LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Monday, July 4, 1994

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

PRAYERS

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS

Railway Traffic Safety

Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Leonard Evans). 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? No? Dispense.

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

WHEREAS there have been two recent serious railway accidents in Brandon involving children; and

WHEREAS many residential buildings are near railway tracks in Brandon and in urban communities throughout the province; and

WHEREAS many units owned by Manitoba Housing have no rear yard fences, making it difficult to keep small children in the safety of their back yards; and

WHEREAS it is important that everything reasonable be done to enhance the safety of children, including steps that would minimize future possible accidents involving railways.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly request the Minister of Housing (Mrs. McIntosh) to consider the installation of fences in back yards of residential units owned by Manitoba Housing, particularly in those near railways.

AND FURTHER your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly will request the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Findlay) to encourage and promote improved safety conditions to protect young children from railway and other traffic accidents.

AND FURTHER your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly will request the Minister of Highways and Transportation to review this issue of railway traffic safety with the federal Minister of Transport to enhance and promote a greater degree of safety in the vicinity of railway trackage with particular reference to small children.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Farm Support Programs

Government Position

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

Today, there is a very important meeting with Agriculture ministers across Canada meeting in Winnipeg dealing with the proposals from the federal government and from the various provinces. This meeting is taking place under the environment of suggested reductions in support both for farm support programs and for transportation programs in the province of Manitoba and nationally.

We have lost close to 1,400 farms in Manitoba since 1988, a situation that is not unique across western Canada and prairie Canada with the decline in farming incomes and the decline in supports for farmers and farm families in this province. This is a very, very important issue for us and for all members of this Chamber because agriculture is one of the most important industries in our province.

I would like to ask the Premier, can he table today in this Chamber the position that Manitoba is taking to that important meeting of Agriculture ministers?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns).

Status Report

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, there are reports that the existing programs will be replaced by a so‑called whole farm program. Our concern is, of course, that if the whole farm program is developed, we do not have a situation where we have a new program but we have half the support or less than the existing support for farmers across Canada.

All the advisory groups to our Agriculture minister and all advisory groups in agriculture in Manitoba have recommended that the levels of support from the federal government remain at least at the '94‑95 level, that this not be an attempt to just rejig the numbers and lower the investment in farm families and in western Canada.

It was indicated in some media reports today that Manitoba was worried that the federal government would be reducing their support for programs with the new farm support program.

I would ask the Premier, have there been any numbers on the table, and are there any possible reductions in support to western Canadian farmers at the meeting in Winnipeg today?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, as the member knows well, our Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), the member for Lakeside, is chairing that very, very important meeting. He will take a very strong stand on behalf of all Manitobans, ensuring that not only will farm support programs be preserved for the benefit of our farmers in Manitoba to ensure that they do have the security that they need to continue to operate the family farms and to be able to continue to prosper on the farms, he will of course be very, very adamantly opposed to any attempts on the part of the federal government to offload onto the provinces.

Those possibilities do exist from the cursory examination that we have of the proposals the federal government is talking about, but since we do not have details, I cannot give him any more information as to exactly what the federal government is proposing. We do have grave concerns when we read comments from the Honourable Doug Young about potential for major, major reductions in transportation programs, primarily the Western Grain Transportation assistance programs and others.

I know our Minister of Agriculture will be taking the strongest possible stand on behalf of Manitoba farmers.

* (1335)

Co‑ordination

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I know the Premier mentioned the issue of transportation grants. Of course, transportation programs plus the farm support programs are very important in their total, the accumulative total at the farm gate and to farm producers in western Canada.

Can the Premier indicate the co‑ordination from our own province on dealing with farm income that is arising from a provincial government position on both the agricultural transportation policies and the proposals that are being dealt with by the Ag ministers? How is it proposed by the federal government that both these programs will come together? How is it that the Manitoba strategy will deal with a comprehensive set of investments for agriculture and for western Canadian producers, rather than having one track dealing with the farm support and another track dealing with the farm transportation policy and not having a co‑ordination from the federal government and therefore no co‑ordination at the farm gate.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question, as well, as notice on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture.

Provincial Court

Backlogs

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Justice.

