back.

Winnipeg Jets

Agreement Deadline

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Just over a month ago, Mr. Shenkarow, representing the majority owners of the Winnipeg Jets hockey club, indicated publicly that he had agreed to extend the June 30 deadline and therefore there was no longer any hurry. The Premier in fact spoke about that when we were in Executive Council Estimates and indicated that it was his understanding that that was the case and therefore that was a reason for not, in any way, wanting or needing to push the Burns committee. We are now at a stage where Mr. Shenkarow appears to have withdrawn that offer to extend and similarly we are coming close to the June 30 deadline. The Burns report has not come down, and there is no indication as to when exactly it will.

What does the Premier intend to do in the ensuing 10 days with respect to this timetable which Mr. Shenkarow is now apparently holding us to? Does he favour specifically a government exercising that $32‑million option to purchase the Winnipeg Jets?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): No, I do not, Mr. Speaker.

Private Investors

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, is the Premier then, in any way, prior to the Burns report coming down, looking for, in co‑operation with the City of Winnipeg, other investors who might take the benefit of that option?‑‑because in his Executive Council Estimates on May 2 he specifically indicated that that option can also be one in which the two levels of government actually name the optionee, so it does not have to be government.

Is government actively looking for other investors or is that something that they expect the Burns committee to do because, if they do not report before June 30, that may be irrelevant?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I know of no other people at the moment who have the capital to be able to exercise that option and are willing to utilize it for that purpose. I will await the report of the Burns committee on the matter.

* (1345)

Burns Committee

Report Tabling Request

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the First Minister has indicated that he has not seen the report‑‑it is now coming on three months late‑‑and he has indicated that we will have it before the end of the session. He indicated that last week and that it will be the subject of debate in the session.

Can he indicate whether or not we are going to have it before the June 30 deadline?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): To my knowledge, yes.

Hog Industry

Impact on Water Quality

Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, everyone here knows that jobs in this province and in the Interlake and agricultural jobs are important, but also the importance of the quality and supply of our water. Three weeks ago, I brought to this government's attention the concerns of many residents in the Interlake area who feel that the supply of water quality may become a thing of the past.

Has the minister responded to the recommendation by the advisory board and concerned citizens to review the amount of water used in Chatfield and Silver and how it will affect the future supply of quality water?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I do not have that information‑‑if he is referring to the request to Water Resources, or if he is referring to the water quality issue. If he is referring to the review by Water Resources, they have an ongoing review and are prepared to substantiate the numbers.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Speaker, I was referring to both.

The guidelines for the hog operations were just released last Friday. Residents of these communities are asking the government to do an impact study to assure that the lakes and the water supply are safe today. Will the Minister of Environment conduct a study?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, that is a fascinating question that the member for Interlake is raising. He is asking for a generic environmental assessment of the Interlake region prior to allowing any development in the area of livestock production. If that is what he is saying, then I think he should come out and be more clear.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Speaker, when will this minister initiate a complete environmental audit in this area with the input of livestock producers, fishermen, concerned citizens, LGDs, so that we can all be assured that a supply of quality water will be available today and in the future?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, I must admit that I am a little bit disappointed in the approach the member is assuming in relationship to this issue because I do not think I want to become involved in fear or smear and innuendo that many people are now putting forward about what are rumoured to be, and I emphasize the words "rumoured to be," concerns that have been raised in relationship to development in that area.

There are a number of issues that are raised in the media today that, in fact, have been investigated, and the answers have been made available, but yet they are repeated here again today as if they were ongoing mysteries and facts.

So I say to the member for Interlake, if he is asking on behalf of his constituents that he would delay any potential development in that area based on a complete environmental assessment of the area, then I would ask him to stand up and be clear.

Northern Fly‑In Sports Camps

Lottery Revenues

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Lotteries.

Last week, I rose in this House to raise the issue of the northern fly‑in sports camps that began in 1986. Considering the $200‑million revenue that this government has received from lotteries and a fair chunk of that from northern communities, I would like to ask the minister, given the huge increase in these revenues, why the fly‑in camps have not been given an increase in their funding. The $50,000 apparently committed appears to be not appropriate to run these programs in northern communities.

Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Foundation Act): Mr. Speaker, inadvertently, due to certain matters of House business, I was unable to hear the member's question. I would ask him, please, to repeat it again.