As of last Friday, about one‑quarter of the full‑time Provincial Court judges in Manitoba who were available to deal with the issues of Manitobans were no longer available to serve. The government has bought off eight judges recently at a cost of about a million dollars to taxpayers, while over 200 court‑sitting days in Winnipeg this summer alone have been cut by the government due to Filmon Fridays.

In light of this and the fact that relations between this minister, the government and the judges of the Provincial Court and the morale of the judges have deteriorated to the point where the judges have now today launched a legal proceeding against the government, will the minister advise how the court backlogs can possibly be reduced this summer, and will she advise this House now how much worse these backlogs will get?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, just to correct the record‑‑the member is frequently wrong; he very rarely has his facts right‑‑it is my understanding there are seven Provincial Court judges who have accepted the retirement.

Mr. Speaker, media reports indicate that court documents will be filed at some point today. In the interest of due process, in the interest of fairness, I will be confining my comments to the fact that we as a government will be filing our defence in court, and our statements will be made in court in response to any documents filed by the other side.

I would also like to make it perfectly clear that this government intends to respect the court's decision in this matter.

Political Interference

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): In the interest of Manitobans, would the minister confirm that the government has attempted to use its financial clout to silence and to stifle, interfere with the Provincial Court judges speaking up on an issue related to its independence, that is, the application of Filmon Fridays to the court?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, again, I am shocked by the member's questions, by his attempt to frequently interfere, by his attempts to meddle in the area of judicial independence, by his attempts to meddle in cases before the court, by his attempts to meddle in cases where sentencing has not been handed down.

It is shocking to me that someone with legal training would meddle so very closely in matters which have been before the court or are presently before the court.

* (1340)

Mr. Mackintosh: Rather than reflecting on the propriety of the questions, Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister should read Beauchesne.

I would like to table letters between the government and counsel for the judges. By the way, Mr. Speaker, the letters will show that the government has withdrawn support for a salary increment to judges on the condition that they forgo pursuing a matter in court against the government.

My question, Mr. Speaker, is, how does the minister justify the independence of the judiciary in light of this action by the government in trying to silence the judges?

Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely wrong. He is absolutely wrong in what he characterizes as a part of the letter, and he should be ashamed of what he has characterized as a part of the letter.

As the member knows, there are ongoing discussions to arrive at judicial compensation, and this was simply part of the process which is being led by the civil servants to deal with judicial compensation.

Provincial Court

Workweek Reduction

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Justice, and my question relates directly to the implementation of Bill 22 by this government, which does not offend any rule of parliamentary procedure to discuss it openly.

My question for the Minister of Justice is, were the judges, those who administer the courts in this province, the Provincial Court judges, given the same leeway to apply those reductions as many hospital administrators were given after many discussions with the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae)? He did see the light and allowed hospitals and hospital administrators to apply Bill 22 in the way to cause the least harm to the delivery of services.

Were the judges given that same independence, that same ability to take those reductions in cost and impose them as they saw fit and as they best know, running those courts every day, every week in this province?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Perhaps the member is already privy to whatever documents will be filed by the judges today. I have not yet seen them. I will be very careful and will refrain from answering in the interests of not wishing‑‑[interjection] Mr. Speaker, the other side seems to feel that there is not a line here. There most certainly is a line. It is absolutely imperative that I respect the judicial process, that we know what has been filed as an issue, as a case before the court, and that I not make any statements which might jeopardize a case before the court.

Mr. Edwards: This minister, this government, have interfered with the courts more than any other administration in the history of this province, Mr. Speaker. Consistently they have done that.

My question for the minister: In the implementation of Bill 22, in the administration of the courts which she has the responsibility for and which is the past and is not directly related and does not prejudice this government's court action, were the courts, were the judges given the right, the ability, the respect to impose those reductions in cost as they best saw fit to ensure that the level of service to the people whom the courts serve in this province had the least effect?

That was given to the hospitals. That was given to the hospital administrators. Was it given to the judges and to the courts in this province?

Mrs. Vodrey: Perhaps the member would like to jeopardize a case which will be before the courts. Perhaps the member, again, would like to jeopardize a case.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this government, I am not prepared to put that case into jeopardy, and I would ask that members opposite hold the same respect for due process through a court of law.

Mr. Edwards: The Minister of Justice does not understand the principle that she is speaking of, Mr. Speaker, and she is using it to avoid very legitimate questions in this House today.

Now, Mr. Speaker, my final question for the minister: There was an agreement between this government in principle and the judges to sign off with respect to pay and benefits. I do not seek here today to discuss the details of that agreement, but I would like the minister to answer for all members of this House whether or not she or a member of the government specifically indicated that they would not sign that off if, in fact, the judges were going to bring this court case on the issue of judicial independence.

Did she put that condition and did she put essentially that threat, Mr. Speaker, to the judges, that they would not go ahead with that pay agreement until and unless the judges specifically indicated they would not bring any further court action? Did she do that?

Mrs. Vodrey: It is the member who fails to understand the judicial process. It is the member who consistently fails to understand the judicial process. It is that member, that side of the House which constantly wants to jeopardize the system on behalf of Manitobans.

Mr. Speaker, I will not see the justice system fail. They would see the justice system fail. I will not see the justice system fail on behalf of this government.

* (1345)

Highway Construction/Maintenance

Northern Manitoba

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, not a day goes by when we, as northern MLAs, do not receive complaints about the condition of northern roads, whether they be into Nelson House, Split Lake, Cross Lake, Norway House. Now information obtained from the Department of Highways shows why.

I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon) if he can justify why the spending on construction in northern Manitoba has plummeted to 6.5 percent since this government came into office, compared to the 16.3 percent it was under the NDP government. In terms of actual numbers, it is now $5.7 million compared to $14.7 million under the NDP.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, the member fails to realize that when he left power they were spending about $85 million a year on capital, on highways in the province. It has now been over a hundred most of the time we have been here‑‑last year, $110 million; this year, $109 million‑‑a significant increase, while at the same time Saskatchewan over the same time period has gone from about $120 million a year down to $62 million.

We have consistently spent around $6 million a year in Highway capital in northern Manitoba, a significant investment in roads in northern Manitoba, as we have done a significant investment in roads throughout Manitoba where all Manitobans drive.

Mr. Ashton: Well, the minister makes my point, Mr. Speaker. Out of $109 million, $5.7 million is going to northern Manitoba. That is not acceptable.

I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): When is he going to govern on behalf of all Manitobans, including northern Manitobans, and give us decent roads?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I will acknowledge‑‑and I am sure every other Minister of Highways across the country would make the same statement‑‑for every dollar we can spend, there are about six that are wanted to be spent. There is a limit to what we can source from the taxpayer. We make decisions continually throughout the year on a wide variety of criteria of where we must most urgently spend our money for the good of all Manitobans.

Mr. Ashton: Well, Mr. Speaker, let us talk about criteria, and I want to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): We have money for an underpass on Kenaston‑‑by the way, more than is being spent in northern Manitoba in the entire four years under this government in construction. We have money for the Winnipeg Jets. When are we going to see some fairness from this First Minister who has to accept responsibility for ignoring northern roads?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, that member does not understand what the word "fairness" to Manitobans means. They increased taxes, increased taxes, increased taxes and Manitobans do not want that anymore. They want a responsible government that uses the resources available to it in the most responsible manner, and this government has done it for seven budgets in a row.

Farm Support Programs

Government Position

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, as our Leader has indicated, there are very important meetings taking place in Winnipeg this week, meetings that will discuss the future of farmers across Canada. Unfortunately, this government has not put forward their position as to how they propose to deal with the new whole income programs.

I want to ask the Acting Minister of Agriculture: As we look forward to these programs, is this government prepared to take a position that will see programs capped so that we would be targeting more family farms instead of what we have with NISA right now where the majority of the money is going to a small number of farmers and the basic family farm is not being able to take as much advantage of the program as the large corporate and huge farms are? Will they consider capping the amount of money‑‑

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

Hon. Glen Findlay (Acting Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) is co‑chairing a very important meeting, as there have been many important meetings over the last few years in terms of safety nets for the farm community. Manitoba stands tall in terms of what it has done in terms of safety‑net support for Manitoba farmers. Compared to Saskatchewan‑‑I will compare that any time.