* (1350)

Mr. Robinson: Last week, I raised this matter in the House concerning the northern fly‑in sports camps that began in 1986 in Manitoba. These are very much needed in many of the northern remote communities, and considering that this government has attained a $200‑million revenue from lotteries, my question to the minister was that, considering the huge revenue that has been realized by this government from lotteries, and a fair amount of that coming from northern communities, why there has not been an increase of the currently $50,000 committed?

Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, I regret I do not have the response for the honourable member that I should have had, and I apologize for that. I will endeavour to get that immediately for him.

Mr. Speaker: Taken as notice. Okay.

Mr. Robinson: These communities have very high unemployment. It appears to me that it would make more sense to increase the support for these camps so that more young people can be hired and more communities can take advantage of this very meaningful program.

Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the great success that the northern fly‑in sports camps have had. As a matter of fact, there are public statements on the record that crime has been reduced as a result of these activities, that sniffing and other activities that have occurred from time to time are down because of the activities of these sports camps. I agree with the member, so I will endeavour to get him the earlier information that he had requested.

Mr. Robinson: One of the recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, and I would like to quote that recommendation, says that the funding for the northern fly‑in sports camps can be firmly established and that the camps should be expanded to provide services to all northern aboriginal communities.

The number of communities served has dropped from 16 to just six in the past two years. Should the government not be putting greater support into a program that directly cuts down on youth crime and provides role models and major benefits to the communities affected?

Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, I am not familiar with all the information the member has brought. I will look into that matter and report back.

Social Assistance

Special Needs Fund

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Family Services will be aware that social assistance is intended to only meet people's basic needs for food, shelter, clothing, personal needs and household needs. What she and her government may not appreciate nor understand is that all other expenses and emergencies, insurance, everything else, is covered, or has been covered in the past by the $150 special needs fund, $150 per year.

Can the minister confirm that a new policy directive has gone out which extremely limits the items that can be covered by the special needs fund?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): In review of our social safety net programs in the province of Manitoba we have endeavoured to continue to provide the support where it is absolutely needed. In the area of special needs requirements there have been some changes in the policy this year, but those services required for new mothers, for infants, for children, for school supplies and for a lot of the other necessities, have been maintained, and they will continue to be available to those who are in need.

* (1355)

Mr. Martindale: The problem with this policy is that the number of items has been greatly restricted.

Will the minister confirm that her department has decided they would rather pay out for things like refurnishing an entire apartment after a fire than cover things that have been covered in the past such as tenant package insurance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I will just read out for the information of my honourable friend who has asked the question and for all members of the Legislature and the public, Mr. Speaker, those items that will continue to be available under the special needs policy are, an allowance of up to $250 for a first child and $75 for each subsequent child to provide items necessary for the newborn such as a crib layette, et cetera. Where no other alternative is feasible, the purchase or repair of a washing machine, refrigerator or a stove will still be covered.

On an as‑required basis, where recipients cannot find furnished accommodations, a one‑time start‑up allowance of up to $500 for the purchase of household furniture is provided in certain circumstances, such as a disabled person leaving an institution or parental home or a recently separated sole‑support parent who was not able to obtain marital property. Also, the actual replacement cost of a mattress, box spring and frame to be provided a maximum of once every seven years, and bedding to be provided on a maximum of once every three years.

Mr. Speaker, moving costs approved by the program, such as moves to confirmed employment, will be covered. School supplies for dependent children will be covered as follows: Kindergarten to Grade 6 up to $40; Grade 7 and Grade 8 up to $60; Senior 1 to Senior 4 up to $80.

The list goes on, and I will continue in my next response.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the list, which of course I already have. The minister misses the point. She will not admit that the policy has been completely tightened up to put the screws to the poor. That is what she will not admit.

Mr. Speaker: What is your question, sir?

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask if the minister will confirm that since the Canada Assistance Plan regulations have not been changed and the Social Allowances regulations in the province of Manitoba have not been changed, is it not true that people can still apply and have their needs met since this was not a regulatory change, it was only a change in her department's policy?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, those special needs items which are required as a program of last resort will still continue to be provided. Each individual case will be assessed on an individual basis, and where there are exceptional circumstances warranted, we will review, as I said, on an individual basis, each case.

I make no apologies for ensuring that social assistance is paid to those that are most vulnerable in our community and those basic needs are met.

WRAP Act

Junk Mail

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Environment.

I must commend the minister on his work on The WRAP Act, but I do have some concerns. My concerns are around the issue of flyers, better known as junk mail.

I am wondering, seeing as the minister is tightening up the act to see that producers pay for the recycling of most of the products, will the producers of the flyers and junk mail be responsible within the act?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, we certainly anticipated that the large volume of material that is affectionately referred to as junk mail would contribute towards the cost of its removal from the waste stream.

Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, will the minister be approaching Canada Post towards paying their share, seeing as Canada Post does send out approximately 3.9 billion pieces across this country, with a revenue exceeding $211 million?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that a very high volume of unsolicited mail comes from Canada Post. While we have been in contact with Canada Post, we have not yet received confirmation that they will contribute to the cost of recycling in this province. It is our hope that while they may not feel responsible to the act, they will in fact make a voluntary contribution to support this recycling program.

Deputy Minister of Health

Reassignment

Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to hear the Premier indicate today that the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) will be speaking with the Ombudsman and asking him to review the apparent discrepancies between comments from the Deputy Minister of Health and the chief medical officer of Health.

I am wondering if the Premier can indicate for us today, with all due respect to the Deputy Minister of Health, given that there is this cloud of suspicion surrounding the office, will he be temporarily reassigned until the Ombudsman presents his report?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, what I believe we have here is not a cloud of suspicion but rather a disagreement between two professionals as to the handling of a particular issue. I do not think that warrants the removal of the deputy minister in the circumstances.

* (1400)

Public Health Act

Amendments

Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): With a supplementary to the Premier, and we would hope that he would confer with the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) and reconsider that particular decision and in fact have the Deputy Minister of Health temporarily reassigned.

Dr. John Guilfoyle has also indicated that his job is somewhat impeded by an antiquated Public Health Act. I am wondering if the Premier can indicate to us if we can expect to see amendments to that Public Health Act in this session.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I know the minister will be examining the comments of Dr. Guilfoyle and looking into whether or not changes ought to be made, given his testimony before the Krever inquiry.

Ombudsman Review

Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): With a final supplementary to the Premier: Can the Premier indicate, is it possible for the Ombudsman to also look at the nature of The Public Health Act which talks about a minister's and a deputy minister's ability to override the decisions of a chief medical officer of Health? Can that be part of the review as well?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I think that what we want to get at is the difference in testimony between two professionals. I do not think we want to get into a policy decision which is really overall the issue to do with the provincial government's policy on the issue.

I said that I am sure the minister will be examining that issue, and I am confident that he will, because we take the advice and the testimony of Dr. Guilfoyle seriously, and we want to examine it and see whether or not there is merit to making changes in the act.

I believe that what the Ombudsman ought to be doing is examining a clear difference in testimony under oath before the Krever commission and determining how this conflict between the two senior officials of the department occurred and try to sort out and give us recommendations as to how to deal with it. That is the matter that we are referring to, I believe, the Ombudsman.

Used Tires

Storage Site Regulations

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, a fire on Panet Road yesterday was oddly enough at the Reliable Tire Company, and it burned approximately 150 tires and was likely set by burning garbage. It could have burned thousands of tires inside and outside the building.

I would like to ask the Minister of Environment what type of guidelines are in place, or will this government bring in, to make sure that tires are not being stolen or burned in these sites, to make sure that there is going to be some protection in these sites where tires are being stored.

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): There are a couple of parts to that question. First of all, we have every intention of working with any of the operators who may accumulate larger volumes of tires, that they are safely stored and that they are not stored in such a way that fire could easily spread from one grouping of tires to another.

Secondly, however, the member questioned whether or not tires might be burned at these sites. In fact, now that tires have a value, I would think that it is very unlikely. Certainly if she has information or a belief that someone was, other than for mischievous or for arson purposes, in fact burning tires, then I would certainly appreciate receiving it. That is not the information that I have received at this point.

Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Speaker, will the minister table a list of all of the sites authorized in Manitoba to store tires? Will he include emergency provisions in that document or list, including provisions for water run‑off protection in case there is a fire of in‑store tires in the province?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, I guess the member is asking if we are prepared to regulate municipal waste disposal grounds where significant numbers of tires are accumulated, along with private industry. The approach we have taken is that if there are significant accumulations of tires, they must be adequately segregated and kept in a manner so that it would not be easy for a fire to occur or, secondly, to spread.

I must indicate to the member that we have had a very successful six months recently in the tire recycling program that is occurring in this province. In fact, the number of tires that are being removed from the waste stream and recycled is about equal to the number of tires that are being sold in this province on a month‑over‑month basis.

So we are now dealing with the backlog, and I think that the issue the member raises will in fact be very much alleviated through the process of our tire recycling program.

Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Speaker, the tires are not being recycled if they are stockpiled in communities, in East Kildonan, Transcona and St. Boniface.