Mr. Speaker, the member clearly misses the issue. What is going on is the federal government is finding various ways and means to offload support to the farm community on the provinces, in fact, pull it away from the farm community of western Canada. Why does she not ask that question? That is the serious question. The Liberal government in Ottawa does not pay any attention to the problems of western Canada.

* (1350)

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, we all agree that there should not be federal cuts to the Agriculture budget. What the federal government is doing is disgraceful.

I want to ask the Acting Minister of Agriculture if they will consider looking at ways to target the family farm rather than having the largest portion of money going to large farms. If this government believes in the rural community and sustainable development in the rural community, we have to have people there and the money has to be distributed. That is all we are asking for. Will they cap the amount of money‑‑

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

Mr. Findlay: I should not answer for the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), but as I recall, the figure is that 98 percent of the farms in Manitoba are family farms. We have targeted our support to the family farms of Manitoba.

Ms. Wowchuk: I want to ask the minister if he will admit the fact that in most cases there are farmers that only get $2,800 from this program, but there are specific farmers that get well over a hundred thousand dollars. This is not fair. We have to look at ways of targeting the family farm on need, but more specifically‑‑

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

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the member to read the process by which the programs work. They are targeted to need, whereas in the past it paid to everybody regardless of need. Today's programs are targeted to need. I would recommend that she read the guidelines and understand them so she does not misinform the farmers of Manitoba, who, by the way, proudly support what Manitoba has done over the last number of years.

Point of Order

Ms. Wowchuk: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I would like the acting minister to correct the record because NISA is not targeted on need. It is‑‑

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

Homeowner Protection

Legislation

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I find it truly amazing that this government, when it wants to bring in regressive legislation that is going to take the province backwards, they can do it very quickly, but when they have an opportunity to bring in legislation that is going to protect homeowners from predatory tactics of banks, they take their time.

I want to ask the Premier why the government can bring in Bill 22 to break collective agreements and bring in Bill 38 to destroy wildlife areas without consultation, but when they have the chance to bring in a bill that is going to protect property owners in this province, it is going to take them two years.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice.

Points of Order

Ms. Cerilli: On a point of order, can you ask the Premier to listen to the questions in Question Period and answer‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. There is no point of order.

* * *

Mr. Speaker: The honourable First Minister is up on a new point of order.

Mr. Filmon: I took the question as notice. That is very legitimate under parliamentary democracy, and if the member had been here awhile and understood the rules, she would know that, Mr. Speaker.

* * *

Ms. Cerilli: Can the Premier tell the House why other provinces in Canada have legislation that is going to protect homeowners when they sell their property under an assumed mortgage and why we do not have that kind of protection in Manitoba?

Mr. Filmon: I will take that question as notice.

Ms. Cerilli: There was a paper that was prepared for Manitoba's Securities Commission that I hope that the Premier will take the time to read since he has taken this matter as notice.

I would like to have him tell the House when the recommendation at the end of the paper was first made to the government to amend legislation in Manitoba that is going to ensure that homeowners are protected in this province.

When was that recommendation first made to this government‑‑

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

Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice as well.

Manitoba Hazardous Waste Corp.

Environmental Licensing Violations

Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment.

During a recent inspection of the Manitoba Hazardous Waste Management facility in St. James, Department of Environment inspectors identified a number of deficiencies and operational problems which contravene the environment regulations and which indicate that some activities are being carried on outside the corporation's licence.

My question to the minister: Can the minister advise us what steps are being taken to remedy this situation and to prevent future licensing and regulatory violations?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): I am not sure to which matters the member is referring, but if I can assume that it is in response to an inspection that the Department of Environment made about a month ago, that demonstrates precisely what we are doing to make sure that corporation and any other operating in the province is subject to inspection and enforcement and make sure they live by the rules.

Ms. McCormick: Can the minister assure us that the list of violations and deficiencies has been provided to the community representatives as is required by the co‑management agreement?

Mr. Cummings: I am not sure if I can confirm or deny that, but I will make sure that it does happen.

Status Report

Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): My final supplementary: The June 30 deadline has passed. Can the minister provide us with a status update on the sale of the assets of the corporation to IEI and whether the buyer has managed to raise the funds necessary to complete the transaction?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): We are waiting for some adjustment to the letters of credit to make sure that they are fully compatible with the conditions which we have imposed on the deal. Everyone within the corporation and within the proposed partnership gives us full assurance that they will meet those conditions, and then we will close the sale.

McKenzie Seeds

Privatization

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Culture and Heritage.

In early April, when the announcement was made that McKenzie Seeds was exploring options to privatize the company, the statement was made that there would be a decision made within six to eight weeks one way or the other. Well, it is now three months since the initial announcement and no statements have been forthcoming.

My question to the minister is: Will the minister now confirm that the government will not proceed with the privatization of McKenzie Seeds?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister responsible for A.E. McKenzie Co. Ltd.): No, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, I would then ask the minister if he can advise the House when the government will make a decision in this matter, because it is not in the public interest to leave this matter in a state of indecision.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, the member reminds me of the editorial in the Brandon Sun, which advised that member not to get hysterical about these things.

Some discussions are ongoing. When there is something to announce, it will be done in due course.

Mr. Leonard Evans: If I was hysterical, Mr. Speaker, there were 8,000 people in Brandon who were hysterical as well about the decision made by this government to privatize.

My final question is: Will the minister respond? Will the minister give this House and myself as a member of this House the courtesy of responding to the written questions I placed on the Order Paper over two months ago respecting McKenzie Seeds? Will he give the House the courtesy and myself the courtesy of an answer to those questions, or is he going to ignore it?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I would remind the member that we spent a number of hours in committee discussing McKenzie Seeds. The member indicated that he had some more questions that we would be dealing with at a subsequent meeting, and I look forward to that.

* (1400)

Pritchard Place Drop‑In Centre

Funding

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, in Winnipeg's north end there is a drop‑in centre called Pritchard Place Drop‑In Centre. They are doing an excellent job of keeping children off the streets and out of trouble, providing a positive alternative in terms of recreation.

I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services if she can confirm that Winnipeg Child and Family Services have indicated that their grant of $39,000 may not be renewed after August of this year.

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House certainly do encourage very actively and promote recreation as an option to reduce crime, and it also keeps our children very active and involved, especially during the summer months.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to indicate that I will have to take the details of that question as notice and report back to my honourable friend.

Mr. Martindale: Will the Minister of Family Services endeavour to ensure that funding is kept in place either from Winnipeg Child and Family Services or from some other source, so that they can continue with the same level of staffing and the same level of service so they continue to provide this service and keep children off the street and in a positive alternative setting?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to my honourable friend, I cannot confirm or deny what Winnipeg Child and Family Services is doing as an external agency to government regarding their funding commitments, but I will endeavour to get the detailed information, ask the questions and report back to my honourable friend.

Hikel Report

Tabling Request

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.

This winter, I asked under Freedom of Information for a copy of the Hikel report, which examined the merits of the ACCESS programs at Manitoba's universities. That request was refused, Mr. Speaker, but the minister has repeatedly said in Estimates and in the House that he will be tabling that report and he said, in June.

It is now five months after my initial request for that report. Will the minister tell the House today when he is going to table the Hikel report?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, to correct the revisionist history as put forward by the member for Wolseley, I said I would make every effort to table same in the month of June.

Mr. Speaker, translation is a problem, yes, No. 1. Number 2, Mr. Hikel is out of town until, I understand, July 8 or 10, and at that time, the report will be completed. So at this point, I cannot table the report.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised by the minister's response.

Could he tell me whether he will be tabling that report upon its completion on July 10, or is he, in fact, giving himself another out here for yet a further delay of three or four months? Will it be July 10? When will it be?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, as I said, I would make every effort to table it as soon as possible. I am hoping that will be July. I was once hoping and expecting that it might be the end of June. That was impossible.

ACCESS Programs

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm that that report upon which he has based his policies of cutting ACCESS programs, that that report is based upon only focus groups and that there has never been any systematic contact and analysis of the effects of his policy upon ACCESS students? Will he confirm that?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I will not confirm that because the member is dead wrong.