I would ask the minister: What are the environmental impacts such as chemicals released into the air due to these tire fires? Is there money from the $4 million that has been collected from the tire tax since 1992 that is going to go into ensuring that the environment is protected and ensuring that tires are not stockpiled in an unsafe manner?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, we undertook to make sure that every dollar that was collected from the tire‑buying public on behalf of recycling of the tires, in fact, goes back into that process to assure them that the tires are being removed and recycled. Naturally, the issues that the member raises are regulatory ones that we will deal with through the Department of Environment. If the member has evidence of some site where she thinks there are tires that have been accumulated improperly or unnecessarily, then I would appreciate that information.

Mr. Speaker, there have always been large accumulations of tires in this province. There are some very large significant dealers who operate within the tire industry in this province. I would find it quite puzzling if someone is accumulating used tires for any other purpose than to get the $2.50 rebate back from the tires, because if someone is in fact doing this, they are going to wait a long time before they see it go up. In fact, industries are now competing with each other to obtain those tires to move them into recycling systems. So I am more than confident that this is an issue that can be properly controlled.

Goods and Services Tax

Food/Prescription Drugs

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

It is reported today that the parliamentary committee reviewing the GST is going to report on a number of changes on the tax. I know the previous Leader of the Opposition, now the Prime Minister, did promise, in fact, I believe in Brandon that the GST would be scrapped.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very, very serious financial issue because it does affect every consumer in Canada. It affects every consumer certainly in Manitoba. It affects the relationship in tax collection between the provinces and the federal government. It has been disproportionately difficult and hard on people who are most vulnerable in our economy. It has resulted in a prolonged recession, the original GST, and it has been particularly tough on northern Manitobans.

My question to the Minister of Finance: Will the new GST, as proposed by the parliamentary committee, include harmonization with the provinces, and will it include expanding the base to include food and prescription drugs in Canada?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for that question because I believe, as we speak‑‑the information I received this morning was that the report is being released at 2 p.m. this afternoon. We are expecting copies probably in my office right now in terms of what the specific recommendations are. The rumours have been along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition has suggested, about base broadening, harmonization and so on.

I want to remind members of this House that the position of our government when the GST was introduced, we rejected harmonization, and we continue to reject harmonization unless we can seek some convincing reasons as to why that should be changed. To date, that has not been provided. We have been provided with no information or data that should suggest supporting harmonization today, but we are awaiting that report. As I have indicated before, this agenda, this item is on the agenda of Finance ministers when we meet at the end of this month, June 28 and 29.

It is a very important issue for not only Manitobans but all Canadians in terms of the impact on individual consumption, individual spending. The short‑term impact on our economy, when the studies were done earlier about the impact on the GST and any expansion, there was concern about in the short term, there can be job losses, although in the long term, there is potential for job enhancement. So it is a very important issue, Mr. Speaker.

* (1410)

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, our calculation dealing with food and prescription drugs, specifically with food, is that it would cost the Manitoba economy $170 million, and it would be approximately $680 per family, even at the lower rate that has been discussed in terms of the lower rate of 5.3 percent.

We believe this would produce a very, very disproportionate impact on lower‑ and middle‑income Canadians and Manitobans in terms of their ability to have disposable income and their necessity to have to purchase the basis foodstuff and basic prescription drugs in their family.

Has the government‑‑[interjection] Mr. Speaker, I know the Liberals are opposed to this. At least they were when the federal Conservatives proposed the GST on food. Has the government produced‑‑[interjection] The Liberal Leader is welcome to put his position on the record. We are opposed to the GST applying to food and prescription drugs.

I would like to know whether the government has any impact study on the effect on food and prescription drugs, and is it similar to our study of $680 per average Manitoba family?

Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, we share the concern about the extension of the GST into food and prescription drugs, and we have some preliminary analysis done of the impact on any changes to the GST in various ways. We are awaiting this report coming from the federal government in terms of seeing what data they provide in terms of whatever recommendations do, in fact, come forward from the report.

I do want to remind members of this House that the red book did say that a Liberal government will replace the GST. I think today many people are questioning whether or not an extension into food and prescription drugs really is a replacement of the GST.

Public Hearings

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): We disregarded their red book after they proclaimed NAFTA, so if the members opposite are still reading it‑‑Mr. Speaker, the Ministers of Finance will be meeting in June this year, as the minister has indicated. The GST is a very important issue for all Manitobans and all Canadians.

Will the Minister of Finance provide all the impacts of the proposed new GST by the new federal government?