There were many discussions with individuals, with institutions. There was a wide cross section of referencing done that led to the final recommendations within the report.

Omands Creek

Protection from Development

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

In my memory, there have been four times that developers have sought to either develop over or right up to the riverbank of Omands Creek, which is in the west end of Winnipeg, most recently back in 1989 when the owners of Rae & Jerry's were going to put up an office tower and car wash. There is another application that has been filed in the city of Winnipeg to build a parking lot, an extension, right out over the river.

Mr. Speaker, my question for the Minister of Urban Affairs: Given that the province has a significant investment in this park through the purchase of Bluestem Park, which happened some years ago, is the minister aware of this application?

Has the minister had discussions with Mayor Thompson or other city councillors about how to preserve again and protect the environmental integrity of that very important river in the west end of Winnipeg?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Urban Affairs): No, the mayor has not brought this particular issue to my attention regarding the parking lot. We have, however, as you know, passed legislation that requires the City of Winnipeg to pass a by‑law concerning construction over waterways. We are waiting for them to do that, and we have discussed, the mayor and I, the time line and the delay in getting that by‑law to pass. So we are looking for them to proceed as requested, with the formation of that by‑law and looking for wording to come forward in the near future.

Mr. Edwards: This application is set to go before the standing committee this Friday, I am led to believe.

My question for the minister: Will she speak to those at City Hall to ensure that the province and her office are well briefed on this application?‑‑because the province must take a role in protecting this park. We have been joint purchasers and joint developers of this park. It is now time to stand up and make sure that it is not compromised by another parking lot.

Mrs. McIntosh: The mayor and I will be discussing this and many other issues in the days to come. We are in communication on topics of this nature.

The application going forward to City Hall, of course‑‑it is not coming forward to the province, but rather going forward to City Hall. I expect that we will be discussing this issue, the mayor and I, for a number of reasons, primarily to discuss the passing of the by‑law that is required for the city to do.

Mr. Edwards: My final question for the minister: When the minister meets with the mayor and does discuss this, would she be prepared to discuss ways of solving this once and for all and simply sitting down with the owners of that small piece of property, which is the only privately held piece of property between the two parks, the city park and the provincial park, and bringing that piece of property into public ownership?

There must be a way to do that. There have been years and years of negotiations. Will the minister discuss with the mayor ways of once and for all solving that, Mr. Speaker?

Mrs. McIntosh: The mayor and I, and other councillors as well, have discussed this issue at length in terms of other methods of trying to resolve it, including the discussion of the possibility of a land swap and that type of solution. Those discussions are still ongoing. They have not been resolved at this point.

Manitoba Mineral Resources

Trout Lake Divestiture

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): My question is to the Premier (Mr. Filmon).

Last year, the government of Manitoba decided to raid Manitoba Mineral Resources of some $16 million for their own purposes. On Thursday, the government announced that it was selling its share of Trout Lake to HBM&S. As the MLA for Flin Flon, obviously I have mixed feelings. I think that particular sale may help HBM&S in the short term and it may help the steelworkers, the people who work at HBM&S, in the short term.

My question, however, is to the Premier. Will the Premier be giving the people of northern Manitoba and the people who are involved in mining across the province the assurance that the $25 million in sale will remain an asset with Manitoba Mineral Resources so that it will be available for MMR to continue to work with mining companies in the province of Manitoba and mining communities in Manitoba for the improvement and the benefit of those communities in the future?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased my honourable friend is content with the sale of the Trout Lake asset to Hudson Bay and their acquisition of Granges' shares of the Trout Lake mine, because in his community that means an $80‑million to $100‑million investment in the Trout Lake mine, 50 additional jobs over the next two and a half years in the construction, the deepening of the shaft there, and continued employment at the Trout Lake mine for approximately 10 to 11 years.

My honourable friend obviously has not been aware of the tremendous success that the Mineral Exploration Incentive Program and the Prospectors Assistance Program have meant to exploration activities in northern Manitoba and in his own constituency. Those programs, worth $10 million, are providing ever increasing levels of exploration activity with ever increasing ability to employ more and more people in the mining industry of northern Manitoba.

Mr. Storie: