LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, May 12, 1994
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Harry Enns
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, it is
my privilege to table the Annual Report 1992‑93 for the Manitoba Crop
Insurance Corporation.
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Minister charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure for me
today to table the Annual Report 1993 of the Workers Compensation Board of
Manitoba, as well as the 1994 Five Year Operating Plan of the Workers
Compensation Board.
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister charged with the administration of The
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
Also, from the
On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to
welcome you here this afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Royal Bank
Data Centre
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I think all members of this
Chamber appreciate the fact that
Mr. Speaker,
I would like to ask the Premier: Why did the Royal Bank choose
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, I welcome the member opposite's
question and his interest in ensuring that Manitoba gets all of the job
opportunities that it is capable of getting here, particularly in areas such as
the telephone call centre and telecommunications operations of various large
corporations.
I spoke yesterday, immediately after learning of the
decision, to the chairman and CEO of the bank, Mr. Taylor, and asked him to
provide us with information on the basis of their decision. Mr. Taylor did not give me any direct comparative
data to be able to justify it. He
repeated many times about how Manitoba's presentation was an excellent one and
Manitoba is very highly competitive in this field, but he did not have any
final information on which we could evaluate just where it was that Manitoba's
proposal was lacking.
We are concerned of course that the decision may well have
been made based on subsidies for jobs. I
know that we have in recent times been successful against competition with
So we are trying to find more information about it.
* (1335)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, in reviewing the material, I am
aware that New Brunswick has bid quite extensively for jobs in the past, but in
reviewing this proposal it appears to us that there was no direct subsidy,
although we cannot determine whether there was an indirect subsidy in that they
have promised engineering and other technical assistance from the telephone
company and the Province of New Brunswick.
Mr. Speaker, were there comparable proposals? Was
Were there any comparable offers indirectly through
telecommunication companies and other engineering expertise that was offered in
Mr. Filmon: We are led to believe, Mr. Speaker, that our
proposal was at least comparable in all the areas that the bank was looking
for. We are trying to find more
information to try and find any substantive differences or the basis on which
the final decision might have been tipped.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I wish the government well in
this endeavour.
Interprovincial Trade
Competition
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): We have been very concerned that bidding has
gone on, and we certainly cannot see any direct subsidy in this proposal from
what we have seen at this point.
On the larger issue, Mr. Speaker, there are a number of
other proposals before a number of other private companies dealing with a
number of other provinces, and it appears to us that Saskatchewan bid for jobs
with the Sears project, and that was the NDP, that Manitoba's bid was for jobs
with the GWE plant, which we have been critical of, and New Brunswick is of
course with the Purolator operation and has also bid quite extensively and
expensively for jobs in this related industry.
Are the Trade ministers in Canada and the Trade minister of
Manitoba and the First Ministers, as part of their dealings with so‑called
free trade within this country, going to come to an agreement, an agreement
across Canada, that taxpayers' money will not be used to bid one province
against another, so that we can have a level playing field based on our
expertise, on our great location, on our skilled workforce and other
competitive factors in our economy, rather than on subsidies, both either
direct or indirect to private companies?
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): As the member knows, our government has been
very, very strongly working towards the removal of interprovincial trade
barriers. Back about four years ago, we
put on the table an issue which we added to the issues that are involved in
interprovincial trade barrier removal, and that is what we call destructive
competition for investment. We call
destructive competition for investment utilizing taxpayers' dollars to create
an unlevel playing field.
We are very much attempting to ensure that that becomes
part of future agreements in
We are very much in agreement with the Leader of the
Opposition that there should be a code of practice that is developed and that
is what we are working towards now.
* (1340)
Youth Court
Backlogs
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I have a new question.
A citizen phoned us today and we have been getting a number
of calls from the public about the whole issue of court delays. This is an issue that we have raised in this
Chamber before, particularly in the youth court and in courts dealing with
sexual abuse and child abuse.
I want to ask specifically about young people. We have repeatedly asked the Minister of
Justice about the issue of backlogs in the court. Our Justice critic has raised this day after
day.
Today, on an open‑line show, Mr. Speaker, the
question was put to the Child Advocate of Manitoba about the issue of juvenile
offenders and the delay in the court backlog:
What about the court backlog? The
Child Advocate says, I do not believe the court system is working. I think part of the problem is there is not
any justice for children offenders under the Young Offenders Act. It is not swift for one thing. Children are waiting six months, up to a
year. They are being delayed, constant
delay in sentencing children and the Child Advocate of Manitoba goes on to say,
I think this really does little to impress children, that he has to wait for
something so long in terms of something in the wrong that is not legal. They are remanded and remanded.
I would ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon), in light of the fact
that his Minister of Justice has repeatedly said there are no problems in this
backlog, whom are we to believe, the Minister of Justice who says there are no
problems in backlogs in the youth system or the Child Advocate who is saying
clearly today, there are major problems in the Young Offenders Act here in
Manitoba?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
Mr. Speaker, I am very interested that the Leader of the New Democratic
Party raises the issue of problems with the Young Offenders Act, because his
party does not seem to think that there is any problem with the Young Offenders
Act. In fact, they have never once put
their position forward. They have never
once offered support to this government.
We have recognized difficulties with the Young Offenders
Act. I have taken that position to
Mr. Doer: Well, no wonder people in this province are
saying they cannot get any justice from the Minister of Justice in the
I would like to put it to the Premier, who presumably the
Minister of Justice answers to. Whom
should we believe, the independent Child Advocate who is saying there are major
problems with the delay in the youth court of Manitoba, or the Minister of
Justice who tells us that everything is okay and we should not worry about it
at all in the
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, again, the Leader of the New
Democratic Party referred quite specifically to the Young Offenders Act. I want to make a point of saying that we look
forward to their position being declared. We still have not heard it.
However, in the matter of the youth court, Mr. Speaker,
again, I have to say that the critic and now his Leader continually cast
negative statements. They should know
that we have managed to bring down any backlog in the youth court. We are booking for cases where young people
are in custody into June‑‑that is next month‑‑and that
there is booking now reduced from seven months down to five months for those in
noncustody.
Perhaps the Leader of the New Democratic Party does not
understand the due process of law, the requirements to take a case before the
courts, the requirements for pre‑sentence reports and, in some cases,
psychiatric assessments. There is a due
process of law.
The people of Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, want to make sure that
we are working diligently where there is a backlog, that the due process of law
is being handled, that there is an effective management of the case.
* (1345)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, of course the minister knows
full well that the five‑month statistic that she is quoting is from when
a court date is set, not from the time in which a charge is laid in the
I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): Why does he not take some of the money, the
$500,000 they are spending on promoting themselves in lottery ads, and take
some of that money and put it to young offenders in the young offenders court
so that we can deal with the backlog in this province and deal with youth
offenders in a timely way, rather than delays that we see now in the young
offenders court?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, again, I will remind the Leader
of the New Democratic Party about the due process of law, about the requirement
of the three‑‑that there needs to be also the presentation by the
Crown, there needs to be work by judges, there also needs to be work by the
defence bar or people who are acting on behalf of the person who is accused.
Let me give every assurance now that we are working
diligently with the chief judge of
The people of Manitoba are concerned that cases are handled
effectively, that there is a proper handling of the case that respects the due
process of law, and that the guilty are punished, Mr. Speaker, and that where
the member has any question about the laws which then cover those courts, he
should make himself clear, particularly in the area of the Young Offenders Act.
Funding
Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader
of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my
question, in fact, is for the Minister of Education. He is not getting many chances these days and
I want to help him out. I know he is
eager.
An Honourable Member: He is already up.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, I know the Minister of Energy
and Mines (Mr. Orchard) is a little pent up these days, too, so I will try‑‑they
should let him out more often.
Ironically, Mr. Speaker, we have learned that last week the
Lord Selkirk School Division sent out 55 layoff notices. That was as a direct result of a $2.6 million
cut to their funding and represents approximately 10 percent of their
workforce, including 25 teachers and 22.5 support staff.
Now, that $2.6 million cut ironically is awfully close to
the $2.5 million that the government is prepared to put at risk for Mr. Blue
Taylor.
My question to the Minister of Education: Why do they not just take the money and use
it to keep the people who are there, who are working, who have been doing their
jobs and educating children? Why do they
not just keep that money and those jobs in that community right now, jobs we
know are already there?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, the Leader of the Liberal Party draws a long bow as between Blue
Taylor and the Lord Selkirk School Division.
This is an issue that was raised by a member of the NDP several weeks
ago, dealing with public school funding.
Again, I point out for the member, if he wants to try and leave the
impression that money has flowed by way of economic development support to a
company, it has not. He is well aware of
that.
But, Mr. Speaker, the issue is funding overall. The Lord Selkirk School Division has in the
past done reasonably well under the existing formula that is in place. This year, though, it has felt some pain with
respect to the impact of reassessment and how that flows through the funding
model.
Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of some of the decisions
that that school division has made; indeed, they are not a lot different from
many the other school divisions have had to wrestle with over the course of the
last two or three years.
I have had representation from members of the community and
indeed from the board, and I am hoping of course that next year will be
providing a result that is more acceptable to that division.
* (1350)
Mr. Edwards: Well, Mr. Speaker, 55 people are out of work.
My question further for the minister: Not even the proponents agree that there is
any chance of getting the 600‑‑
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, my question for the Minister of
Education: Part of the agreement with
Mr. Taylor is that that company will put back $2 million eventually into the
education system in that local area. We
are giving that company, encumbering through loan and prepared to put at risk,
$2.5 million. It is a paper shuffle.
My question for the minister: Instead of cutting these jobs now in
education in Selkirk, why does this government not just leave that money there
and tell Mr. Taylor that it will be used to train those workers if they ever
materialize in that community? Why are
we doing this shuffle via Mr. Taylor and not just leaving the money in the
community now with people who are working, teaching children right now in
Selkirk?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I know the member could care
less about the creation of wealth, of course, from which the support comes for
all of our social services. It starts
somewhere and it starts of course‑‑I am talking about the money
that is directed into education to help starts with the creation of
wealth. So whereas the Liberal Party
does not seem to understand that or care less, our party does.
To the extent that this proponent can live up to all of the
conditions agreed to, then maybe there may be a loan. But the member tries to make it state that
indeed it is a transfer of money. If he
knew anything about the accounting in this province, it does not work that
way. We set up an allowance. If the money is lent out, we set up an
allowance which is far short of the two‑point‑some million dollars
in this case.
The member does not understand accounting, the member does
not understand the books of this province and the member does not understand
finance and business generally.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, this from a minister who brought
in six deficit budgets, promising a balanced budget every time‑‑19
years in a row.
Now, Mr. Speaker, until this government realizes that
education is the key to the creation of wealth, we will be on the same road we
have been on. Education is the key to
wealth in this province. Until they
realize that, they are going to be lost in the wilderness.
My final question for this minister: Tonight in
Will the minister or his representative or someone else be
attending to listen to the people in those communities who are doing the
teaching and understand the effect this is going to have on their children and
the effect this is going to have on their futures, including their economic
futures?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, yes, I did bring down six
budgets and there were six deficits, and the members opposite voted against
every one of them because the deficits were not high enough. They wanted more taxes. They voted against every one of them. From where are these members coming? They make no sense. There is no logic behind their questions. These people are at sea. [interjection] I
have to indicate that I think we are going to have to put a committee together
afterwards to decide how we spell that word to help Hansard out. That is a new one to me.
The knowledge of the meeting being held tonight was
presented by the Leader of the Liberal Party.
I met with a number of associations and school divisions over the course
of the last number of months, trying to go through the basic rationale used
with respect to some of the funding decisions that have been made, but
throughout it all many divisions have been impacted through reassessment.
The policy which was supported by the Liberals when this
government brought it in was widely supported, totally supported, by all the
members of this House because they saw the rationale that you should tax
wealth. But wealth moves from location
to location over a period of time. That
has impact, obviously, on certain school divisions.
* (1355)
Youth Crime
Prevention Programs
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St.
Johns): Mr. Speaker, after a summit on youth gangs
and youth crime held by this government five months ago, involving 500 people and
700 recommendations produced, and after a nine‑point plan being announced
by this Minister of Justice three months ago, I understand that the minister
will shortly be announcing a phone line on gangs. I am sure Manitobans will rest safely
tonight.
I ask the Minister of Justice, what meaningful action has
she taken to rid
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
Again, we certainly would look for the support of members opposite as we
deal with the very serious issues of youth gang and youth crime and violence in
As a result of their participation, yes, we did announce
that we would be putting in place a youth gang line which would be useful for
young people who are involved in gang activity and who wanted to find some ways‑‑
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mrs. Vodrey: The members opposite, Mr. Speaker, do not
think that this is a serious problem.
They do not think it is a serious problem because they continue to avoid
listening to the answers.
Mr. Mackintosh: I ask the minister to indeed take Manitobans
seriously and the summit recommendations seriously. Where is the phone line?
Mrs. Vodrey: I think it is very important that all the
members of this House take very seriously the issues of youth crime and
violence. That is why I ask those
members of both the Liberal Party and the NDP to make it clear where they stand
on the Young Offenders Act. Where do
they stand on the framework that deals with youth crime and violence?
In terms of the youth gang line, yes, I do intend to make
an announcement very shortly on the operationalization of the youth gang
line. I also look forward to making
other announcements. We are moving very,
very quickly in the area of youth crime and violence. We have also made ourselves clear. We are moving to rigorous confinement in our
institutions, moving towards the youth gang line, and we have made ourselves
clear on the Young Offenders Act.
I have received now over 8,000 petitions to strengthen the
Young Offenders Act. I have heard
nothing from members opposite.
Surveillance Strategy
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (
My question to the minister is: What new surveillance strategies are now in
place? Can she explain to me why the
Winnipeg Police advise me they have not received a single cent from this
government for that project?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
The member would like to have me reveal in this House today exactly what
the surveillance methods are. Would that
not be helpful to all the gang members and youth crime in
Mr. Speaker, let me just mention the youth gang line again
which the member seems to think is of no use.
The concept originated in NDP British Columbia.
Workforce 2000
Northern Blower
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, I took a question yesterday from the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen)
as notice. It was to do with Northern
Blower Inc. The member asked a series of
questions.
I would like to inform the members of the House the
training plans approved for Northern Blower contribute to the skill development
of 50 Manitobans employed by this firm.
The curriculum requested by the member for Wolseley is not
available. A training plan is on file,
but, again, that too is confidential information at this time.
I wish to clarify for the House that approved training
costs are those upon which a company's payroll tax refund will be calculated,
not the actual tax refund itself.
Finally, it is our view that the provincial support represents only
about 15 percent of the company's total training costs.
* (1400)
Victims Assistance Fund
Status Report
Ms. Becky Barrett (
The last annual report from the Victims Assistance Fund is
from 1991‑92, even though legislation requires that it be tabled in the
House within 15 days of the sitting of the Legislature.
I would like to ask the Minister of Justice how much is
currently in the Victims Assistance Fund, what services or programs were funded
in 1992‑93 or is this also‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
During the Estimates of the Department of Justice, we will be able to
cover in detail what is available within the Victims Assistance Fund. I can tell the member that we certainly see
the whole Victims Assistance line of the budget to be a very important one.
I can tell the member, and in Estimates I will be able to
elaborate, that over 55,000 Manitobans have been assisted by the services
provided through that Victims Assistance line.
I do expect to be able to table the annual report very shortly in this
House.
Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, given that the minister, in a
March 11 meeting with the
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the member makes my
point that I do meet very carefully and as often as requested with groups
across this province who ask for information and who want the opportunity to
make sure that I understand their issues.
As the member knows, March 11 was before the budget. Therefore, I was not able to reveal at that
time exactly what was in the Victims Assistance line.
Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, what guarantee do the victims of
crimes in the province of Manitoba and the external agencies that historically have
provided services to those victims have that the Victims Assistance Fund
actually will provide services and programming to victims and to external
agencies, rather than being used as a legislative change last year allowed for
internal Justice department programming such as the deputy minister's salary?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, again I will not even comment on
the accusation that the member has made regarding something which she assumes
and accuses occurred.
We are able to speak in Estimates. However, I can tell her, and she will see in
the budget, that there most certainly is a line for Victims Assistance. I can tell her that Victims Assistance does
assist certain programming, programming such as Women's Advocacy, and the
member will know that in terms of Women's Advocacy we have expanded that to
Brandon, Thompson and The Pas which is an increase in service. I will remind her that from the programs
within the Department of Justice over 55,000 Manitobans have been assisted as
well as those assisted by outside agencies.
Abitibi‑Price‑‑Pine Falls
Environmental Licensing
Mr. Eric Robinson
(Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
responsible for Native Affairs.
As the minister knows, the federal government granted a two‑year
extension to the environmental licence for the
Given that the meeting of the engineers and company
officials with the band to review the environmental licence proposed changes
takes place on the 16th of this month, I believe, is the minister prepared to
ask that the deadline be extended so that no workers and the First Nations
community of Sagkeeng will have an opportunity to review the agreement?
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Minister responsible for Native Affairs):
Mr. Speaker, I can tell the honourable member that I had a meeting with
the council and acting chief of the Sagkeeng First Nation. I believe it was on Saturday, March 19, in
which we discussed a number of issues.
That was not one that they particularly requested. That is a matter that the federal Minister of
Environment will have to determine in his process to ensure that there is an
adequate opportunity for all involved to participate.
Mr. Robinson: The First Nation of Sagkeeng has waited over
60 years for this plan to be improved.
Surely the proponents can wait a few days for the band to review the
plans.
My question is for the Minister responsible for Native
Affairs. Is he prepared to support a
short delay to give the First Nation community time to review the improvements?
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, certainly one appreciates the
interest of all people who live down river of the Pine Falls Generating Station
and the need to improve water quality.
That is why, in fact, this administration has supported the mill buy out
with a $30‑million note. I know
the Liberal Party does not support that in principle, those types of loans, but
that is one of the reasons why we are there, to ensure there is a sufficient
upgrade to improve the water quality.
At this particular time, I appreciate that the member is
the local member for the Sagkeeng First Nation.
He raises this issue. It is one I
would suggest that that representation be made to the federal Department of
Environment and to the local member of Parliament who have some control. We, as a province, have no control on that
particular process.
Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the First
Minister (Mr. Filmon), will the First Minister overrule his minister and
contact the First Nations community of Sagkeeng and also Abitibi‑Price to
ensure and request an extension of the takeover deadline so that all the
shareholders have equal treatment?
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated to the
member, I did have a meeting following the spill incident with the particular
council, and that was not a particular issue that they raised with me. There is ample opportunity for the Sagkeeng
First Nation to express that position to the federal minister.
Their environmental licensing with the federal government
is for them as proponents and those of the various communities to be involved
in that process. It is not one in which
I as local MLA or minister have been involved, nor do I think it appropriate
that they do. I would suggest that those
comments be made to the federal Minister of Environment.
Community Policing
Government Support
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister
of Justice.
We are all deeply saddened by the tragedy that occurred in
the north end, where a 15‑year‑old was killed. I worked for two years as a community police
officer in the housing complex where the tragic event occurred. I know and consider many of the parents and
children my friends. I also know that
parents in this housing complex are now fearful and extremely concerned about
the safety of their families.
Will the minister, as the chief law enforcement officer for
the province, set up a meeting with the chief of police for the City of
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General):
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by saying any remarks that I make are not to
be considered in any way close to a case under investigation by the police, and
that any remarks that I make should not in any way be attributed to the police
investigation. My remarks are to be
considered in general only, and in terms of in general only, my remarks are
that certainly we really are very supportive of police and communities working
together, and communities being able to express to our police officers what
their issues and what their priorities are.
Certainly, for the RCMP, we do have a mechanism, that is a
police force and a police service, and which I deal with very directly.
In terms of the City of
* (1410)
Mr. Kowalski: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question to the
Minister of Justice: Because I worked as
a community officer in the north end, I am well aware of the unfortunate fact
that the number of community‑based police was reduced due to a lack of
resources.
I ask the minister, is she prepared to confirm her
government's support for community‑based policing by backing up those
words with adequate resources from the province?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, the
province provides a block grant to the City of Winnipeg and that grant is then
determined by them how they will use that grant and, based on their own system,
how they wish to have their police service operate. So I think that he also needs to look at
working with the city councillor and with the City of
Mr. Kowalski: Will the Justice minister do as her
predecessor did with a very successful ALERT program, where the province did
put in resources to aid the
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, of course the work of policing
is very important. I meet regularly, and
am always careful to make sure that the needs of police and the needs of
citizens are being considered, but as we deal with the issues of youth crime
and violence that the member has raised, I ask him again, where do you stand on
the law that covers the Young Offenders Act?‑‑because he has never
once made himself clear.
Point of Order
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a
point of order, Beauchesne's is very clear.
Citation 417: "Answers to
questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and
should not provoke debate."
This minister has repeatedly abused Question Period, Mr.
Speaker, by trying to engage in debate.
We are prepared as opposition members to debate this minister any time,
any place, on her record‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member did not have a point of
order. The honourable minister had just
finished responding to the question.
Tourism
Mr. Gregory Dewar
(Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, given the confusion and
opposition of the Liberal Leader to jobs coming to Selkirk, I will table a
letter sent to me by the mayor of Selkirk supporting and endorsing the SHI
project. [interjection] Shameful, exactly.
My questions are to the Minister of Industry, Trade and
Tourism.
As the minister will recall, last year, due to the bungled
closure of the
Hon. James Downey (Minister
of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr.
Speaker, this government has been working extremely hard, as it relates to the
development of the tourism industry and the advertising promotion that we carry
on with as well, to attract jobs to the province of Manitoba so that it can in
fact increase the economy to increase the support for the social safety nets
that we all expect.
I will look into the issue which the member has raised
without making a commitment at this time but will look into the proposition
which he has laid before us.
Mr. Dewar: Mr. Speaker, would the minister agree to meet
with the
Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, I indicated that what I was
prepared to do was to take a look at the issue which the member has laid before
us without making any commitment until after that time.
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable First Minister have leave
to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, I invite all members of the
House to join with me today in celebrating
The
In 1970,
We are a rich and diverse multicultural society with many
cultures, heritages, languages and customs, but we are all proud to be
Manitobans. The sense of pride is
founded on an understanding of our past and optimism for our future.
Our history has been an exciting tale of discovery and
adventure, of growth and prosperity, of endurance and perseverance, of people
and events. All these factors have
contributed to the continuing saga of
By commemorating our past, we can look forward to the
future with excitement. The announcement
made earlier today epitomizes this feeling.
By replacing the existing monument of our founding father Louis Riel
with a new statue, we are not only recognizing our diverse heritage but, most
importantly, we are celebrating our future.
We are also recognizing the 175th anniversary of the oldest education
institution in western
I ask all members of this House to join with me in
recognizing and celebrating May 12 as Manitoba Day in our great province. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Wolseley have
leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): I am pleased to be able to respond today on
behalf of the opposition to the message of Manitoba Day. This is the one day of the year that
Manitobans have chosen, at least in the last decade, to celebrate their sense
of a provincial community and their shared past.
This year, in particular, we celebrate two anniversaries,
the beginning of our 125th year of the creation of the province and 1919, the
75th anniversary of the General Strike in
It argues that the important milestones in
This is the story we teach in school. It is the story given to those who tour the
Legislature. It is the story recorded in
the majority of the monuments of our province, and it is the story written and
recorded as one of victory. But there
are other voices, other histories and other ways of commemorating our common
experience in this land, and there is a people's history to be told on Manitoba
Day. It is the story of those who wish
to reclaim the memories that go unrecorded by the dominant culture.
In Manitoba, this means teaching our children that the
16th, 17th and 18th Centuries of our province were not primarily the story of
fur trade empire and exploration, but of a widespread and changing aboriginal
world at whose margins these few newcomers from Scotland and France plied their
trade. It is a story which sees the
1870s not as the triumph of the new Canadian nation, but as the dispossession
of
The pride in the growth of Winnipeg as a commercial centre
must be tempered by a recognition of the implications of a General Strike of
1919 which sought to limit the power capital and which led over the next
generation to create a consensus for the creation of our social democratic
state. The people's story is a story of
work, of labour, whether on the trap line, on the railway, in the hospitals or
in the 40 percent of the GDP which has been unrecorded and unpaid and performed
largely by women in the household.
On this Manitoba Day, in the official opposition we are
proud to remember the part played in our shared past by hunters, fishermen,
farmers, domestic workers, industrial labourers, public servants, teachers,
nurses, parents, husbands, wives and children whose voices collectively, in
Cree or Cambodian, are those of Manitoba.
* (1420)
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable Leader of the second
opposition party have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader
of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I am
very pleased to join with the honourable Premier as well as the member for
Wolseley, speaking on behalf of the opposition party, on behalf of the Liberal
Party, the second opposition party, in commemorating and acknowledging the
124th anniversary of the
I join comments with the member for Wolseley in recognizing
that, of course, the history of this province and this land and its people
began many centuries before May 12, 1870, when we officially joined
I want to also recognize that it was those people who
welcomed the rest of the people in this province who came here, showed them how
to live in a very hostile, very difficult environment, taught them the ways of
their culture and their people and so a culture evolved.
Mr. Speaker, as we go down the road together with the First
Nations and the non‑First Nations communities in this province I think it
is important to remember today, perhaps more than any other time, that we may
not be exactly on the same road, but we must strive to be travelling in the
same direction. I think today is an
important day as we see many changes with the First Nations community to
remember our obligation to them and to remember that we must live together in
peace and in a tolerant society as we both try to progress for ourselves, our
families and our community.
The people who came to this province came seeking peace and
freedom, and they have had that with some exceptions. They have had that and built a tolerant
society which has provided opportunity for their children over the
decades. Mr. Speaker, while I think that
we live in a society in which we often see conflict‑‑and this House
bears out that conflict as the diverse society tries to work out common
decisions and a common future‑‑it is an important day to look
around the world at all the nations that have struggled and are fighting and
are involved in armed conflict trying to achieve what we have had and what we
have got. Let us remember on this day
that we have a very, very wonderful society here in this country that has been
built, and in this province, and we are the envy of the world.
I want to, of course, wish all Manitobans, all members of this
House, congratulations on the anniversary of our province and its
birthday. Thank you.
International CFIDS/ME Awareness Day
Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for Radisson, does she
have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
Ms. Marianne Cerilli
(Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I am rising to commemorate this
day, May 12, as a day to recognize chronic fatigue and immune deficiency
syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis.
It is a mouthful, and it is also causing a lot of problems throughout
our province for a number of residents.
Mr. Speaker, the City of Winnipeg has designated this the
first day ever for Winnipeg to recognize this increasingly common illness, but
there are a number of cities in Canada and the United States that have been
recognizing this day for quite some time, and there is a march on Ottawa today.
I was going to read the proclamation signed by the mayor of
the City of
WHEREAS the Nightingale Research Foundation, Manitoba
Chapter, was formed in 1993 to provide support, education and information about
the nature and impact of Myalgic Encephalo myelitis, Chronic Fatigue and Immune
Dysfunction Syndrome and related disorders; and
WHEREAS the local chapter of the national nonprofit
Nightingale Research Foundation holds monthly meetings for self‑help and
the exchange of information; and
WHEREAS the foundation has chosen May 12, 1994, as a
special day devoted to increasing public knowledge, awareness and understanding
of ME/CFIDS in the hope of obtaining more funding, research and treatment for
this disease.
It is then signed by Mayor Thompson proclaiming this day
International CFIDS/ME Awareness Day.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to say as well, that the World
Health Organization has also recognized this illness and this day at the
international level, but there are many areas throughout our country, and
indeed in
I have had the chance to work with three members of my
constituency who are stricken with this illness and I just found today, with
the article in the paper, that there is a third boy who also lives in my
constituency who is ill with this illness.
The symptoms are varied.
They seriously affect the ability for people to earn a livelihood. They provide incredible stress on families,
and there is an incredible stigma attached with this illness, partially because
it is not recognized.
In conclusion, I would just like to give recognition to the
Nightingale Research Foundation Manitoba Chapter for all the hard work that
they have done. I wish them continued
success. Thank you.
National Nurses Day
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Crescentwood
have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]
Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, it is quite appropriate, I
believe, that on May 12, as we celebrate the birth of our province, that we
also celebrate a group of what used to be mostly women, who are now men and
women, who have helped to build this province.
This group of professionals are nurses.
It is National Nurses Week, and today is National Nurses
Day.
Certainly, all of us in our lives know of nurses, whether
we have had an opportunity to have them take care of us, whether we know them
as friends, whether we know them as neighbours.
Nurses are very much an intricate part of our lives and are very
important persons in
Many of us, of course, when we think of nurses will remember
Florence Nightingale who was certainly called the lady with the lamp. She was a British nurse who worked under
appalling conditions during the Crimean War.
She later went on to found the
She had an interesting quote in one of her writings on
notes on nursing. In those days, Mr.
Speaker, of course all nurses were ladies of the lamp. There were no men. She said that no man, not even a doctor, ever
gives any other definition of what a nurse should be than this‑‑devoted
and obedient. This definition would do
just as well for a courtier. It might
even do for a horse. It would not do for
a policeman.
So, Mr. Speaker, Florence Nightingale in those days was
saying that nurses are more than individuals who are obedient and devoted. Certainly, this is a profession and it
certainly has grown into a profession where I would say the key word is service
to the people. Nurses are there to serve
the people whom they work for whether they are public health nurses out in
rural and northern communities, whether they are nurses who work in intensive
care in some of our larger institutions, whether they are practical nurses who
work in our personal care homes.
Certainly, nurses are very much an intricate part of our society.
Nurses are also very much important in Third World
countries and on the international scene where many of our nurses take on the
idea of service and go to
I am sure that all members of the Legislature today will
join me in recognizing the valuable contributions over the centuries of the
profession of nursing. We wish them well
as a profession, and we certainly are very much pleased that they are there,
that they will continue to grow. We wish
them well, and we hope, in fact, that we can give them the same respect and
offer them as legislators what they have given to us as a community. Thank you.
* (1430)
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Hon. Jim Ernst
(Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move,
seconded by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey), that Mr.
Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to
consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.
Motion agreed to, and the House resolved
itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty
with the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for
the Department of Education and Training; and the honourable member for
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent Sections)
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Marcel
Laurendeau): This afternoon the section of the Committee
of Supply meeting in Room 255 will continue consideration of the Estimates of
the Department of Education and Training.
When the committee last sat, it had considered item 2.(b)(1) on page 38
of the Estimates book.
2.(b) Education Reform (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits
$505,400.
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I just had a couple
of cleanup questions here on some issues that were outstanding. The other evening the minister said that he
would be glad to attempt an answer regarding which private schools were allowed
to an exemption on the compulsory teaching of the independent living skills
course that has been made compulsory for the vast majority of schools in the province. He said when he got to the School Programs
area, he would attempt to answer that. I
wonder if he would want to do that now.
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, I have to correct the record. I started to make reference that I thought
that some schools were giving flexibility in that they did not have to offer it
this year but had to offer it by 1996.
Specific to the question, the one independent school that is not
offering it in '93‑94, the present year that we are in, is
Mr. Plohman: The minister had mentioned that Glenlawn had,
without permission, not offered it for, I believe, this current year as a
public school. That is what the minister
had said. Now he is saying that there is
only one independent school that has been allowed to vary, with
permission. Is that correct?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I did not say
Glenlawn Collegiate had not offered it.
What I said was, they had not offered it as its own course. They had integrated it, without permission I
gather, but they had integrated it into other curricula.
Mr. Plohman: What the minister said, and I quote: I would have to think it would all have to be
taught. One example for sure in the public
school system‑‑and Glenlawn Collegiate did it, but they did it
without permission. Permission has to be
granted for it to occur anywhere, independent or public school system. So nowhere did the minister say the other day
that they had integrated it. He just
said they did not, he talked in a generic sense about them not getting
permission, and I think he has clarified today that they did not get permission
to integrate it into other subjects. For
this year, are we talking about continuously, or is this just for a one‑year
period?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think I also made a
reference to another point to Glenlawn where I may have been more expansive, I
do not know. By the time we found out
what had happened in that situation, we were well into the school year, at
least it was too late to change. Yet the
department and myself were certainly not willing to grant a blanket exemption
across all divisions, given that there has been work over several years and a
lot of pressure with respect to this particular issue.
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, just to clarify then,
is Glenlawn Collegiate asking for permission to integrate this into other
courses for the '94‑95 year, and have any other schools in the public
school system or any school divisions asked for the same permission?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is my
understanding that formally Glenlawn has not filed a request for '94‑95,
but three high schools within the River East School Division have put forward
proposals for '94‑95 that would be similar to what existed at Glenlawn in
'93‑94.
Mr. Plohman: And the minister is saying, that is it as far
as he knows in the whole
Mr. Manness: As far as we know, Mr. Deputy Chairperson,
but, as I think I have alluded to previously, sometimes the department is the
last to know through no fault of their own.
An awful lot of bureaucracy all the way through the system, and some
school divisions interpret guidelines in a certain way and move
accordingly. I imagine this has happened
before in other areas of new subject matter and probably will happen again.
Mr. Plohman: Can the minister indicate whether any
decision has been made on these three for '94‑95?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it has not been
brought to my attention in a formal matter.
As a matter of fact, some of this information I present now is new to
me, but beyond that I am also, of course, reminding myself that with the whole
Ed Reform side I have to try and make decisions consistent also with what I
sense might be the new approach through the broader context. There are other factors at play here.
Mr. Plohman: I thank the minister for that, and is he
saying also that there is only one independent school that has asked for
permission, or is there none at the present time, for '94‑95, with St.
John's‑Ravenscourt being the one only for '93‑94?
* (1440)
Mr. Manness: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that is the only
school. We have been in contact with the
Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools, and, I guess, indicated very
strongly that we expect all of their community, all of their membership to
implement according to the plan. They indicated
that will happen across all of the membership.
Mr. Plohman: Across all of their membership. All those schools that are members of the
Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools.
In addition, I wanted to clean up one other area we
had. A number of questions have been
asked about these specialists and consultants, but I was looking through‑‑and
I had received a call from MAPAL, the heritage language organization, the
Manitoba Association for the Promotion of Ancestral Languages, who said that
they understand that there have been some changes in the consultants' roles
there. I was looking through the
document that has been circulated, Program Development and Support Services
Reorganization to Become School Programs Division, by the minister's department,
and under provincial specialists there is a Rupert Barensteiner listed as a
German consultant now. It seemed rather
odd to have one person in charge of German and yet seemingly no one in charge
of phys ed, which is something right across the province in every school. Then there is Tony Tavares, languages,
antiracist.
So I just wondered about the position here that there would
be one person for one particular group, albeit one of the larger ones in the
province, but certainly Ukrainian‑‑I do not know if I see a
Ukrainian consultant here. Just what is
happening here with regard to these consultants?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, Rupert Barensteiner
is an interesting person. He is a
citizen of
I tell you who is making the greatest use of him and where
he is finding his work most fascinating, because I have spoken with him: it is within the Hutterite colonies. There is some of the traditional, the very
traditional, and German is still the language.
As a matter of fact, he told me that the German language around the
world is almost the purest with the Hutterites in
He has been here three or four years. His salary is being picked up by the German
government. It is an outreach on their
part to the German‑speaking people in our province, and whether or not
there is any affinity between that fact and the German base in Shilo, I do not
know, but it is a fine gesture on the German government's part.
Mr. Plohman: Okay, that explains why there is a separate
German consultant, but what about the other heritage languages. Where would we find them included?
Mr. Manness: Under Tony Tavares, who is responsible for
language instruction, which includes heritage languages.
Mr. Plohman: That would include all heritage
languages? There is no one else that is
going to be doing some part of that. Is
that correct?
Mr. Manness: That is right.
Mr. Plohman: Just to follow on the questions that were
asked last day. Looking at these charts,
these organization charts, where would I find the phys ed consultant as a
vacancy, or does it no longer exist in any of the charts? Regional teams or whatever, I have looked
through, I cannot see a phys ed consultant there, and I do not see an
industrial arts consultant either.
Mr. Manness: Basically, there has not been a position; I
know the field's sense is that I have one and that I should be filling it. But that staff position, basically, the focus
of that has been changed over the course of the last year. I believe that half of that position has been
directed into race relations‑‑no, the violence prevention
consultant‑‑and for the activities that used to be maintained in
that staff position, we have now asked Joyce Martin, who is in the development
unit. She will continue to be the
contact through this transition with respect to physical education matters.
Mr. Plohman: What is the rationale for having some of
these consultants as provincial specialists in other sections of the
department, rather than this one unit?
You find these consultants throughout now, the regional teams in
implementation and in program development.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it depends where you
want to start on the pyramid. Where do
you want to call at the top? We have
decided now through the reorganization to call it program development. That takes priority over, therefore, the
grouping of specialists in one area. So
if Program Development is the top, and then you were going to break it out into
implementation and support services and you are going to do it on a regional
context, that takes priority over the old re‑organization. Now, if you want to give the grouping of
specialists the priority, then it would have to be higher up on the pyramid.
Mr. Plohman: But in some areas, you have your consultants
in the specialists area, and in others, they are in the Program Development
area. Is that a reflection of where the
work has to be done, in Program Development as opposed to where it is believed
that we basically have a good program developed, and now it is a matter of
continuing to work with schools and teachers in delivering it?
Mr. Manness: Well, it is a reflection of a flatter
organization, where you are going to have to have these specialists, obviously,
in the reduced number of areas, and it is a recognition that in development and
in implementation and in student support services, you have to have specialists
in all of these areas.
Mr. Plohman: I am just wondering if we do indeed have
specialists in all those areas. When we
look through here, we just do not see some of those titles. That is what I mean. For example, the Vocational Education and
Apprenticeship, Marshall Draper, is that also now including industrial arts, or
is there a separate industrial arts position yet to be filled?
Mr. Manness: Certainly, that is a fourth area, Vocational
Ed and Apprenticeship Training. That is
an important area, and there will be obviously specialists that will be located
there, but generally, I guess the term "specialists," I do not know
whether it is a generic term or whether or not within education it has specific
meaning, to my way of looking at the world, there are reasons for having
specialists across the horizontal plain of focus.
Mr. Plohman: The minister missed my question. I asked him if industrial arts was included
in Vocational Ed under the same specialist or same consultant. Obviously, it is a different philosophy, a
different type of education and yet was done separately previously with Gene
Happychuk, I understand, the industrial arts consultant. That name no longer appears, nor does that
position appear, and I just asked the minister if that responsibility has been
rolled in with Vocational and Apprenticeship.
* (1450)
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will try and do a
better job of answering. Vocational
Education and Apprenticeship is now part of, falls within the provincial
specialists area, and Mr. Draper is listed under that title.
Mr. Plohman: The minister did not do a better job of
answering. I have that here. I know he is under the provincial. I asked about industrial arts. I do not know if the minister is aware that
he has had separate consultants there.
Industrial arts is quite different than Vocational Education. Industrial arts is a general education
available to all students. They do not
have to specialize in the same way that vocational education has traditionally
been. Industrial arts is a general
nature and is an education, a field of study, for students who are enrolled in
academic or any of the other streams in high schools. They can take this as an option.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is all included
within that single line, but I guess the import of that is, as the recognition
is we move to ed reform, this will become more public over the while that we
are going to want to focus more on, particularly in the latter senior years,
more on apprenticeship and vocational education as per the old industrial arts
connotation.
(Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mr. Plohman: That can be somewhat alarming, I think. If the minister‑‑he talked about
high school particularly, so I will accept that. What about junior high industrial arts, which
is a major part of exposing younger people to all forms of technical and
industrial education at an earlier age, so that they can use that knowledge to
determine perhaps where they would like to go on further and specialize in
those areas. It serves a very valuable
role in introducing all of these areas, whether it be in home economics or
industrial arts, the broad range of industrial arts fields of study, and
emerging ones, like computers and so on.
Is the minister saying that that is something he is considering
eliminating from the junior high curriculum?
If he is not, where are they going to get their support, if they indeed
need support? Or does the minister feel
they do not?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, no, the
introductory aspects are certainly valuable and necessary, but I think we will
want to rethink how it is we do that. I
am not saying that anything will change, but a lot of the introductions that I
see, as I travel throughout the land, are concerning me a little bit. I do not see where, in all cases, a full
effort is being put in by some of our students to learn what is available. There is certainly a role for it‑‑a
significant role, a very important role‑‑but I want to make sure
that it is meaningful to the students as it is to the member for Dauphin and
what I would like to see it be.
Mr. Plohman: I think, though, that if the minister is
already eliminating‑‑and maybe he will say, this is a question of
priorities‑‑but I think we have to admit‑‑and he said
that technical education, in this case, industrial arts as a preparatory kind
of study to vocational and apprenticeship training and so on is important, is a
priority actually. It is an area that we
have to address in the future, more than we have in the past. Then is it not putting the cart before the
horse in terms of removing the supports here and saying: Well, I have already made a judgment that
maybe it is going to have to play a lesser role when, in fact, the minister is
not convinced of that yet? He is
convinced that there maybe needs to be some change, but is that a reason why
the industrial arts consultant should have been removed? I am just looking at it in terms of
priorities here.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we should not
read into the fact that that consultant being no longer here says that the
department places any lower priority on it.
These are decisions to be made, although I can tell you, this is a very
important area. Introduction has to
happen at this age, but I think that, when we are looking at the whole program
of instruction within our high schools, we should do an evaluation to determine
the effectiveness of the industrial arts program as we have known it now
basically for 20 years. It is time.
Mr. Plohman: You said high schools.
Mr. Manness: I meant junior high‑‑I am sorry;
for the record, I meant junior high. It
is time to do that evaluation. Although
we have not started on it, I see the importance of introducing our junior high,
middle, whatever we want to call it, the middle‑year students, to the
concept of something other than academic study for the sake of academic
knowledge. We have got to evaluate how
we have done it over the last 20 years and whether or not those changes should
be considered.
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I would
suggest the minister has taken a rather peculiar way to go about it by sending
the message that he is going to evaluate and, in so doing, eliminate the person
that would be most involved in that process‑‑the position at least,
whether he is satisfied with the person or not, I am not commenting on
that. He may have been a very good
person. However, I think the minister is
not sending out very clear signals on this, and I wonder how he intends to
communicate this matter to the education community. He certainly has not communicated it anywhere
that I know of at this point.
Mr. Manness: Certainly that has to be an aspect of the
communication that is out in the field now.
I mean, we just started into the reorganization big time not quite a
month ago. I would think that, as our
staff are out there telling all as to the changes, organizationally, this
question will be asked, and a clear response will be presented. Failing that, I am hoping my comments on the
record today are clear.
Mr. Plohman: For the minister, I think this staff will
have a very great difficulty convincing education community with that person in
that position no longer there, that somehow it is still a high priority and
that it is just a matter of a review taking place, and while that review is
taking place, we will not have a consultant in the area. It just does not make a lot of sense, and I
would have difficulty if I were a staffperson trying to convey that message.
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think they will look at
these charts that are here, look at the positions and draw their own
conclusions as to priorities.
Mr. Manness: The member talked about Mr. Happychuk. He now works for the Public Schools Finance Board
on industrial arts facilities, and now Mr. Draper is free to plan and work with
field on curriculum. That is what we
have done here. We have tried to make
them greater specialists in their own rights, and so Marshall Draper is going
to assume part of the responsibility.
Yet we have a need in the Public Schools Finance Board capital side to
look at what we have out there as far as plant with respect to facilities, and
so there is some order, considerable order to the changes announced.
Mr. Plohman: Well, just to close on this matter, may I
indicate to the minister that Mr. Happychuk was an industrial arts specialist,
that Marshall Draper is a vocational specialist, and that is quite different. You have now got a vocational specialist
partially in charge of industrial arts, so some might not see that as making
that much sense.
A question to the minister regarding the issue of protocols
for special needs, delivery of services for special needs students in the
schools. It is a major area, one that has
been discussed at Estimates over the last number of years, one that really has
not been addressed in terms of any concrete action in the field; it has been
more that there were deputies' committees and other committees looking at this. We went through this last year, and during
the Estimates.
* (1500)
I have a letter here which I would be prepared to table
that Mr. Carlyle has written on April 21 to Health and Safety representative of
the Canadian Union of Public Employees about this issue, because they have been
concerned about it. It seems to
indicate, and I will quote from it: For
your information, the interdepartmental committee reviews existing service
mandates and jurisdictions on an ongoing basis to identify areas where
increased service co‑ordination is both possible and desirable. The committee prepares this material for
consideration by the ministers responsible for the human service sector. I am not in a position, therefore, to release
reports publicly which are prepared as background information to assist
ministers in setting future policy directions.
I would be pleased to forward a status report, however, once the
government decides deliberations are complete.
That was on April 21.
So can the minister bring us up to date on the status of‑‑as
I said to the minister, if he would like, certainly they can have a copy of
this‑‑I quoted from the letter‑‑if they so wish; anyone
can have it.
But I wonder if the minister could indicate what reports
have been prepared, are completed for ministers, and when we can expect a
policy statement on this. Is this
something that the minister is placing any priority in? It is something that is identified in all
education circles as critical for the efficient delivery of services to special
needs students in our schools.
Teachers are very often being asked to administer
medication, and a lot of rather complicated medical procedures, and they are
not trained to do it. They are having to
deal with students who have severe disruptive tendencies in many cases, and
there need to be resources put into this from other professions, other
departments, I think, to have it done efficiently in the schools.
Now, maybe the minister does not agree with that; he is
shaking his head. Let us see if he does
and whether he is inclined to put this on the back burners again as his
predecessors have done, or whether he intends to bring it forward and address
it in a similar way that the protocols have been developed in other provinces
such as
Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I know
this has been a long‑standing issue, and I know many in the community and
education community are waiting for a response from‑‑
The Acting Deputy Chairperson
(Mr. Sveinson): Order, please. It just happened that this came up about this
last letter here. You did say, I will
table the letter.
Mr. Plohman: I said I am prepared to table it if it is
asked for.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Sveinson): Order. That is not what was said.
Point of Order
Mr. Plohman: On a point of order, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson. We have just interrupted
the minister in his response because you, as Chairperson, have said I said I
was going to table it. It is a small
difference between what I did say and what you think you heard me say.
What I did say is that I am prepared to table this letter
if it is desired by anyone‑‑that copies can be made available. I did not say I was tabling it. I said I am prepared to table it if I am
requested to do so. That is the standard
way it is dealt with.
The Acting Deputy
Chairperson (Mr. Sveinson): Order. You have made it clear what you said now.
* * *
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we do not need
a copy because we sent it out.
This issue is a vexing issue in many respects, but very
important, as we try and decide how to deal with a problem that is real and
that many sense that government by decree or edict has the magic solution
and/or the resources to put into place a solution.
We are still internally, within government, reviewing, and
the member uses the word "struggling," and he is maybe not too far
from the truth. But we know that there
are critical situations with respect to emotional and behavioral disordered
children and yet trying to come forward with a multisystem case‑management
system‑‑I do not know what term you put to it‑‑including
all of the players, is not proving to be very easy.
We do have a blueprint.
We do have a form. Certainly, I
will not release it at this time, because it is not government policy at this
time, but we are continuing to struggle with this issue.
Mr. Plohman: Can the minister indicate whether this will
be released as part of his education reform blueprint then?
Mr. Manness: No, I do not think it will be, but it could
very well‑‑there could be a release, I am hoping, more or less at
the same time. But as far as an integral
part of the reform, no.
Mr. Plohman: Is the minister saying then that we will have
a definitive position or a statement of policy as current as anything that is
possible then of the government of day when that is released?
Mr. Manness: I am not promising that. Certainly, though, that is an objective of
mine. I mean, it really is. I have indicated I was hoping to have this
released by early, early summer, but that is a goal. I cannot promise that.
Mr. Plohman: Is the difficulty greater with regard to the
various hierarchies of control and the unwillingness of the bureaucracy to give
up the control, or is it more with resources with money that the minister is
struggling with here?
Mr. Manness: Well, it is a bigger issue than that. I mean obviously resources are a significant
part to it, but is it not time to maybe evaluate the whole process of
inclusion? I mean it is time to do that too,
so it is a bigger picture.
Mr. Plohman: So the minister is saying he is also dealing
with the desirability of the whole process of mainstreaming students,
physically and mentally disabled‑‑challenged is, I believe, more
appropriate‑‑students into the regular classrooms. That question is being dealt with as
well. That seems fundamental then to
education reform as well. I am rather
curious about that, since the minister said it would not be part and parcel of
his education blueprint. It would be rather
fundamental to that it would seem.
Mr. Manness: Well, there is no doubt, I mean, if we bring
in a major new reform, there will be some ramifications that may change the way
we look at things and the way we have accepted the status quo. Of course, then that leads to other
considerations as we move up that road, but the most important is the whole
discussion on the role of the school and the relationship to other government
departments. So if you start at that
beginning point, you would then have to take all of your thinking down that path. So I guess what he is saying is, in part, he
is right; he would say, well, then you have to have this all thought out with
respect to reform.
Obviously we are going to have to think around it. Whether or not a specific recommendation or
action flows as a result of it is too soon to say.
Mr. Plohman: So this ties in then with the special needs
review that the minister was referencing in answer to questions yesterday, and
this whole area of review of special needs services, the principle of
mainstreaming, perhaps, even as part of that review‑‑well, of
inclusion of the students in the regular classrooms.
Mainstreaming refers to high school terminology as well as
in the elementary school when you bring students into the regular
classrooms. I know that very often those
words are thrown around and maybe in a confusing way, but I am using it in the
sense that disabled, physically and mentally challenged children are not
separated out the way modern practice has been, but included as much as
possible, that being mainstreaming into the regular classroom.
So is that principle, just to clarify then, one that is
being reconsidered by the minister as part of this review?
* (1510)
Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the left
hand has to know what the right hand is doing.
I mean that is a given, and the special needs study obviously will
attempt to do that.
There is no doubt in my mind that mainstreaming and
reaching out to a large cross section of handicapped is well accepted and a
high ideal to be able to provide, and we want to continue to do that.
But the question is, and I think it is time to
question. I mean do we include
absolutely everybody? Was this the
original objective? Are we in keeping
with the original objective or have we gone beyond it, and if we have, what are
the impacts? These questions have to be
asked. They are not easy to ask. They are not always the most gentle areas
that one would like to find themselves, but the reality is they have to be
asked. So rather than just building in
another add‑on, another calling on a bunch of resources and say, well,
throw some more money at it, it will fix it, I think it is time to be bold and
brave and to step back and look at the larger issue, and that is what we are
attempting to do.
(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Mr. Plohman: Yes, well, the minister is quite right in
terms of reviewing policies and practices that are in place. They should be questioned and reviewed as to
whether they are effective and efficient and are meeting the needs from time to
time. That is obvious that that should
happen.
I guess I am working from the assumption that this is a
good policy. It may be when dealing with
all of the problems out there and with all of the students' needs out there,
the minister may come to the conclusion that he cannot afford to do it, to meet
all of those needs, and so it is a question then of which one is the most
efficient, which model.
I believe that by centralizing those services in the
schools, especially in areas where they really need it, where there is a large
number of students, that it is the most effective way to go, that the public
health nurses have to be in the schools, and the other services, social
services have to be‑‑the professionals have to be in the schools in
contact with those children and free teachers up to teach. It should not cost more overall, I would not
think, because those specialists are there.
It is just a question of how accessible they are to the students.
They have to deal with these children after in the other
parts of their lives, but they do not have to deal with them in their school
lives, and it does not make sense that they stop at the door of the school.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this is part of our
problem because, for instance, in the rural areas, I am led to believe that
Health is of the view that public health nurses are not trained. This is the point, I mean, if public health
has to divert their resources that are not working in the field during the day
into the public school, then obviously the work in the field is not being done,
and so obviously then we are calling on a significant increase in resources
because no person that I know of can be in two places at one time.
Mr. Plohman: The fact is though that it may be the most
efficient way to deal with these children instead of dealing with them after
school hours when they are at home and in a crisis situation.
It is kind of the ongoing support that may be needed, and,
of course, there are other tasks now that teachers are having to do in the
schools. It is a question of whether it
is efficient use of, you know, teacher time, so it does distract considerably
from their ability to meet the educational needs of those students and others.
The question is, is that fair to everyone else in the
classroom? The minister might come at it
from the point and say, well, maybe we should just change the system and
consider whether those kids should be in that classroom in the first place. That should be considered, but I am saying
working from the premise‑‑ I am not trying to put words in the
minister's mouth nor a position in this for him to take‑‑but given
that they are in the classroom, then is it not best to have other specialists
providing the services that they are trained to do and leave teachers free to
teach?
Mr. Manness: The member makes a strong point, and I do not
disagree with anything he said.
Mr. Plohman: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, a couple of
questions maybe about the Winnipeg 1 questions that were asked yesterday about a
$10.2 million categorical grant that is made available for special needs
students and 60 percent, 59 percent of it going to Winnipeg 1 to meet the
additional needs in recognition of the greater numbers. It was asked yesterday.
I just want to ask the minister, he made his argument very
forcefully to the member for
Mr. Manness: Well, I do agree with that, and that is why
the categorical funding is in place and so much of it goes to Winnipeg School
Division No. 1. I do agree.
Mr. Plohman: Is the minister aware, for example, that
$400,000 was spent by
Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I mean,
appropriate, who should do what and when and all that when it comes to
interrelationships between levels of government, that is always a tough
call. All I know is it ends up in the
same pot, and local decision makers decide where the highest priority is. That is the basis of local decisions. I mean, I can think the City of
A school division, if it decides that there is not enough
support there and decides that on its own it wants to tax its citizens to
provide that support, that is its free choice to do so. I do not know how we change that system.
But on the same hand, when they decide to do it and say,
well, we are doing it, but really it is the senior levels of governments'
responsibility, I can tell you, you can argue until the cows come home and you
are not going to be able to reach the conclusion on that one. I mean, things sort of move along, and then
they jump. By that I mean I look at the
contribution made to special needs over a period of time. They sort of move along on a constant continuum,
and then something causes it to spike upward in support.
These last few years, sometimes it is a downward provision
of support because of the reality of funding today. I cannot draw any conclusions out of those
that come to me and say, hey, we are doing this, but it really should be your
responsibility. I mean, we do that as a
provincial government. We say that to
the federal government. You know, here
we are doing this, but you are offloading there, and really, it is not our
responsibility. I mean, you can waste
away all the time of the day arguing and debating these points.
* (1520)
Mr. Plohman: Yes, well, the minister has to recognize, I
would imagine, that socioeconomic conditions, poverty, has a great deal of
impact on the ability of students to learn.
It presents a great myriad of problems that maybe would not be found in
other school divisions, so when we are talking about things like nutrition
programs and so on, these are almost fundamental for these children in getting
to the schools. So the minister cannot
just turn his back on them either and say, well, they are being offered by the
school division, and we do not have the resources to do it.
It is kind of like ignoring the problems and letting
someone else look after them, and that is why I asked the question about the
degree of need in the Winnipeg 1 School Division, even though the minister is
leaving the impression that, yes, there is more going in there proportionally
to that school division. The fact is,
though, that the need, I think, has been proven to be much, much greater, and
growing when we are dealing with poverty, and the minister just has to look at
the growing welfare rolls, the increase of 200 or 300 percent in the last
number of years, to know that in fact this is a growing problem.
I want to move on to another area just briefly. The minister has stated that he is moving, he
is inclined, I guess, to accept that there is less reliance or should be less
reliance on a single textbook and that there should be more variety in
materials available for courses. It kind
of would indicate to me that maybe the minister is‑‑
Point of Order
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, a point of
order. I did not pass judgment one way
or the other. What I said was it was
reality. That is what exists today. Less reliance on a single textbook indicates
that is what we have in place today. We
do not have that in place today.
It is not a point of order, but I had to clear the record
because the words were not quite properly put down by the member for Dauphin
(Mr. Plohman).
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The honourable minister did not have a point
of order. It was just a dispute over the
facts.
* * *
Mr. Plohman: I want to thank the minister for facilitating
my question. He had written a letter in
April '94 to the Teachers' Society, school trustees, included in the resource‑based
learning and education model that was sent out.
In it he said that resource‑based learning is an educational model
which, by design, actively involves students, teachers and teacher‑librarians
in the meaningful use of a wide range of appropriate print, nonprint, and human
resources. This goes on to say students
mastering independent learning skills is a means to handle their present day
information needs.
It seems to indicate, since it was signed by the minister,
that in fact he does recognize the value or the advisability of moving away
from a single textbook to a wide range of materials as contained in the
resource‑based learning model, or did he just not really endorse it‑‑he
just sent it out for reaction‑‑because from reading this letter, I
would assume the minister endorses this approach. I am kind of interested to know now whether,
in fact, he does or does not, especially since his clarification of a moment
ago.
Mr. Manness: Well, I remember, when I signed that letter,
I read it once and I read it twice and I read it several times, and would you
not know it, the member for Dauphin had to ask me a question on this.
I understand the rationale, in all walks of life, of having
various resources at your disposal and how important that is, but I still am of
the belief that something has to be primal.
Now, as I said yesterday in my remarks, this is becoming kind of a
troubling issue with me because I am trying to decide which way to go on it.
In my view, there should be a provincial text. Now the question is, should everybody follow
it religiously? Well, I am not as
troubled by that as long as everybody religiously works toward the learning
associated with the basic concepts that are in our provincial text, and the
vast majority of them have not, not all of them, of course, but virtually
all. So I guess that is my general view
that I bring to the office. I know it
would take us some time to get there.
Notwithstanding what the member thinks or what I think, how
are we going to do it in the global context outside of
I think we are going to have a regional curriculum. Let us play that in theory. Let us say
You know I am using the argument to the extreme, but the
reality is where does that leave us? So
then you are going to see the constant pressing down to something of greater
commonality. I guess in a math context
the concepts have to be similar throughout, but once you start to move into
some of the other courses of study, and you start to allow room for
interpretation around concepts, then it becomes a little bit troubling. So I do not know whether I have addressed the
member's question or I have left him more confused than I am myself, but I am
saying I understand why there have to be various resources and why we should
not fixate everything on one. I can tell
you that at the end of the day, something is going to have to be held out that
is higher than the rest.
Mr. Plohman: I think teachers in the school divisions and
people involved in education take this pretty seriously when the minister sends
this out. It is not just, here is some
resource materials. This is an education
model that he was endorsing and sending out to the education community, a
resource‑based learning education model.
It would seem he was endorsing it, not that it was just a minor perhaps
deviation or diversion from his task to move towards greater uniformity.
I think, though, that it does fit in with what I was saying
yesterday. Perhaps the minister will be
helped by this, or perhaps he will not be, but it is really the bench marks and
standards that are established that are the important features here for
curriculum, not necessarily the recipe book to get there, that there are maybe
several paths to get students to attain because everyone learns differently at
different rates and so on. So would the
minister say, then, that perhaps by marrying those two ideas, in fact this
could fit in quite nicely with that proposition?
Mr. Manness: I do not think we are too far apart on
this. I mean, I honestly believe that as
we give more‑‑I will not use the word "jurisdiction"‑‑influence
to local schools to decide programming outside the core subject area
particularly, and even with maybe influencing also the core subject area, that
they will want to reflect on the material used.
Some may very well want, within their school communities,
notwithstanding the educator's desire, to try to influence collaboratively a
decision that moves in some settings to a more rigid system of textural, if
there is such a word, leadership.
In other divisions and/or schools they may want to leave
that school community completely flexible to accept the pureness of the
resource‑based freedom.
But you are right.
Ultimately the great arbiter between those two approaches, if we allow
the greater flexibility as far as the community deciding, will be the standards
themselves and the evaluation methods put in place.
* (1530)
Mr. Plohman: Well, perhaps inadvertently the minister has moved
himself down the path to greater flexibility than he desired, but I am pleased,
actually, that he may have done this with perhaps some degree of question and
doubt when he signed the letter. I think
that it actually is a positive development, and I hope that he does not reject
that move in the future.
Mr. Manness: I will not, as long as the education
community does not reject my desire to have a main text, not the compulsory use
of it but to have a main provincial text, because I am pretty sure I am going
to have to develop one in concert with the other provinces, as long as we do
not reject each other.
Mr. Plohman: Well, that is an interesting statement by the
minister in terms of the text. I thought
that what he might want to be developing with the western provinces is a common
core curriculum with the outcome for each level clearly outlined, but, again,
the way to get to there left with some flexibility for each of the provinces
and indeed each of the school division's schools, and this is what seems to indicate resource‑based
learning moves toward.
As long as you have those outcomes and the standards and
bench marks outlined, why do you need the recipe book? Why do you need that textbook that the
minister now says he is going to probably have to develop and he is going to
want endorsation for, if indeed he is going to continue to support this kind of
thing, which is a broader base of research materials available to supplement
the curriculum?
Mr. Manness: Because I believe it is the government's
responsibility to make sure that exists.
I am not saying, and I am not at this point advocating that everybody,
that anybody has to use it, but there has to be a point of reference. That point of reference, in my belief, in my
view, is that the government has to have a main text.
I am not advocating, again, for the record, that it has to
be used; I mean that is the thinking.
Mr. Plohman: I think the minister would have a lot of
people confused in those two statements then in terms of saying he wants to
have the main text, but he is not advocating it has to be used, and then he has
said that bench marks and standards are the key. He has agreed with that proposition.
The question is then, what force in fact will this main
textbook really have? I think the
minister has now waffled over it. If you
are going to have a main text, but you are not going to require it, then,
again, the main text is just another one of the reference materials, but the
standards are the key.
Mr. Manness: The standards are the key. The main text, for those who want to use it,
that will be their reference‑‑for those who want to use it. For those who do not, they will not use
it. They will use other sources, other
references, other reference material.
The standards are the key.
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we will wait and see
how that falls out in the minister's blueprints, expected hopefully in the next
month and a half, by the end of June. We
will hold the minister to that.
A couple of questions yet on Distance Education. I have a meeting to go to at four, just in
the building here, with MAST representatives.
I am hoping that either the Liberal critic will want to take the last
hour, or else I will have to get my other critic to deal with some of the other
issues.
I wanted to ask the minister, just in regard to that
meeting that we are having, MAST has come forward clearly endorsing the
distance education task force report.
They have mentioned a couple of major areas that they would like to see
government action on. We discussed the
initiative in Distance Education just yesterday, the $750,000 for pilot
projects and so on, but we really did not deal with the task force report at
all.
I am wondering whether the minister could tell us as to the
progress made. It seemed to me maybe he
was suggesting that perhaps it is outdated already, because things move along
so quickly. There was some reference. Is the minister implementing or intending to
implement, and I draw his attention specifically to the establishment of the
provincial council, with representatives from regional consortia, like where is
that at, and from the department and other users of the system and so on, the
MTS? That was a major, central
recommendation and it would seem to me would be fundamental in perhaps even
deciding which pilots should be funded, and the minister talked about making
decisions on that. So has that happened?
Mr. Manness: We have Treasury Board clearance to begin to
build that council, and yet we are going to have to do it carefully, bearing in
mind some of the other comments I made yesterday, working towards the greater
integrated model. When the task force
wrote, of course, its report and made reference by way of that recommendation,
it was thinking, the writers, I know, were thinking almost purely of
education. A year hence‑‑I
mean, we have as a government policy‑‑education is obviously
important, if not the most important, but there are other factors that had to
be taken into account.
So we are struggling to see how it is we give a council on
education total advisory capacity dealing with education, and yet hoping and
wanting that it would also consider the greater requirements of the
community. So that is what we are struggling
with, and yet we certainly have agreed to the council. We see where it has an incredibly important
role, and we will bring it into being in one fashion or another.
Now, as far as my reference to the report changing, I was
not talking about the concept of clustering and/or working together and sharing
services. That, in itself, is still very
important and would be the mainstay behind the new distance education
thrust. What I was talking about more so
was the technology and how that is changing, and there are certainly two
different areas to consider.
Mr. Plohman: I do not think the recommendations from the
task force were based on one technology.
The microwave advances would certainly fit in with this, I would think,
as well as fiber optic cable, but they did talk about integrating in the
community. Everything seems to be based
on that, the importance of the need for focus on community commitment to
lifelong learning; not just the public education system, the importance of co‑ordinating
activities at the local level, libraries and so on.
So it seems that was always intended, to recognize that
this was going to be broader certainly than just the public education system
and post‑secondary institutions.
So it seems to be reflected to a certain extent in here, and I think
that that is what that council was supposed to do. It was supposed to deal with the education
aspects of it.
Now, is the minister saying that he is struggling as to
whether the government as a whole should set up some type of mechanism, a
council to co‑ordinate all these needs, as opposed to one that co‑ordinates
education needs, and then have a separate, maybe, arm that would deal with the
other issues?
Mr. Manness: The member is correct. Certainly, when this was written a year ago,
we knew conceptually that there would be other services, but not until we got
into‑‑for instance, let us use an example, the Department of
Health, and realized that on its own, it is also almost duplicating, not
duplicating, but it is putting into place systems using technology.
Nobody that would have written that report would have
known, because we did not know until several months ago that there is
tremendous potential and that, indeed, if you do not take that into account at
the beginning you put at risk the ability to support not only the education
system, but a health application and anything else, so you had better do your
thinking properly at the beginning. That
is what we are trying to do.
Mr. Plohman: The integrated approach seems to be included
in the regional consortia. That seems
already to be built into the recommendations, not just for education. The point is that the provincial council is
supposed to have representatives from that, as regions, so it already could
reflect that integrated approach, and it is just a question now whether it
should be broader at the provincial level to include all of those other
departments as named, with representatives named by government or through
agencies of some kind to add to the expertise in rounding out the nature of the
council. Is that the way the minister
sees it going, or is the council idea perhaps in jeopardy?
Mr. Manness: Well, no, that is the way it has to go, but
the question is, is it a council that is focusing on education first and then
integrating in everything else, or is it a council, a broader council that is
looking from an umbrella standpoint of which education is a very important
goal. That is our‑‑I will
not call it a dilemma, but that is where we are.
* (1540)
Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, they also suggested
that the Telephone System be strongly encouraged to establish a branch dealing
specifically with telecommunication services for educational use. Has that been done? Has the minister been in contact with his
colleague responsible for the Telephone System?
In fact, do they have the kind of expertise that is required and needed
to carry out their role in the delivery of and the development of the
electronic highway, distance education being a part of it?
Mr. Manness: Well, who am I going to be in trouble with
most if I answer that question? I mean
my sense is that Manitoba Telephone System, there are a couple of individuals
within the organization who understand fully well where this approach is going. Now, the question is whether they are senior
people or not. I think there has been a
realization at senior levels over the course of just the last few months how
important an emerging area this is to the well‑being not only of the
Telephone System, but as importantly to rural
Certainly they will be part of any dialogue as we try to
work towards a better integrated model.
Mr. Plohman: Would the minister see them as being the primary
player when dealing with fibre optic technology and the cable companies being
the primary player when dealing with the digital microwave or would that be
oversimplifying it?
Mr. Manness: That is oversimplified. I mean, I guess the question the member
really is asking is should they maintain a monopoly or restricted monopoly‑‑[interjection]
No, I am putting words in his mouth, I acknowledge that‑‑and/or
whether the competitive model be allowed to have a greater influence in a lot
of these decisions. You know, we are
struggling with that element too right now.
Mr. Plohman: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have no
further questions at this particular point in time. I will pass it to someone else and come back
to a couple of points my colleague has on native education, but not a great
deal more in this particular branch.
We want to move to the bureau as soon as possible, but, as
I said, I will have to leave for a while.
If it is necessary to deal with those other issues now, we can.
Mr. Lamoureux: I wanted to pick up on the meeting that I had
with the Manitoba School Library Association, actually, where there was a great
deal of concern with respect to the resource‑based learning model that
the minister had in fact issued out.
Generally speaking, I had thought that it was received quite positively
in terms of what they believe is the direction that the Minister of Education
was wanting to see us move towards.
In the discussions that I had, I thought they had put it
quite well, and it is going to lead to a series of questions that I would like
to ask the minister. They talked in
terms of the differences of a school library compared to a school library
program. It is a significant difference.
I wanted to read in terms of how they worded it. A school library is a collection of books
organized and catalogued, able to circulate with minimal loss and
confusion. A qualified technician or
qualified clerk would give you a school library.
A school library program, on the other hand, matches the
material resource of a school library to the curriculum design of classroom
activities, the teachers' styles, the teachers, the learning styles of the
students and the information skills of both.
Only a qualified teacher‑librarian can give students and teachers
a school library program.
As the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) has pointed out,
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I believe that there are a number of people from within
that whole area, and particularly the School Library Association, have received
this report in a very positive way. We
would like to believe that the minister is not trying to build up expectations
that he is not going to be able to deliver later on.
There ware a specific number of questions that they had
asked me or concerns that they had expressed to me. I want to see if we can get some of those
questions answered. One of the major
ones was, if we are going to be moving into this area, how will the educators,
if you like, be trained in the future to be able to facilitate having library
programs?
Mr. Manness: We have a school library specialist who has
been working in the department for two years and will continue to do so to try
and share the knowledge that we have at the department with those practitioners
in the field.
Mr. Lamoureux: On the organizational chart where would the
school library specialist fit in?
Mr. Manness: She is in the provincial specialists area in
the Program Implementation Branch of the division.
Mr. Lamoureux: Could the minister indicate in terms of what
specifically her role is in terms of trying to provide programming, training
seminars? Maybe the minister could
comment on that.
Mr. Manness: As the member indicates, he has answered his
own question. Her role is to lead training
seminars and professional development sessions and, of course, to be there as a
consultant as individual problems arise or questions need to be answered. He has answered his own question.
Mr. Lamoureux: Can the minister indicate, in terms of the
number of training programs, is this something that we are looking at the
expansion of? Is there a role, for
example, for the
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, planning for next
year is happening at this particular time.
So there are not any definitive plans at this point in cast, but we are
working on those plans. As far as using
valued experience or views from outside of the department, whether they come
from the university or elsewhere, certainly we are welcome to accept all offers
of support.
Mr. Lamoureux: Can the minister indicate in terms of what
sort of planning they are putting into works for the upcoming year and how that
would vary from the previous year? Do we
see, for example, additional resources towards seminars, in particular, in
rural
* (1550)
Mr. Manness: We will develop a plan. We will take it out to the regions. We will let them react to it. If they deem that it is in keeping with what
they feel the local clientele wants, then they will be accepted. If there are some changes required, we will
change those. If it requires some
additional resources, that can happen, but that will have to come out of their
allocation. If that is deemed as the
highest priority within their allocation, then there will be more resources
directed.
Mr. Lamoureux: I wonder if the minister can indicate whether
or not he sees, in the future, the need to have some sort of a certification
for librarian‑teachers in our schools.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this is quite an
issue. This does not begin or end with a
specialist as a librarian and the certification showing that. That is the question, but certainly the
answer does not end there, because there is no end of individuals today who
want specialization under the certification process. It is not only in education, I might
add. Why do you think this government of
the day referred to the Law Reform Commission‑‑how it is the
professions come to grips with the expanding proliferation of powers that they
want within subdisciplines, want by way of legislation.
So the member asks very direct questions specifically
dealing with librarians, and I know he would like me to be able to give him a
very direct answer, but from the government point of view, it expands and
explodes to something much greater.
Mr. Lamoureux: Can the minister indicate in terms of what is
there currently at universities to facilitate librarians expanding their
skills?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there are courses on
being a librarian. The member asks,
well, are there enough of these courses offered during formal training as one
proceeds through the Faculty of Education?
We are asking those questions ourselves right now. Certainly, the teacher training initiatives
committee that has been put into place and is working closely with the Faculty
of Education is trying to delve in greater depth into this whole issue.
Mr. Lamoureux: The minister made reference to the teachers
training committee. Is there, in fact, a
librarian on that particular committee?
Mr. Manness: Yes, there is. She happens to be a staff member of the
department at this point, but she is a qualified librarian, so I would say yes.
Mr. Lamoureux: Given the importance of educational reform in
the incorporation of a library program, if you like, which is no doubt an
important and integral part to distance education, I am wondering if the
minister feels that there is a need to have some form of enhanced curriculum
development at the faculty over at the University of Manitoba in order to keep
up with the technologies.
Mr. Manness: A very important role, extremely
important. You know, the question is, is
that more important than developing curriculum in math, science and language
arts? I mean, this is an issue of
priorities, very important in itself.
The location of where that expertise should be placed is maybe in
question but very important, but I say no more important than developing
curriculum in the core subject areas.
Mr. Lamoureux: The minister, throughout the Estimates,
refers to the core curriculum area. Does
he include technology as part of the core curriculum?
Mr. Manness: That is a very key element to essential
learning, unquestionably, but is the member then saying that he envisages that
only in a course, or is he more inclined to envisage it like I tend to do,
across many courses?
It is part of our activity, and I would have to think
rather than just focusing on it in its own course area, that maybe it should be
integrated in other learning. I mean
nothing impressed me more when I was in River East high school and saw the
relationship between français and computer science, and here there were two
teachers who were putting their course work together and fully integrated. I would have to say that is more important in
my view than maybe just trying to focus it as a "you either take it or you
don't, make your decision now."
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that is all the questions
I have on Education Reform. I am quite
prepared to go into Assessment and Evaluation.
I know the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) is back, unless you have
some more questions for Education Reform.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: 2.(b)(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits
$505,400‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,744,600‑‑pass.
(c) Assessment and Evaluation (1) Salaries and Employee
Benefits $675,900.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, under the objectives,
it indicates that the department is to analyze school and student data to
determine if standards are in fact being met.
My question is, in terms of, how is this data information
compiled and what data is collected and how?
Mr. Manness: Three ways, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. The member would know that the department has
been doing assessments on curriculum for a number of years, over the course of
the last two years, three years, provincial exams with report back to local
divisions and, thirdly, a provincial report with respect to the results associated
with those provincial exams.
Mr. Lamoureux: I am not necessarily referring to provincial
exams. In my reading of it, I take it
that there is data or information that is collected from the local schools. This is the information I am referring to, that
school divisions might have in place for their local exams, that sort of thing.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not know whether
the member has spent the time in some of the curriculum assessment
results. I remember when I was a critic
10 years ago, it seemed like I got bogged down on them and I spent two weeks in
them, Norm. I guess if the member has
not done that, he would not know that there are data references there and
indeed there are conclusions reached.
That is the database to which I refer.
* (1600)
Mr. Lamoureux: I am asking information in terms of the
putting together of that particular database, the sorts of information that
would be accessed. I am quite pleased
that the minister, when he was critic, might have had access to that or thought
of looking into that. For me, I would
want to know if the minister would in fact be able to at least enlighten me on
that issue.
Mr. Manness: I do not know whether I can do that in the
context of a few minutes. I would invite
the member to talk to Mr. Norm Mayer who is here and heads up that whole
branch, and he would do a much more adequate job of trying to lay out the
methodologies and the processes in place than I could probably do in a short
period of time.
I mean, there is nothing sinister at work here. This is a long‑standing process that
has been in place in this province for 15 years and certain subjects‑‑a
subject every year is targeted as one in which we go out into the field and we
have people write some type of an exam or a test.
But the focus is the curriculum itself. This is where the focus exists. I would have to think that over 15 years,
math may have been looked at three times at grade levels 3, 6, 9 and 12, and
almost all of the major subjects have probably been looked at two or three
times in that 15‑year period.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I guess I am
referring to‑‑and I do not know if the minister is getting the
point that I am trying to get at. The
department is responsible to ensure that the curriculum is, in fact, being
delivered. If you have exams one year in
math and exams in another year in language, that does not necessarily ensure
your curriculum is, in fact, being implemented.
What I am referring to is there is no doubt internal things
are being done within the school divisions, within local schools, but I would
have anticipated that the department would be having some sort of monitoring
process to ensure that the curriculum is, in fact, being implemented. Again, I appreciate the minister's advice in
terms of sitting down with one of the staff people, but I also believe he has a
responsibility to indicate to us in terms of what is going on.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member‑‑his
sentiments are not new to the world. I
mean, that is why the former minister, Mr. Derkach, who on behalf of the
government shared many of the same views, caused to be brought in provincial
exams to begin to try to determine, in a broader context, whether or not the
curriculum was being followed.
I am telling the member what was the status quo, the
process in place. Where it broke down, I
suppose, is that when there was a recognition that the curriculum might be
short in some areas and/or students who were short in their understanding of it
in some areas, the governments of the day refused to mandate that action be
taken within school divisions, that would force students or classrooms to
either present the curriculum in a different way, or whatever.
So a lot of the work had been done, but beyond that, we
sensed that provincial exams should be brought into place to try to determine
whether or not the curriculum was being imparted, and we have done that.
Mr. Lamoureux: The minister indicates that Mr. Derkach, his
colleague, brought in provincial exams.
Prior to that, you mean there is absolutely no monitoring of the
implementation of the curriculum at the different levels? Even the provincial exams that the former
Minister of Education brought in were not necessarily for the full
curriculum. It would have been for
specific areas, is that not true?
Mr. Manness: That is true, but the reality is we had to
begin to build all over again. I sense by
the tone of the question, the member is critical for not having tests across
the board in all subjects. I do not know
what grades he might be referring to, but maybe he would even say all grades.
At the same time we were constituting our own, we were
making a collaborative effort towards a national test under the student
achievement. I always get that
"s" mixed up, student achievement indicators project on a national
context. We are trying to move along
with this and, of course, the very basic and the essence of reform which will
be made public next month, will again indicate how strong we are of the view
that we have to continue to increase the measurement and the evaluation within
this area.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to be
very clear in terms of what I am critical of, and that is that the minister is
not able to indicate to me in terms of how the curriculum is being implemented
or give assurances that a curriculum is in fact being implemented from K to 12
or K to S4.
(Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
He refers to the provincial exams. He does not refer to any of the communication
or co‑ordination from the department with the school divisions nor the
independent schools in terms of what is actually going on. That is in fact what I am critical of. One of the responsibilities of the department‑‑and
it is fairly clear here‑‑is to ensure the administration or
implementation of the curriculum.
Can the minister give us that assurance?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am not going
to sit here and be subject to a simple question which would call for a very
difficult complex question, even though the member would like me to simply
answer.
Why does he not phrase his question in terms of
outputs? Why does he not say is the
system doing its job? Why does he not
say do you know for sure that our students along the way are achieving certain
goals? I would also ask him to‑‑and
here I am telling him how to ask his questions‑‑but the reality is,
is Manitoba leading or following other provinces who are rushing to try and
measure at various points along the system?
I would indicate to him that the reform package that we are
working on right now would show that we are quickly trying to become a leader
in this area.
But, I am not going to try and answer his question in a
quantitative objective fashion because, quite frankly, I cannot. I have to believe that in most of our schools
and most of our classrooms that the curriculum is being imparted. Does he ask me to guarantee that it is
happening in all areas? I am sorry. I cannot do that, because the process of
delegation that started long before I was in office, long before this
government was here, of delegating these responsibilities from the ministry to
school divisions, to superintendents to principals and ultimately to the
teacher in the classroom, has been a process of 40, 50 years, unless the member
is dictating that there should be school inspectors once again put into place
so that I know more, with certainty, what is happening in the classroom. Maybe he is advocating that. Right today that is not in place.
* (1610)
So the good‑faith model that I talked about in other
answers to other questions is what we have today. Of course, what we are trying to do to get a
read on that is to bring into place more quickly than possible standards and
tests that indicate how our students are achieving as against that standard.
Mr. Lamoureux: The minister suggests questions that I could
ask. I could also suggest ways in which
he could answer questions. The minister
says that he is responsible for delegating.
He delegates. He is also
ultimately the one who is responsible.
In fact, if you read the assessment and evaluation to assess the degree
of the curriculum implementation, the minister has not yet answered that
question other than saying there is something that is in place. What that something is he is not prepared to
answer, but if I like, I can go and talk to one of his staff people.
I would suggest to him that it is an appropriate question
to ask: How does he ensure, using the
words of his Supplementary Estimates, to assess the degree of curriculum
implementation, or how is that done?
That is the original question that I had asked.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I answered
that question in detail. The member then
went on to say, how can you be sure that the curriculum is being implemented‑‑and
I think, by reference and inference, he meant‑‑in all schools and
across the total subject area?
I said I cannot give a simple answer to what I think is a
simple question because I did not delegate the responsibility. Legislators long before me delegated much of
the responsibility to other educational authorities. I am responsible for what happens in the
university. Believe it or not, I am held
accountable for what happens at universities ultimately. But, believe me, the powers that the ministry
has with respect to programming within universities are minute.
These decisions of delegation have been made long before I
inherited the office. So that is why I
react in the fashion I do. I guess I say
that is why the government, though in keeping with the essence of the question,
has introduced provincial exams at Grade 12 because we too are concerned as to
whether or not the curriculum is being taught completely.
That is why we will probably be introducing some base‑line
assessment as we move into the reform package.
That is why, of course, we have joined other Ministers of Education
across the country to put into place a student achievement indicators program,
because we are concerned that certain standards are not being met. Whether or not that reflects as to whether
the curriculum has been taught or not, well, we will have to determine that.
Mr. Lamoureux: Can the minister indicate in terms of what
the department has in place to correspond with school divisions and schools
with reference to the curriculum? Are there
ongoing discussions? Is there something
that is formal? Is it something that if
a school has a problem they write to the department or they go to the school
board or the school board goes to the minister?
What is actually the process for that?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, when it is a
new curriculum, we literally have hundreds of meetings. If it is existing curriculum, we have always
let divisions and/or educators know that we are prepared at a phone call to sit
down with them and discuss the curriculum.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, maybe what I
can do is to bring up a specific example.
If you have a two‑semester high school and each high school has,
let us say, 90 days in each semester, some will have four classes for that day;
others will have five. If you are in the
four‑class semester day, if you like, the four‑class‑a‑day
semester school, you will get the required regulation of 110 to 120 math hours,
for example. If you are in a five‑class
day in a semester, you will fall considerably short in the math because there
are 80 minutes in the first followed by a much shorter period in the second.
Does the department follow things of this nature?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that may
happen in some schools, but the most that I am familiar with, the principal in
setting forward the timetable has to have these revolving as to what week is
four and what week is five of the various subjects. I suppose, in some instances in some schools,
there may be a shortage of hours, but I still think that most principals who do
the timetabling‑‑and my goodness, I do not think the member is
advocating that I do the timetabling or the department do the timetabling‑‑but
I think in most schools, there is an attempt to hit the guidelines on all the
subjects.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am not
suggesting to the Minister of Education that he would set a timetable per se,
but I am suggesting that the department does have a role in terms of knowing,
in terms of what is going on throughout the province in the many different
schools that are there or at least have some sort of an idea of what is out
there.
In the objectives, for example, it says: "To analyze school and student data to
determine if standards are met." We
referred to the provincial exams. I gave
a specific example. How does the
minister or the Department of Education monitor what is actually going on in
the schools other than just through delegation?
Is there anything that is in place?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, other than
several years ago when there were inspectors and then field officers, which no
longer exist and were taken out, in my belief, in the NDP years for the final
time in the '80s, the department has no day‑to‑day insight into the
classroom other than by way of examinations, which were brought into place in
'91‑92, after a year of piloting.
Mr. Lamoureux: Then how would the department know the degree
to which the curriculum is being implemented?
How would they know that? Is it
because they have delegated it and they believe that they are doing a good job,
all the school divisions and the administrators at that level? How does the department know the degree of
its implementation?
Mr. Manness: Well, other than the assessment tests and the
exams that we have in place and I guess some extraneous information‑‑I
do not think that is the right word‑‑that may be shared with us
with universities upon our other post‑secondary institutions, upon what
they are finding in first‑year students coming into those institutions,
we have nothing.
Mr. Lamoureux: I am wondering if that is maybe part of the
reason why then the minister was surprised to see the standard math tests come
as low as they were. Would that be a
fair comment to make?
Mr. Manness: I do not think I was surprised. I never said I was surprised; I said I was
disappointed.
Mr. Lamoureux: If the minister was not surprised, then what
made him feel that in fact it was going to be there at that level?
Mr. Manness: Well, again, my greater disappointment was as
much with the Canadian results as they were with the Manitoban results. The great concern from a lot of people in the
education circle in the first place is, uh‑huh, we are going to be ranked
(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
* (1620)
My disappointment was more with the Canadian results and
how the whole student body within our nation probably fare. So this is not a
How did I know? How
did I sense that maybe it would not be well?
Well, we have looked at other results before, an international
assessment of education results. We are
mindful of the fact that we now have progress all the way through. I was mindful of a new term I have come to
learn called mark inflation, which is being practised at some of our
institutions, post‑secondary, whether anybody wants to admit it
particularly or not, and no doubt is happening in some of our public schools
and independent schools for that matter.
I mean, how did I measure this? How did we know it? With certainty I guess we do not, but the
reality is many people, particularly members of our government coming into
office, sensed that not all was right, and to that end, we brought in to try
and get a snapshot of where we were at‑‑we are the ones who brought
in provincial exams. We did it.
Of course, we also saw similar results on the international
assessment of education progress in math and science, and some of our schools
are now actively involved in that. I
mean, this has been building. The member,
the tone of his questions indicates this is a new revelation, that he has
discovered oil or something, but the reality is this has been growing for some
years.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister
indicated that his curriculum implementation is monitored by assessment tests,
by exams in certain places. At least
that is what I had written down as he was speaking, and those are all
provincial. Is that not correct? So that is the only way in which they monitor
the curriculum being implemented currently?
Mr. Manness: For 15 years, again, I will push the member
on this, as far as monitoring curriculum, not student progress, but curriculum,
for 15 years that is the process that has been in place in
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, if we go to expected
results, it will say that school division examinations will be reviewed and
approved as needed.
I would ask the minister if in fact they do review school
division exams.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, no, at this point we
do not. We are mindful that they are in
place, and yet we sense that we should become a repository for those results if
indeed school divisions, within their freedom of administering division‑wide
exams, if they want to register them with us, the results I am talking about.
Mr. Lamoureux: Then would this be an entirely new line that
has been entered into this year's Estimates?
Mr. Manness: It is not a new line at all. It is just a new service. It is not a new line.
Mr. Lamoureux: I do not understand. It says that school division examinations
will be reviewed and approved. I asked
the minister then, had that occurred, and he had indicated no. I seek just some clarification on that.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, many school divisions
are wrestling with this same question and some have been administrating
division‑wide exams for a number of years. Others are contemplating them. They want to, in developing their division‑wide
exams, they would like to have an outside judgment as to whether or not they
are in keeping with some model and cover basically the important areas.
What we have said to them is listen, if you want to begin
to measure within divisions or if you have been doing it for some years‑‑and
some divisions have‑‑and you want an outside party to pass judgment
on it, we will attempt to do that. That
is something new. I do not know if we
have had a formal request yet, but we expect that some divisions will.
Now, there was a Strategy 59 under Answering the Challenge
which, if we accepted that recommendation, would dictate that all divisions
would have divisional exams. We are not
at this point imposing Strategy 59.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister says
that some school divisions are, some school divisions are not. Does the minister believe that school
divisions should be doing it?
Mr. Manness: I do not know whether what I believe is
terribly relevant. I am for tests and
exams, but I am also for greater school autonomy and the programming aside
outside of the core curriculum areas where I think the ministry should be very
much involved. After that, divisions and
schools should reflect what is important to them. If they want to have a score, a divisional
score or a test procedure in place to deal with all the areas of study, so be
it.
I think, in my view, it is a rigour that all of us should
be subject to as citizens, particularly as we come through those formative
years. I am not saying that they should
be pass‑fail, but there is nothing wrong with being challenged to
understand that study is important and critical thinking is important and from
time to time that should be tested.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would argue that in
fact the Department of Education is in the best position to be able to do the
sorts of reviews that are necessary, the sorts of reviews that have been at
least indicated that the Department of Education has been conducting, but as it
turns out has not been conducting.
I am wondering if the minister could give us some sort of
assurances that at the very least those school divisions that have been
conducting these tests, that there will be some sort of a monitoring
process. I would like to think that
might have even possibly had something to do with the blueprint that the
minister is going to be introducing in June, if he has a better idea.
Some school divisions could have been doing extensive
monitoring of their own whether it is through having individuals come in to
oversee what is going on in the classrooms or having standard exams in
noncompulsory courses, that this sort of information could have been very
beneficial. Again, I would express some
disappointment in the sense that this review has not taken place, because I do
believe that it should have been taking place at the Department of Education
level.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not have to sit
here and take this nonsense. I mean, I
have to take it, but the reality is I do not remember when I said exactly the
same thing in
* (1630)
I said that. I was
severely criticized in some quarters for saying that. I said there should be standards and there
should be uniformity and that we should be open with our students and tell them
where they rate. I do not remember‑‑maybe
I am wrong, maybe I did not see it‑‑the Leader of the Liberal Party
(Mr. Edwards) and/or the Education critic standing up and applauding.
As a matter of fact, the great irony of this is‑‑and
it is foolish of me to put this on the record but I cannot hold myself back‑‑an
individual who used to be part of our party now gives notice to the world, who
happens to be the head of school trustees, that he is leaving our party to join
the Liberals because we are the ones who said that. I mean this is the joke.
He is joining the Liberal Party because our view, my view,
on standards and how it is that we should try and begin to do this was
something that belonged way in the past, and he is going to join the Liberal
Party because he thinks they are going to have a much kinder approach and stay
with the status quo.
I am not confused on this, but I question where the support
was. I will be very thankful for the
support of the member for
Mr. Lamoureux: You know, I am surprised. No, I should not say surprised, but the
minister interprets what he likes out of what I have said. If he will read Hansard, he will see that
what I said is that there is a role for the department to make use of the
information that has been collected through the different school divisions. He himself acknowledged that some school
divisions have, some school divisions have not.
The minister says that he does not feel he should even have
to be here to answer a question of that nature.
I think that he does have a responsibility not only to be here to listen
to a question of that nature, but also to be held accountable for an Estimates
book that says there is a review that is going on and then we find out the
review is not going on.
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this is '94‑95
Estimates. We are into the second month.
It talks therefore about the '94‑95
school year. The member seems to say, we
want you to impose this with respect to the new school year.
I am sorry that the member always takes out literal
interpretation of what is written. I am
sorry for my outburst. Naturally, I am
to be held accountable. That is why I am
here, and I will stay here as long as the member wants, but the reality is I do
not think he has a strong enough base of knowledge in this whole area to ask
the questions in the manner he does. That
is not a criticism. This is not an easy
area, and you have to be in it for some period of time.
I want to assure him that hopefully we are on the same wave
length. I kind of resent the fact that
he is saying, as a government‑‑he is not saying it, but I think he
is inferring that as a government you should have done this sooner or you
should be more in charge, you should know what is happening in the
schools. I am saying that is an easy
thing to say from the comfortable pew of opposition.
As I say to many who are pushing us to do the ed reform
more quickly than we are, this is not an easy task. Yet, if we were to move too fast, the very
same member‑‑because I have seen it in health reform‑‑would
be criticizing us for not consulting enough.
That is what disturbs me so darn much as I sit here. The very same group of people who will
chastise us for not having the instant results in Education are the same people
who have run us through hell and back because we have not collaborated and we
have not interacted with the health community.
That is what galls me a little bit with respect to the question.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there are a number of
things that gall me with respect to the answer.
I could talk in terms of contradictions that the minister has put from
yesterday to today with the whole issue of special needs. He can feel assured that once Hansard is
printed I will show it to him, some of the contradictions.
The minister says this is '94‑95 budget. If you will recall I asked him the question,
was this in fact a new initiative‑‑I should not say a new
initiative‑‑was this a new line.
He indicated to me, no, it is not a new line. If it is not a new line, then that tells me
that it was there in the previous year.
I had asked him‑‑and the minister says, no from his
seat. Again, I do not want to spend the
rest of the afternoon on this particular line.
I do want to get on to special needs.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister cannot say, look, this
is the '94‑95 budget and you cannot expect us to do it in the past two
months since April 1, because he did indicate that it was being done
before. I do expect the Department of
Education to be able to be doing some sort of a review of what information is
out there. The Minister of Education has
failed to indicate that he is making usage of the information that some school
divisions‑‑using the minister's words‑‑are in fact
having, whether it is exams or monitoring or anything of that nature, which is
a far cry from what the Minister of Education was saying at MAST in
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Deputy Chair, I have not been here all
afternoon, so if I am repeating questions or not on the right line, then please
tell me.
Under this line, which I believe deals with Assessment and
Evaluation, I would be interested in having some comments from the minister on
the assessment of the phys ed evaluation that was done last year in English and
French programs at the‑‑I think it was Elementary 3 and Senior 11,
was it?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the final report is
being put together. I have not even see
it, therefore it is not ready for distribution at this point.
Ms. Friesen: But the results have been distributed. There are four booklets that I have received
from the department. They are green‑‑well,
if we are going to get into colours, two are green and two are yellow.
Mr. Manness: Those are the statistical raw data numbers,
but the analysis has not been put to that, so that is why I am saying the
report‑‑that is the import of doing it. The analysis has not been done.
Ms. Friesen: That was why I asked for the minister's
comments because those were just numbers, but there are obviously inferences
and policy directions that are going to come from that, so when will this
evaluation be ready?
Mr. Manness: Again, I say do not hold us to it, but we are
going to try and have that done by fall.
Ms. Friesen: What would be the normal procedure after
that? When an evaluation is done then
published, what is the next step?
* (1640)
Mr. Manness: The member puts her finger on a problem. Mr. Mayer is with me and certainly when I
came into the ministry and asked him to give me an in‑depth study or
knowledge of this whole area up to this point in time the department, whether
it has not had‑‑probably does not even have the legislative
authority today to cause changes in the divisions with respect to the
conclusions. Divisions that read it and
their education instructional leaders who read it and say, yes, we have a
problem, and to the extent that they want to vary or make stronger their
curriculum, we will do that. We sense
that most divisions file it on the shelf and I know it is one of the areas of
consternation that has bothered the staff particularly who have gone through it
in a diligent fashion in trying to make this system work. There is no teeth today for the department to
impose changes on divisions.
Ms. Friesen: The evidence that was published in that study
was not given in terms of divisions. It
was given in terms of programs, so how would the divisions in fact be expected
to apply those results to their own particular programs? It could be that a particular division has
performed very well but they would not know it and it may be that a certain
number of divisions in fact are "dragging down" the whole statistical
basis.
Mr. Manness: Well, divisions that are interested can
approach us and get an analysis of their group of students if they choose to do
so.
Ms. Friesen: Have any chosen to do so?
Mr. Manness: The majority have those results. The question is, have the majority acted on
it, and I gather the majority to our understanding at least do not act upon
that information once it is provided to them.
Ms. Friesen: The minister is actually making a very broad
general statement about the impact of evaluations that no action is forthcoming
from the divisions. How long a period
are you looking at? Has that been the
case for 20 years or 10 years or five years?
What basis is there for making that statement?
Mr. Manness: Both for the micro and macro, first of all
the micro, we do teacher surveys and we ask that question specifically, given
the results of the last go‑round, have you made changes in methods and/or
curriculum in this subject area? The
results of those surveys for the most part indicate that changes are not made.
For the macro level, we have been to math three times. You sense that if you evaluate it and you
have pointed out where some of the weaknesses are in math five years hence and
then you come around again and do it and the same weaknesses and soft areas
show up, then you sense that you have not made the progress you had hoped.
Ms. Friesen: I will pursue two areas. One is the methodology, the teacher
surveys. Are those sampled surveys or
are those every teacher who has participated in the evaluation?
Mr. Manness: Sample survey.
Ms. Friesen: How broad is the survey? Does it incorporate, for example, every
division?
Mr. Manness: No, the survey methodology certainly is
scientific. We would approach, of 12,000
students across the province, as many as 600 by way of scientific method. So we think the survey is pretty pure. Of that, about 90 percent return completed
surveys.
Ms. Friesen: I am sorry, I did not understand the
minister's response. I was asking not
about the testing but the teacher survey.
Does that mean that you are surveying 12,000 teachers? There was a confusion‑‑
Mr. Manness: I said out of 12,000 students, pardon me
teachers, we are surveying 600, but they are drawn randomly on a scientific
basis.
Ms. Friesen: Do they include representation from every
division? How random is that?
Mr. Manness: I could never make the statement random and
scientific if they did not come from every division.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the second question
that I asked a little while ago was the basis of the minister's statement for
believing that no changes ever follow upon these kinds of evaluations. His example was the math program which has
been revisited a couple of times. Is
that the only example, and is that the length of period that we are looking at
over the experience of the last five years, and is it only in math?
Mr. Manness: I do not know whether the member was here
when we covered some of this ground. We
have had this policy of assessment in place now for 15 years. Math, I guess, would be the one subject that
has gone around three times and there might be a couple of other areas. Here is a sample, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in
1985 reading was done, in '86 science, '87 math, '88 social studies, '89
biology, '90 chemistry and physics, '91 the French science area, in '92 reading,
'93 phys ed, '94 science. This is the
schedule of events.
Still to the question, I could not say categorically that
some divisions have not made changes. I
cannot make that statement and I never did.
My statement was general, and it is based on, again, the empirical
evidence that we have, first, the survey and, secondly, the return to the same
subject and basically the same areas of questioning and testing and the results
therein.
Ms. Friesen: The minister talked earlier of his
frustration with the absence of legislative authority for making changes. I wonder if he could expand upon that. I am thinking, for example, I would be
interested in a general discussion of that, of what the minister learned,
because it seems surprising to me as well that that is the department's
understanding of its role.
I am thinking, for example, in the context of the phys ed
survey. I think a number of divisions
and a number of schools have been diminishing the amount of time spent in
physical education, particularly in the senior years, to the extent where‑‑well,
I will not go into the extent‑‑but certainly a diminishing amount
of physical education. That seems to me
within the legislative bounds of the minister and the results that have been
shown in that phys ed study, and I emphasize particularly females because that
is where the decline is seen most dramatically, but certainly there are
striking differences between the French and English programs which are not
easily explainable.
It does seem to me that one avenue of change that the
minister has is the amount of time that is spent on a particular subject,
whether it is math, whether it is phys ed, whether it is English or
whatever. So what legislative authority
then is available to the minister? Are
there areas, for example, in terms of time devoted to certain subjects that may
not have been used recently or may need a broader application?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as I indicated
yesterday in a question similar to this, very limited powers, guidelines for
the most part and then, of course, the ultimate of by regulation stating what
should be compulsory courses. Of course,
many, many in the community, in the school communities, are calling into
question this imposition from on high and I do too, by the way, as to a broad
range of activity and professionals and learned people from outside, in other
disciplines outside of education trying to almost impose their will or
certainly their belief that if we do even more of imposing certain areas of study
or unit of study on the public school system, we will be better able to address
some of society's ills.
* (1650)
I am not one for one moment who believes that government
edict in any way is going to cause to be a better educated student, either in a
physical sense and/or in some other areas.
I came through school at a time when physical education was not
mandatory, yet there was a certain make‑up of teachers and educational
leaders within the school setting who just wanted every‑‑I mean
every young man and woman wanted to be part of that, and there was nothing
there. It was just kind of the spirit of
the school. It was the very personality
of the teachers and the educational leaders.
It was supported in the home and in the community.
There is no way I could resurrect that by just passing
along and saying it has to happen. I am
as concerned about some of the results and some of the backing away from
physical activity in the public school system as the member. I gather she is concerned about that.
I am as strong an advocate that there should be physical
education in the school day as anybody around this room, but to mandate and
enforce it under the belief that this is going to cause students to want to
like to do it, I do not believe that for a second, because I go into schools
today. I go in some cases where physical
education is being practised, and it is a compulsory course, and I see kids who
just do not want to be any part of it or are bored or are just wasting time.
I have people criticizing me because I am not‑‑[interjection]
Well, I have the member for
We are all over the map here, and I have come to the
conclusion that as strong a supporter as I am of physical education, unless the
school body wants it and the community that supports that school body wants it,
it is not going to be there in a productive way.
Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about home schooling and home
schooling assessment. Is that feasible
under this line? Home schooling itself
is not directly, but the issue of assessment and testing.
I notice that in the '92‑93 annual report, there was
a 22 percent increase in the number of students involved in home
schooling. Could we start perhaps by the
minister telling us what the percentage increase has been in '93‑94?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to ask
the member whether or not we can hold that off until one of the major sections
coming up, because then we will have all of the data here, and we are certainly
prepared to share that.
Ms. Friesen: That is fine on those kinds of issues, but on
the issue of testing and evaluation, can we look at how home schooling has been
dealt with under this line?
Mr. Manness: The tests I have been talking about, the assessments
and the provincial tests are not applicable to home‑schooled students at
this point. The parents of the students
that are taught at home are expected to file with the department three times a
year, progress reports, which are monitored closely and of course we have the
right at any point in time, as we do, to go into the home and do an assessment
of some fashion.
Ms. Friesen: For these 780‑odd, I guess it is more
than that now, let us say a round number of 800 students in home schooling
[interjection] 750 then‑‑how many people are involved in that
assessment from the department?
Mr. Manness: We are well aware, too, of some shortcomings
in this area. There is one full‑time
person in an independent study program office in Winkler, but we are also aware
through the reorganization that our regional teams are going to have to have a
greater involvement to help with that workload.
Ms. Friesen: I would like to ask some more questions about
the number of home visits that are made and the number of evaluations. Do you have that information here or is that
on the other line? One assessment
person, curriculum person and support person for 750 students is disturbing, I
would say. I wonder what they have been
able to accomplish, and given the increase in this area, what the government's
plans are for future assessment?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, if the member is
wanting that type of detail in some type of log fashion, we are prepared to try
and provide greater insight into‑‑in I think Section 16(f)(2)
tomorrow. I hear the thrust of her
comments, and through our evaluations, certainly we can think of two or three
cases where deregistration has been put into place. It is a good‑faith model‑‑again,
another one of those and it works in many cases well but it does not always
work as well as I think we would like.
When we find it is not working well we take actions accordingly. We know we will have to put more staff and we
plan to for the next year.
Ms. Friesen: I noticed that the highest proportion of
students in that home schooling program, and I am going from the most recent
annual report I have, which is '92‑93, 62 percent of them are taking a
Christian curriculum. Could the minister
tell us what kind of evaluation is done of that curriculum and how does it
correspond to the
Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, what we have found
here is that the basic curriculum is the same.
We make sure it is. But, when it
comes to the values, the values around some of the principles, naturally there
is a difference there from the provincial curriculum. Our progress, what we stipulate is that it
has to be equal or better, not the same, taking into account the value
judgments that the Christian home schoolers want to have in place. Our progress report generally suggests quite
strongly that equivalent to, if not better, results are being achieved.
Ms. Friesen: But, the minister has no means of assessing
that or very little means of assessing that completion.
Mr. Manness: Generally, yes, but of course we still have
people in these schools. We still have
this one person we are talking about and some others who are going into many of
these homes and there are some conclusions reached. Yes, not that can be measured other than subjective,
but in a sense that we have confidence in him and we will have confidence in
the other regional people who will be joining this effort, if they continue to
bring back reports as to progress, equivalent to, we have to take that into
account.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The hour being 5 p.m., time for private
members' hour.
HEALTH
Madam Chairperson
(Louise Dacquay): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order.
This section of the Committee of Supply is dealing with the
Estimates for the Department of Health.
We are on item 2.(d)(1), page 83 of the Estimates manual, Healthy Child
Development.
Would the minister's staff please enter the Chamber.
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Madam Chairperson, yesterday, the minister
gave us some figures about the number of schools participating in the fluoride
treatment program. I wonder if the
minister might repeat those figures for us today or the number of participants,
or the percentage of participants of children or schools or divisions that are
participating in the fluoride, the prevention, the preventative program that
the minister referred to.
Hon. James McCrae
(Minister of Health): Madam Chairperson, the weekly fluoride rinse
program is offered to all rural school divisions. Dental health education is mandated as a
component of the
The number of schools involved in the weekly fluoride rinse
program is 175; 454 schools have been approached but 175 are
participating. There are 55,346 eligible
children in
The number of water treatment plants in
It should be noted that all 60 water plants participate in
the voluntary fluoridation monitoring program.
Mr. Chomiak: It appears therefore from the minister's
statistics that well less than half of the students eligible for the weekly
fluoride rinse program participate. Does
the minister have any idea of how many children of those eligible participated
prior to the government's change in the program last year?
Mr. McCrae: We can check, but those who have not
participated have opted, through their school divisions, not to participate.
Mr. Chomiak: I am given to believe that when the program
was in place, 80 to 90 percent of the children eligible participated in the
weekly fluoride rinse and its weekly preventative program, community based. Now it appears, since the government has cut
the funding to the program, less than half of those eligible are participating
in this preventative community‑based program. I am wondering if the minister has an
explanation for that.
Mr. McCrae: As I said previously, the option not to
participate is a local one. The
communities involved have made that determination. The province has offered the program. The communities have accepted to the extent
that I have set out.
Mr. Chomiak: Has the government done any epidemiological or
studies otherwise, or of a type, to see what the effect of the cancellation of
the program has had on the dental health of children in rural Manitoba, because
one of the reasons given I think initially for the elimination of the program
was the fact that people in rural Manitoba could take advantage of third‑party
insurance.
I am given to understand that only 20 to 30 percent of
children in rural and remote areas have third‑party dental insurance,
which means getting access to dental treatment is both difficult and expensive.
Mr. McCrae: It is too early in any event to take an
appropriate reading of the effect; however the prevention side of the program
is what we continue to support and encourage, and as I say, it is too early to have
a meaningful study.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, does the minister envision
the possibility that should it be determined through studies that access to
dental care has created some difficulty in rural Manitoba, that the
preventative program is not as extensive as it should be and that dental health
is deteriorating, that the government reconsider reinstating all or at least a
portion of the Children's Dental Health Program?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the program that was discontinued
was the treatment part of the program.
The prevention part of the program is still available for
communities. The treatment part of the
program never was available to residents of
We have been encouraging the Manitoba Dental Association
and the
* (1440)
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I am now going to turn my
attention to Healthy Child Development, sort of specifically.
I noticed both this year and last year in the Supplementary
Estimates that 16,000 children attended child health clinics. I wonder if the minister could just briefly
outline for me what these child health clinics are.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, child health clinics are
conducted by public health nurses throughout the province, and as discussed
with the honourable member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) yesterday, the public
health nurses of
Our public health nurses attempt to identify specific and
priority needs areas amongst the population and design their child health
clinics accordingly. They are involved,
as well, in immunization programs, particularly in areas where physicians are
not as readily available as elsewhere.
Really, the public health nurse in
Certainly, this is a week for us to observe and celebrate
and acknowledge those contributions.
I certainly join with the honourable member for
Crescentwood in the comments that she made, going all the way back to the Grey
Nuns and the Sisters of Miséricorde in the early part of our history, a
contribution that was made in bringing care to people in need of care in
Manitoba as an exemplary history.
Certainly, the activities of nurses in a contemporary
society in
I do not hesitate to agree with what the honourable member
for Crescentwood said because not only in my personal experience, but certainly
in the last number of months as Minister of Health, I have had many
opportunities to be reminded very, very clearly and graphically of the
continuing contribution of nurses.
I thank the honourable member for Kildonan for asking the
question because it points once again to the valued contribution made by public
health nurses employed by the Department of Health in carrying out these
healthy child clinics, which deal with all manner of issues that really only
are defined, to a large extent, by the need that is in the various communities
in Manitoba and they are able to tailor and design their program function to
the need that exists in a particular community.
I think the versatility of the public health nurse is
something that ought never to be taken for granted.
* (1450)
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, one of the reasons I asked
this question was I was trying to understand.
Two years ago in the Supplementary Estimates book, it indicates 20,000
children attended child health conferences and last year's book indicates
16,000 attended child health clinics.
This year, it says 16,000 children attended child health clinics. Is that one and the same? Is that something different? Has there been a different emphasis? I am just trying to get a handle on that.
Mr. McCrae: I think any reference to conferences or
clinics or classes are all basically the same reference, and the number of
children taking advantage or benefiting from those sessions fluctuates from
year to year. In recent years, there has
been no change in the complement of public health nurses in
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, we are looking forward
with great anticipation to the release of the report on Healthy Child
Development. The previous minister
outlined his vision for it last Estimates; I remember he went on at length one
evening in fact. I am personally aware
of a number of people on some of the committees, and certainly they are very
high quality, hardworking people. That
is not to say that, when the report comes out, we may find‑‑subject
to the report, we may have some criticism.
Nonetheless, that has happened on occasion. It has happened on occasion that we have
disagreed. We have found policy to not
fully meet our needs and expectations; nonetheless, we do look forward with a
good deal of anticipation towards that.
The impression that I have obtained about the committee and
the final report and the work that is being done is there is going to be an
emphasis on things like birthweight and assisting in healthier births for
people on lower income levels and things of that nature. Am I correct in that observation, or am I off
base?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the birthweight of a child
is one important matter that I think should be looked at, but it is only
one. I think the early and formative
stages of a child's life can have one very large impact on the rest of the
child's life. I know that from
experience in our own family, but I also know that from many, many other
experiences that I have had.
I had opportunity when I was Justice minister to attend a
conference in
The Head Start program conducted many years ago now in the
I dare say that in this country we have fallen a little
short in that area, and we need to address more of our attention to that
area. I think any study that would be
done would show that I am right about that.
I think studies already done have shown that I am right about that, and
any support that we can get from honourable members for programming directed at
that particular group in society, taking into account that many of these young
people live in poorer circumstances than the average. All kinds of emphasis should be placed on a
break for people at that particular age, and their parents need to take more
responsibility than they do. They do not
take enough responsibility. Some of
their local leaders do not take enough responsibility.
When I was at the conference, one person took offence when
I referred to the fact that many in
That is why so often I have pointed out my frustration in
trying to right the wrongs of 127 or so years of paternalism with respect to
aboriginal people in this country. For
some reason, we have not worked up enough courage to address those issues. I keep waiting, I keep trying, I keep
working. I tell the Minister responsible
for Native Affairs (Mr. Praznik), but I tell people like the member for The Pas
(Mr. Lathlin) too, and people like the former member for Rupertsland who has
now moved over to the Liberal Party and joined up with that group, Elijah
Harper.
I ask people like Elijah and people like the member for The
Pas to help get involved in the solution, instead of continuing the discussion,
debate, argument, finger pointing that has been going on for too many years in
this country. It is time we got behind
Ron Irwin in his efforts to put an end to this kind of stuff. I hope that is what he is attempting to do,
because if he is, he has my full support.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, we certainly have an
opportunity in this province, through the recommendations in the Aboriginal
Justice Inquiry, to move forward in several areas. I would hope that the government would
finally begin its work in that area.
With respect to the minister's comments, the whole question
of the Headstart Program has been one of the themes that I think I have echoed
over and over again in this Chamber, both when I was Education critic and
presently, as something that I think is long overdue.
In fact, I was a bit despondent because I attended a
discussion by Charlie Ferguson. I was
quite impressed. The only thing that
depressed me was that he said‑‑it depressed me, and it did not
depress me. I mean, he said that by the
age of two, if we have not gotten to the children, we have already lost them,
and I thought that was tragic.
Nonetheless, we certainly would support any initiatives in a Headstart
area and any initiatives to move.
I am not going to continue my general line of questioning
here because I think the minister has basically answered‑‑the
general direction that you are heading is what I would endorse. So in that regard, we look forward to the
report of the group.
My next question in this area is, I note that Supplies and
Services‑‑the total expenditure under this category is down roughly
$700,000. I think the bulk of it is from
Supplies and Services. I would assume
that most of that is from the Children's Dental Program, is that correct?
Mr. McCrae: Yes, the honourable member is correct.
Ms. Avis Gray
(Crescentwood): I just wanted to go back to a couple of
issues that came up yesterday. One was
related to the Bell‑Wade report, that the minister mentioned that it had
been contracted out to Ernst & Young, and the total cost of the report was
$230,000.
Does he have a breakdown as to what is included in that
$230,000?
Mr. McCrae: I do not today; however I will ask my department
people to obtain some information for me, so I can share it with the honourable
member.
Ms. Gray: Was that a tendered contract or
untendered? Is there an average fee or a
certain commission that Ernst & Young would ask in order to co‑ordinate
the contracting of, I am assuming, Dr. Wade and Mr. Bell, for that report?
Mr. McCrae: We will take note of the honourable member's
question and return with further information.
Ms. Gray: I thank the minister for looking into
that. I also had a question‑‑and
I know the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) had asked the other day about
chronic fatigue syndrome. Given that it
is May 12 and there is a proclamation today in
* (1500)
Mr. McCrae: We are aware of at least one CFS client in
Ms. Gray: I know there is at least one client who is
receiving that. In fact, one of the
clients has written the opposition members letters so that when we get into
Home Care, not necessarily today, he has given us permission to ask some
questions on his case‑‑Mr. Turner, who lives in Headingley.
But, in general, though, is this something‑‑there
is only one situation in the province? [interjection] That we are aware of,
okay. So there may be people who are
receiving home care, but we do not necessarily know that the diagnosis is
CFS. It could be other diagnoses or a
combination of.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, it could be that the CFS
sufferer suffers from other problems that also create a situation that calls
for the provision of Home Care services.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I was interested in the
minister's comments about prevention services directed to low‑income
families, and he talked about the formative years and even good nutrition and
healthy lifestyles.
I am wondering if the minister could tell us what specific
services is the department providing or funding other agencies to do that are
directly related to health prevention for low‑income families?
Mr. McCrae: In the course of our discussions, Madam Chairperson,
we have talked about public health nursing and we have talked about community
health centres. The community health
centres have a large target group which is lower income Manitobans. In the same way, our public health nurses
attempt to target and address their services to those areas where the need is
most acute. That target area or group is
low‑income Manitobans. Where the
need is, that is where we try to provide the services. That is very much a focus of our Healthy
Child strategy that we are working on.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, how many community health
clinics are there in
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, it is hard to give a
number because many facilities work as a public outreach centre as well as a
hospital, as well as a doctor's office and so on. In the city, though, there are, I think,
seven or eight community health centres and I guess it is a question of definition. I have been to some communities where their
total hospital, doctor's office, dentist's office operation looks very much
like a community health centre and operates that way. It operates as a team of people providing
services in the community.
It is hard to put a real number on it. I understand there is one that you could call
a community health centre at
Ms. Gray: With the community health centres that the
Department of Health directly funds, have the resources that are going to those
community health centres, at least those portions of the programs that would be
considered primary prevention, with the move to community‑based services,
have we seen an increase in their budget allocation from last year?
Mr. McCrae: It is not a question of looking at annual
budgets and increasing them more for community health centres than for other
areas. It is a question of asking
community health centres to take over programs and programs like primary
care. We see growth of community health
centres coming as a result of asking them to take over programs as opposed to
increasing the number of dollars they get on an automatic basis year after
year.
Ms. Gray: Then perhaps the minister can tell me if one
way to sometimes increase resources or provide more services is through
budgets. If that has not been done, how
have the services been increased?
Transferring a service from one agency to another is not an expansion of
a service; it is a transfer of a service.
What kinds of expansion of these community‑based health services
have some of these agencies been able to do that they did not do last year as
an example?
Mr. McCrae: I want to clear one thing up. We are talking about transferring to a large
extent. You see, we cannot continue the
spiral of spending in health care, so if we can redirect funding that we save
when we reduce the number of beds in a hospital that nobody is in anyway, if we
can take those dollars and spend them more appropriately in the community, that
is the vision we are working on. Now, it
does mean more for one and less for another.
That is true. But the global
budget, we just cannot see those global budgets‑‑[interjection]
Yes, and the honourable member is looking for examples. If she will just hold on one second I will
give her some.
* (1510)
Madam Chairperson, I will give the honourable member some
examples. For example, we have transferred
primary care from Health Sciences to the Health Action clinic; Diabetes
Education programming is happening at Youville Clinic and at about 11 other
sites in
I think sometimes when we talk about expanding program, it
depends where it is being expanded. It
can be in a community health centre or some other kind of centre as well. We have Women's Health at Youville. We have Street LINKS expanded at
The ones I mentioned, I think you will find them all
associated in one way or another with a community clinic operation, but there
are many, many initiatives happening in rural locations. We do not always describe them as community
health centres. When you are looking at
community options, you have to look at all of the mental health services that
are being expanded throughout the province as well.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, the programs that the
minister mentions, Street LINKS or Street Station and Primary Care and Diabetes
Education are all excellent community‑based programs, but they have been
around for a couple of years, so I do not see how that is an expansion. That is what my question is.
I know the minister talked about Street LINKS and now Street
Station the other day, and he talked about how they had expanded the hours so
that there is a more comprehensive service, if we consider hours expansion
that, and that the volume was not the same.
That is good.
Diabetes education in Youville Clinic and other women's health programs
are excellent, but they have all been under the purview of the department or
its funded agencies before. I guess my
question is, I do not see any expansion in these kinds of services, either in
more services and new community clinics or outreach that is reaching more
people. That is really my question.
Mr. McCrae: I agree with the honourable member that we
need to see expansion. We have seen
expansion in the past. The honourable
member is suggesting that we are not seeing expansion. I think we are having a little problem with
definition because we have talked about our antenatal home care program which
has provided community service, i.e., service in the home, to the extent that
3,101 patient days have been saved in our hospitals. That is fairly significant.
The postpartum referral guidelines‑‑now, this
is a hospital‑based service, I agree, but it has gone from zero hospitals
to five hospitals. Diabetes education
resource program in 1992‑93 served 1,179 new clients. We have all of those community‑based
mental health services. I do not need to
remind the honourable member about Support Services to Seniors. I could, but I do not think I need to with
the honourable member for Crescentwood.
I think though the honourable member's question is directed
at, what are you doing in the community health centre sense? What are you giving them to do? I have talked about some of those things, and
I see more new roles for community health centres in the future.
Here are some initiatives that are underway with respect to
community health centres. New roles for
community health centres with respect to‑‑one of these things I do
not even understand‑‑[interjection] Okay, it was the acronym. The Manitoba Association of Community Health
Centres has a role document which discusses the future roles of community
health centres.
We are looking at an aboriginal health and wellness
centre. We are looking at nurse‑managed
care, models for the future in
When we are talking about putting into place community
alternatives, you cannot forget things like crisis stabilization units. There have been 352 admissions. With respect to mobile crisis units, we have
moved from three to 11 staff members, and by the end of '93‑94 there were
1,151 contacts. With respect to self‑help
groups, three groups have increased support from the Department of Health. Housing and community supports for 140
individuals.
Of course, our Home Care program is growing so fast that we
cannot even‑‑the numbers just blur before us as they keep
climbing. We are up to 93 percent new
funding for Home Care services in the last six years; that includes adult day
clubs. I think I went over that. Within the 52 sites that we have in
In terms of dollars, adult day club, increased support for
that to the tune of nearly $2 million.
We have talked already about breast cancer screening; prenatal community
public health services‑‑that is in the area of nutrition; we talked
about that for another $440,000; prostate care.
* (1520)
Support Services to Seniors, that keeps coming up. It keeps coming up because it is so
significant. Maybe in a big city like
The Manitoba Mental Health acute care alternatives, $3
million being spent there. Of course,
Winnipeg Mental Health Child and Adolescent and Psychogeriatric Services,
another $774,000. Redirection to
community‑based health care services a total of $8,974,000. This is very significant, and I do not know
how you can really make the point that not much is happening in the community,
because a lot is happening. You have
never seen growth like this at any period in the past in
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I would imagine that the
minister and I would probably agree to disagree on some of these points. Some of the items he mentioned, such as nurse‑managed
centres and the aboriginal centre, my understanding is they are proposals and
they have not been implemented, or there are no dollars that have been
attached. As well, some of the service
he speaks of, such as child and adolescent, those are very needed services.
I was referring more to primary prevention as opposed to
secondary prevention or rehabilitation, but I think we will leave that as it is
because I think the minister and I could discuss this at length in terms of
what can be done or should be done.
I did want to ask one more question in this area in regard
to groups of children, the special needs children, the medically fragile
children in the school system. I know
there is a deputy minister's working group that was to look at a report and
then provide an implementation plan on sort of what was going to happen in
terms of who provides the services to these children in the school system. It was a joint committee, I believe, with
Health, Education and Family Services, and to a question I had asked the
Minister of Education (Mr. Manness) in the House in this past month, he
indicated that there should be something forthcoming by June.
I guess my question to the Minister of Health would
be: I am assuming, then, Health has come
to a determination as to what they see as their role in either providing
supports or services to these children in the school system. I am wondering if he could share with us what
Health sees as its role for these children.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chair, I think what the honourable
Minister of Education and Training was talking about was an exercise in role
clarification amongst the various departments, and he, as the member said, said
that we might have something to report on in June on the matter.
At this point, we are a partner with Education and with
Family Services, and we are very much a part of the process to define and
clarify those roles. It may be at the
end of the exercise that Health will play more of a leading role on these
special needs children issues. It
certainly has eluded resolution in the past, but perhaps we can make some
progress this summer.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, is that the minister's
polite, evasive way of telling me that he is not about to give me some
specifics on what exactly is going to happen so that we are going to have to
stay tuned?
Mr. McCrae: I always try to be polite, but I was not
trying to evade anything. I think that
if there is a group of people working on something and they are going to come
forward with something in June, then we should all be polite and wait until
June and see what we find out at that time.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I hope we do see that
because I know that the families involved with these children and the teachers
and administrators in the school system are very much concerned that we reach
some resolution because teachers do not feel qualified in a lot of instances to
be providing some of these health care needs to these children and yet feel
very strongly that children should have an opportunity to be integrated into
the classroom.
Just one final question.
When the minister was talking about primary care being moved to‑‑was
it the Health Action Centre? Does the
minister have statistics on the number of visits that would occur, that did
occur through primary health care and then, are there any updated statistics on
now how many people are going through the Health Action Centre?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, there are statistics and
we will provide them to the honourable member.
Madam Chairperson: Item 2.(d) Healthy Child Development (1)
Salaries and Employee Benefits $721,700‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $398,300‑‑pass; (3) External Agencies $89,900‑‑pass.
2.(e) Capital Planning (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits.
Ms. Gray: The member for Kildonan and I have agreed
that we will pass through this section and not ask questions until we get to
the point where we can actually look at the capital plans of the government.
Madam Chairperson: Item 2.(e) Capital Planning (1) Salaries and
Employee Benefits $239,100‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $120,200‑‑pass.
Resolution 21.2:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$13,675,900 for Health, Healthy Public Policy Programs for the fiscal year
ending the 31st day of March, 1995.
3. Continuing Care Programs (a) Administration.
Mr. Chomiak: I just want to indicate to the minister,
thank you. I received the copy of the W5
tape and acknowledge that.
I am just starting off by‑‑this area, I suspect
that I and the member for Crescentwood may have a couple of questions in this
particular area. At least in my line of
questioning I anticipate we will be jumping around quite a bit. It will be pretty hard to keep on the (a),
(b), (c), (d) line. I am wondering if
the minister has his staff here to deal with the whole area of 3(a)(b)(c) and
(d) because I think it is going to be hard to keep on the strict line within
this area. I am asking the minister if
he has his staff to deal with that.
Madam Chairperson: Is that the will of the committee? [agreed]
Mr. Chomiak: I thank the member for Roblin‑Russell
(Mr. Derkach) for his‑‑[interjection] Who had on his desk a report‑‑just
kidding. [interjection] It is an old line.
As a result of a constituency request I made to the
minister, the minister forwarded to me a document that is called Your Guide to the
Continuing Care Program. It is outlined
in red or maroon and contained within our policy guidelines. Is this the current policy? Is this the current standards with respect to
the Continuing Care Program?
* (1530)
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, what I sent to the
honourable member is what the program sends to new clients of the Home Care
program.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, on page 3 of this booklet,
it says under supplies and equipment, and I am quoting: when someone else is providing your care, the
basic supplies needed are made available free of charge. Walkers, bathing aids, lifts and other
equipment can be borrowed from the equipment pool.
Is that currently correct?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, as the honourable member
knows, certain low‑cost equipment is not covered under the Home Care
program and those kinds of issues are part of the assessment discussion that
goes on with new Home Care clients. So
the document that he is talking about is something that is clarified in those
face‑to‑face discussions between the program personnel and the
clients of the program.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I suspected that, but
actually that was not meant as a trick question. I actually thought there was maybe something I
did not understand.
I guess my next question then is, aside from that
particular issue, are there any other issues in this document that require that
kind of assessment, that kind of information for the clients? It is not reflected in this document. What is different? It is told to the clients it is not reflected
in this particular document since I guess this is the primary information
document that goes to patients and clients.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chair, the purpose of the document to
which the honourable member refers is to acquaint potential Home Care clients
with the kinds of services that are available, to give the potential client a
general idea of the kinds of services government provides under the
program. When it comes time to assess
the needs of the client, all those matters are discussed with those people who
sit down with the client to put together a care plan.
So the document is not a new document. Some policies of course have changed, and
that is the subject of discussion for the care planner, working together with
the client. So that is to give people a
general idea of what the Home Care program is all about.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I assume that the
individuals who do the assessing and the individuals who provide the information
to those clients or patients have documents or manuals that outline for them
what the criteria are.
I wonder if the minister would be prepared, and I
appreciate it may not be available today, but would he be prepared to table or
provide both the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) and me with copies of those
manuals of criteria so that we could understand the basis upon which those
decisions are made.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chair, policies can change over the
years, but the criteria that the program has been operating under has not
changed since‑‑oh, I do not know‑‑years and years. It is the same one that was in effect when
our government took office in 1988, and it has not changed. So I think the honourable member probably has
that. Have we not made that available to
him? I thought we had. There has been no change in the criteria over
the years.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I do not have that, so I
would like a copy if at all possible.
Also, surely there are updates and there is information provided to
those people who are doing the assessments that outline what the program is,
what is offered, what is not offered, et cetera. In fact, I know that they have those, and I
am wondering if those could be provided.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, we will take under
advisement the honourable member's question.
I understand that the staff of the program keep‑‑similar to,
I imagine, a Crown attorney's handbook, or a court reporter's manual or
whatever it happens to be, it is a great big thing‑‑and we will
take under advisement the honourable member's request for information. It has not changed for many years.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, before the member for
Kildonan continues, the minister said he will take under advisement this thick
manual. I think the one piece of the
manual that we are the most interested in is the piece‑‑because
this deals with continuing care and personal care home applications, et cetera‑‑the
piece we are really interested in is the part about assessments and how one
receives home support services and home care attendant services, that piece of
receiving home care in your home, who is eligible for short‑term care
with VON, et cetera. I think that is the
piece that we are most interested in, if that helps the minister make the
decision.
Mr. McCrae: I think I know what the honourable member is
talking about with regard to criteria, guidelines, eligibility and all of
that. Subject to my having a quick look
at it again, I will be making that available to honourable members.
Mr. Chomiak: Thank you, Madam Chairperson, I will look
forward to receiving those documents and reviewing it.
We might as well get right into the Home Care budget.
* (1540)
Mr. McCrae: Great.
Mr. Chomiak: The minister says great. I look forward to some discussion on that
particular budget. Can the minister
break down for me within that budget, firstly, what its component parts are,
the $75,973,500, how much of that is self‑managed care, how much of that
is allocated to each aspect of the program, and just generally, how much is
allocated to the Winnipeg region, how much is allocated outside of Winnipeg, et
cetera?
Mr. McCrae: I am very pleased to have finally arrived at
this part of the Estimates for the Health department because it is with
pleasure that I am able to put on the record the support of this government to
the Home Care program over the years.
The honourable members will know the Home Care program
began in 1974‑75 without an actual voted allocation. That year, $1.75 million was spent on home
care in
In 1975‑76, there was a voted allocation for Home
Care that year of $4.5 million, and the program spent $4.7 million. That year, there were 12,800 people served
under the program, and the average cost per person served was $370.32.
The program has grown significantly over the years and that
is because I am satisfied that governments of those earlier days could see that
people were able to be cared for at home, and governments between '75 and '87‑88,
I am sure, could see the value of contributing to a program like Home Care.
I see in some years there were increases, and actually, in
some years at a time when there was very significant growth in the economy,
there were actual cuts to the program, but that is history, I suppose.
Madam Chairperson, I began to discuss the level of support
for this program in 1975‑76, and over the years between '75 and '76, the
program grew. For example, in 1976‑77,
there were 15,911 people served under the program. In any event, Home Care Assistance since
1988, when this government took office, to today has grown to the tune of some
93 percent in just six short years. As
honourable members know, growth in revenues has not been anywhere near what it
was in the '70s and '80s, and I think that is pretty significant to know.
The honourable member asked about Home Care Assistance for
the
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister tell us what was spent last
year in the
Mr. McCrae: That information is going to be made
available to me shortly.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, the Home Care Assistance
Detail indicates $52,252.7 will be spent on Direct Service Workers this year,
that is '94‑95. Can the minister
please give us a breakdown as to where it is anticipated that money will be
spent?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the honourable member
refers, I guess, on page 57 of the Supplementary Information, Schedule 8, to a
figure for Direct Service Workers. I
think he said $52,000. I think he meant
$52 million to be spent on Direct Service Workers. Estimates of expenditure from last year were
$49,835,000. All that money is salaries
and benefits for Direct Service Workers.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I am aware that is
salaries and benefits. I wonder if the
minister can break it down by category of worker, that is, attendant care and
home support services and self‑managed care, if that is where self‑managed
care comes out of.
Mr. McCrae: The total amount for self‑managed care
for '93‑94 was $2 million. It
comes out of this total expenditures line.
It does not come out of this Direct Service Workers line.
Mr. Chomiak: So the minister said $2 million for self‑managed
care in '93‑94. How much is being
budgeted for self‑managed care to '94‑95?
* (1550)
Mr. McCrae: I beg your pardon, Madam Chairperson; I beg
the honourable member's pardon. I was
incorrect when I said $2 million; $2 million is for '94‑95. It was half a million for '93‑94. Manitoba Health has received approval, and we
have announced in our throne speech that we want to expand the current pilot
project, which involves up to 30 clients in
I had the pleasure again today to meet with the advisory
committee made up of self‑managers.
It was a very positive and pleasant experience for me this morning, as
we look to a future that sees the self‑managed care project grow and
expand and provide a greater quality of life and empowerment to people in the
We do need to enlist the support of honourable members for
this expansion, because the federal government is a partner in the provision of
services through the Canada Assistance program.
This is important, because I am going to be asking the honourable member
for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray), especially, to help me with‑‑[interjection]
Sorry? [interjection] I cannot hear you.
Not just to help me but to help everybody who wants to see this program
expanded.
The federal government, certainly at the officials level,
at this point, has taken the position that self‑managed care is not
necessarily something they can support under the Canada Assistance Plan. We need their help, because these programs
are so very important to us and so very important to the people who want to self‑manage.
So I will be approaching the honourable member for
Crescentwood and the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), as well, for
their active and written support for self‑managed care because we need
that, as I address the issue with Lloyd Axworthy and some of my friends in the
Liberal Party, people like Reg Alcock and others that‑‑you know, I
think we voted for, Manitobans elected 12 of 14 members of Parliament.
An Honourable Member: Are you saying that you voted for us?
Mr. McCrae: I will tell you someday. The governing party in
This is an extremely important thing to the people
involved. You would only have to meet
with them and talk with them to know what they missed before they got to be
part of this program. The program, as I
said, involves up to 30 clients in
Expansion is subject to confirmation from the federal
government. The cost‑sharing under
the Canada Assistance Plan or an acceptable alternative cost‑sharing
arrangement will be maintained for eligible program participants. Existing project participants will have their
contracts renewed for 1994‑95, but in order for us to get into contracts
with the other 90, we need to have the federal people onside.
I know Reggie Alcock.
I have worked with him on a number of projects over the years. I just know that he is going to try and help
us. Maybe it is a red‑tape issue,
I am sure it is, because I cannot see the federal Liberal caucus being against
this program. I think they will bend
every effort to help us, and I look forward to asking them for their support. I am going to be asking both honourable
members, on behalf of their caucuses, to provide written support for self‑management
in
The proposal to expand the self‑managed care option
within the Home Care program has been the subject, as I said, of reference in
the throne speech here for this session.
That came after successful completion of the two‑year pilot
project. That pilot project was
carefully analyzed and evaluated, and there was a positive evaluation.
Five of the existing clients are over the age of 65. The self‑management option should also
include clients who are over 65, should they choose to apply and meet the
eligibility criteria. I mean, sometimes
we maybe make the observation that people over 65 cannot make their own
decisions, and that is a little bit what is wrong with our Home Care program. One of the things that is wrong with it is
that we are just a little bit paternalistic in our approach, that we know what
is best for you, your views are not important enough.
I think that might be part of the reason that home care has
been the subject of so much public discussion in the last year or so. The program is not seen to be flexible
enough, and we need to do things to make the program more flexible, things like
pilot projects. For example, the
So far the clients of that pilot project have made positive
comments about service improvements and so on.
If our own government‑run program, for all of our efforts, is not
flexible enough, because maybe we have to pay overtime on weekends or whatever
it happens to be, we have to look at every option we can imagine, that we can
think of, to provide flexible, user‑friendly, patient‑oriented
service, not service‑provider oriented but patient‑oriented
service, something that puts the customer first.
As I say, I look forward to the evaluation report with
respect to that project at
It is not good enough‑‑and this may be a
problem for the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), because he thinks that lots
of people should be in hospitals, even though they should not be. That may be a bit of a stumbling block for
the member for Kildonan, but‑‑
Mr. Chomiak: Just a point of clarification. I just wonder if the minister can remember
what question I asked him on this particular, if he can remember it, because he
has gone on for so long, and I cannot even recall what question I asked the
minister. Perhaps he can clarify what
question he is answering.
* (1600)
Mr. McCrae: I did not hear what the honourable member
said. Would he mind repeating himself?
Mr. Chomiak: I wonder if the minister could just advise me
what question he was answering, because, now that I look at my notes, I believe
my question was, could you please outline for us what the expenditures of $52
million, et cetera, what the breakdown is between home support workers,
attendant care, et cetera? That was the
question that I asked the minister.
Mr. McCrae: Yes, Madam Chairperson, I know what the
honourable member asked, and I am going to answer that question. But I needed to remind him and his colleagues
in the House of the value that we place on the Home Care program‑‑the
value we place on the self‑managed program‑‑and the
importance of making our programming more flexible, because we are not serving
ourselves. We are not serving the
bureaucracy. We are not serving the
unions. We are serving clients,
patients, our fellow Manitobans. I
wanted to make sure that I underlined those things for the honourable member.
I am going to be looking for his written support for the
self‑managed program so that we can take that and show it to the federal
government so that they will know that we are not just out here crying in the
wilderness, looking for a special deal or something. We need the support of the New Democratic
Party, we need the support of the Liberal Party, to make sure that our members
of Parliament will see their way clear to recommend support for the self‑managed
care program.
I wanted also to make sure the record was very clear about
the support that we have made available for the overall Home Care Assistance
program in
Well, from that time, expenditure for the Home Care Assistance
program has grown right up to $69 million this fiscal year. That is very, very significant expenditure
increases, and units of service and number of people served have been growing
over the years in Manitoba, and that demonstrates that the shift we keep
talking about from acute care to community care is indeed happening despite the
leapings and protestations of some of the honourable members opposite to the
contrary. It is just not true what they
are saying.
Now, the honourable member asked about home care attendants
and home support workers and LPNs and RPNs, and these numbers are approximate
because, as you know, you attempt to project what the demand is going to be and
so on. This does not include benefits;
this is salaries only, for people on the government payroll.
The home care attendants we expect to be earning
$26,966,000 in 1994‑95. I can
hardly believe the magnitude of that, Madam Chairperson. Can you imagine, nearly $27 million spent on
salaries for home care attendants. [interjection] Oh, I am sorry, I understated
the amount of money going to home care attendants. I apologize to you and to all of the members,
all 57 members of the House. Add on to
that $26.9 million another $1.67 million for salaries for home care attendants.
For home support workers, $8.95 million; LPNs, $1.288
million and registered nurses $3.044 million.
These are staggering figures, and they reflect a very significant
increase in the government's commitment for support services in the community
for people so they can have a quality of life, so they can also be spared the
necessity of staying in a hospital longer than they need to.
Now, there are some people in this place and in other
places in
I may have mentioned this before, Madam Chairperson, but it
bears repeating, that when you are putting all of this emphasis on the
community and the care provided in the community, then you do create a vacancy,
if you like, in the hospitals.
I guess they created so many vacancies in
The more you look at these numbers, the more staggering
they appear to me. I do not think some
people realize how much increase in spending‑‑from $34 million all
the way up to nearly $70 million for Home Care Assistance in
Now, I think that in the course of this response, I have actually
responded to the specifics of the honourable member's question, but I should
not really fail to remind him from time to time of the fallacy of adhering to
an approach which if followed would positively choke our health care system to
death. We would not have one anymore.
That is not a prospect I am prepared to embrace, like
honourable members in the New Democratic Party in
Point of Order
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, of what relevance is an
individual who is a consultant in another province? Of what relevance whatsoever is it to my
question to the minister to outline the expenditures for 1994‑95 related
to the Home Care Assistance?
* (1610)
I appreciate the fact that the minister is sensitive on
this issue, but that does not justify his thin political skin just because he
is sensitive on the issue, of going completely irrelevant and off topic. Members of this Chamber want this
information. The minister goes off on
tangents that are so irrelevant it defies logic how an individual could go off
on such a tangent. I am astounded that
the minister would go on and on.
I ask you to call the minister to order to answer the
questions and not deal with completely irrelevant issues. He is wasting your time, the committee's
time, by doing that, Madam Chairperson.
Mr. McCrae: I am trying not to be irrelevant. The honourable member is asking about Home
Care and Home Care Assistance. It is
extremely important to us in
The issue is relevance.
That is the issue of the point of order being raised, and the honourable
member wants to know what the relevance is.
I am trying to tell the honourable member what the relevance is and tell
the Chair and everybody else who will listen. [interjection] Okay, the
relevance is‑‑[interjection]
Madam Chairperson: Order, please.
Mr. McCrae: Now, you are getting me distracted again.
The relevance of all of this, Madam Chairperson, is that we
need to demonstrate for the honourable member that there is a shift going on, a
shift that is happening in a phased and planned way, a way that provides
appropriate care for people in the community as we are able to make capacity
available in the hospitals, capacity for people who should be in the
hospital. Even then, there is gong to be
excess capacity, which will result in closure of beds in hospitals, but the
opening up of new services in the community.
That is the plan. It is a plan
with which we have unanimous agreement.
The only thing I wonder about is, how can you agree with
the plan and then be so very disagreeable every step that you take on your way
to the achievement of that plan? That is
what I have to ask the honourable member, and this is what the relevance
is. That is what the plan is about. I mean, we ought to get with the plan here,
and the honourable member should get with the plan, but all he ever does is get
up and raise a point of order about relevance.
Now, I think the point of order ought to be resolved in my favour
on this occasion, Madam Chairperson. I
lose a fair amount of them, I agree, but on this particular occasion, I have
amply demonstrated in my humble submission that I have been relevant in my
responses.
Madam Chairperson: I thank all honourable members for their
advice, and I would encourage all members to continue to be as relevant as
possible.
* * *
Mr. McCrae: I will attempt to be relevant, as maybe I
have not succeeded in my attempts in the past, but I will keep on trying.
The honourable member asked a question. I gave an answer. I embellished it a little bit, I agree, to
try to make the point that the shift we keep talking about is happening. It is happening safely, and it is happening
in a way that respects the dignity and the needs of our fellow Manitobans.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, a long, long time ago,
when the minister started giving me these figures, he indicated $26,966,000,
and then he said, add to that, one million point something else. Can he give me that figure again? That is for attendant care.
Mr. McCrae: Home care attendants in '94‑95, the
total is $28,636,000.
Mr. Chomiak: I wonder if the minister could give us the
corresponding figures for last year?
Mr. McCrae: As I said, the $28,636,000 is
approximate. We do not have the actual
for last year. We will tabulate it and
give it to him at the next occasion.
Mr. Chomiak: Just for clarification now, the $2 million
that is going to go to self‑managed care does not come out of the line
Direct Service Workers, rather it comes out of the total appropriation of
$75,973 for Home Care.
Mr. McCrae: It is true, Madam Chair, that it does not
come from the Direct Service Workers; it comes from the total. The reason is that the self‑manager does
not have to be told who is going to provide the service.
You see, that is one of the things that may be wrong with
our Home Care program. I have heard
complaints from clients that they do not get along very well with their care
provider. In some cases I think our care
providers, because of the nature of their work, have to be trained to be very
patient and understanding of people in their circumstances.
But under the self‑managed care model, that is
exactly what it is. You manage your
care, you decide who comes to look after you and you make your arrangements
with that person. You can pay union
rates or not pay union rates. It is up
to you as the client of the service, the person who receives the service. You make the decision about who comes to help
you and when.
I think that is very important too. We need, as a Home Care program, to try to be
as flexible as we can. I think that we
are in the process of making improvements to make our service more flexible,
but self‑managed care provides, perhaps, us, our own program, an
opportunity to learn from the self‑managed side of it. We are provided with an opportunity to learn,
and maybe we can learn something from the We Care service provision at Seven
Oaks. I think there might be some things
we can learn there in terms of what we have been doing in the past and what we
could do better.
I think the best way to improve service is to acknowledge
that it needs improving. Just by giving
it more money is not enough. I am satisfied
of that because we have certainly put enough money into home care, well, into
health care generally. If you look at
the total budget for health care of $1.85 billion, you see how that has grown
over the years. All I hear in this House
is how terrible our health care system is from honourable members in the New
Democratic Party, and I say to myself, well, I guess if I threw more money at
it, I could make it even more terrible.
* (1620)
We have sort of changed our approach, because we know that
if things are as bad as the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) would
have us believe, if we could find another few billion dollars, we could make it
so much worse for our fellow Manitobans.
Well, that is a twisted, perverted kind of thinking that I will not
associate myself with, because we have found that throwing money at problems‑‑all
that does is create more programs for the member for Kildonan to pick apart and
to be critical of.
So we are learning to spend smarter. We think that is the only approach that is
going to leave us with an affordable and sustainable health care system in the
future.
Even so, in home care, because of changes in hospitals,
because of changing technology in terms of operative procedures, length of stay
is much shorter and we can use the services of home care more, and we are. Even in the home care system, though,
technology changes as well, and we can find efficiencies even in the Home Care
program. We should do that and make
those changes because every dollar spent ought to be the smartest dollar that
we can find, because if we are going to keep spending the way we have in past
decades in this country, our health system is going to be in danger indeed.
Except for the election of this government in 1988, the
health system in
An Honourable Member: How many?
Mr. McCrae: Fifty‑two hospitals, not beds, full
hospitals.
When you think things are looking a little rough in
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister outline how many attendant
persons we are talking about, how many support workers, how many LPNs and how
many RNs both this fiscal year that we are dealing with and the last one?
Mr. McCrae: While our staff investigate this question, I
would like to get the honourable member's support for a couple of other things
while I am at it. I am pleased that the
honourable member supports the self‑managed care program, and I look
forward to his support in my dealings with the federal authority, because that
is support that we are going to need.
I also want to know if the honourable member is supportive
of the following: When a home care
attendant arrives to provide service to a Home Care recipient and there is some
other need apparent, would it be the honourable member's position that the home
care attendant, should there be time available, provide that service while he
or she is there anyway?
* (1630)
Point of Order
Mr. McCrae: On a point of order, Madam Chairperson, I do
not know about anybody else, what they are all doing, but I am waiting for the member
for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) to answer my question. [interjection] Yes, I asked
him a question and I am waiting for him to answer.
* * *
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I will just take this
opportunity to jump in.
I am sorry, I was a little confused on the minister's
answer, and it is probably because I was not listening, but could he be patient
and for my benefit tell me again where the dollars for the self‑managed
care project‑‑which line it is coming out of?
Mr. McCrae: If the honourable member looks on page 57 of
the Supplementary Information, Schedule 8 Supplies and Services, '94‑95,
$14,522,700, it is from that number that the $2 million will come for the self‑managed
care program.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, if that amount of money
has increased from $.5 million to $2 million, then there must be a decrease in
other areas of Supplies and Services.
Could the minister tell us what that is in?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, I think some further
elucidation is required here for the honourable member. I know she might not have heard my last
answer, because she was not listening; that happens from time to time. I have a tendency sometimes to‑‑I
can put a whole hall to sleep in five minutes flat, if I put my mind to it, and
I can empty a hall in two minutes flat sometimes, depending on the
circumstances.
I think the best way to respond is by saying that Home Care
services take a number of forms, and a number of services are provided. For us to get into this numbers game is going
to be problematic for everybody. I think
if you look at the bottom line, you will see that year over year we have
significantly increased funding for home care.
Last year, even though we increased funding by a million dollars for
home care and took money out from the cleaning and laundry aspect, honourable
members tried to make the point that there was a cut in home care.
There was a cut here, and there were increases there, Madam
Chairperson. Look at the bottom
line. The case is there, the case is
made, and the case is made in these estimates too, that you will see
differences in levels of spending in this area or that area, depending on the
needs of the clients. We are putting the
clients first and foremost, and we are asking for support from all honourable
members to do the same thing.
You will see changes and shifts in service requirements,
and therefore you will see changes and shifts in service delivery. You will see, I hope, staff of the Home Care
program putting in the whole hour, when there is an hour block of time to spend
with Mrs. Jones or Mr. Jones. That whole
hour gets spent there in delivering service.
I have heard stories from the Mrs. Joneses of
I do not know who that was or anything like that, but I
have also heard stories that in one apartment building in the city of Winnipeg,
there are some 23 providers of home care to about, now let me get this right, a
large number of providers for a relatively large number of recipients in one
block. The fact is, why do we have so
many people coming and going? That is a
co‑ordination issue that needs to be addressed. One woman asks me: I live in Transcona; why does my care
provider come from Charleswood and charge for the mileage? So you might see a cut in the budget for
mileage somewhere along the line, I do not know, but you might as well try to
co‑ordinate these things and spend the dollars more wisely.
I am not going to get into that kind of a discussion with
either honourable member here, because in a budget where you see an increase in
spending for home care, what you see is an increase in spending for home care;
you are going to see an increase in service, and you are going to see more
appropriate services. You are going to
see the people receiving services so they do not have to stay in hospitals so
long. That is one point.
You are going to see elderly people who will enjoy a better
quality of life because of home care.
When I think of a 93 percent increase over six years, all I see there is
commitment.
Ms. Gray: I am making the assumption that the Minister
of Health misinterpreted what my question was.
When we go back to the last year's Estimates, and I have my rough copies
in front of me, not the Hansard, but the former Minister of Health was able to
actually provide us with a lot of information as to the services that were
provided through Home Care. He broke
that down for '92‑93 and '93‑94 into the various categories of
care, home support workers, home care attendants, overnight/daily, registered
nurses and LPNs. He told us the number
of persons per month that were serviced.
There were some decreases, and he was able to show us why there were
those decreases or why there were increases in some cases, as there were with
home care attendants.
That is the kind of information that I would find useful
today. I am not sure if that really is
my next question and, again, I would ask the minister, in Supplies and
Services, if he could break down for us what constitutes the categories under
Supplies and Services and what would the breakdown of amounts be?
Mr. McCrae: The member referred to last year and the
helpful information made available by my predecessor. I will look at the format of the way that was
done last year, ask my staff to do so too, and we will consider whether we will
proceed that way this year or not. I
will discuss this further with the honourable member, no doubt.
(Mr. Gerry McAlpine, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)
The point that I wanted to make is that, as I made
yesterday, in dealing with the issue of the so‑called $100 million being
taken out of hospital budgets over the next three years, that is a misleading
approach that was taken by my colleagues in the New Democratic Party yesterday,
a speculative approach.
It is something that they did when they were in government
and we are doing when we are in government.
That is looking at multi‑‑well, maybe they did not. Maybe they did not do multiyear budgeting,
but we certainly are looking at the opportunities for efficiency that can be
made, and to start putting numbers on it like the members did yesterday for the
clear purpose only of scaring people, I am not going to get into that.
I will consider how best to put this information before the
honourable member. I want to answer her
questions and give her all the information that she feels she needs.
I am more interested, however, in the mail that I get and
how a number of home care issues get resolved on a week‑in, week‑out
basis by Home Care co‑ordinators and the work that they do and resource
co‑ordinators and the work that they do.
They try very hard to match services to the needs of clients. They try to work with the clients. They do their best. Sometimes even that is not enough to
alleviate the pain that a client might be suffering or to solve a difference of
opinion. In order to solve differences
of opinion, we need to provide clients with some form of comfort with respect
to an independent party having a look at their circumstances. I am speaking of our plans to put into
operation an appeal panel to deal with client complaints with respect to Home
Care service delivery.
I am interested in some of the complaints that I get and,
frankly, some of the expectations people have for a Home Care program which did
not exist 20 years ago and today is being funded to the tune of $69
million. I know that we have many, many
dedicated home care attendants, home support workers, licensed practical nurses
and registered nurses working in the government‑run program. I also know that we are trying to build as
much flexibility as we can for those clients of Home Care services.
Sometimes disputes arise.
I think sometimes it does not wear very well with the public when
members like the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) take a simple and honest
difference of opinion between a client and the program and make that into some
kind of a cause celèbre that points in certain directions. That approach, I am grateful, is not the
approach used by the Liberal Party in this place, because I think they quit
trying to scare people years and years ago when they realized the reality of
government and the reality of honestly delivering service.
* (1640)
Some of these nicer comments never, never applied to New
Democrats. I was talking about this to
my daughter last night and talking about New Democrats and trying very hard to
leave my daughter to make her own decisions, but I know my bias showed when I
was talking about these matters with my daughter. I just cannot help myself. It is hard for me to be unbiased when it comes
to a discussion on New Democratic political morality and stuff like that.
It is really hard for me.
My colleague the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), the dean of the
Legislature, the one best able to give advice about these matters, suggests I should
try harder, and I will continue to do that.
Advice coming from a person like that ought to be listened to, and I
will try harder to understand what it is that makes New Democrats tick, but I
think what it is, it is a problem in their make‑up that says the whole
world owes me a living. I think that is
what it is with New Democrats that I do not have to put anything in, I can just
take out all my life. It is Robin Hood
gone amuck; that is what it is, Mr. Acting Chairperson. There is a problem with the New Democrats,
and the reason that they have not solved their problem is they have never
acknowledged that they have problems and therein lies the problem.
I have recognized we have problems in our health system,
and by making that recognition and that acknowledgement, then I will be able to
do something to fix some of the shortcomings of our health system. It is a health system that is changing, and
obviously Home Care program is going to have growing pains. When you see the kind of growth that it has
had, no doubt there are going to be problems associated with it. We have a good team of people working for the
Home Care program, and they are trying their best to satisfy the demands of the
clients of the program. I am going to
continue to work with them and try to provide them with the supports they need
to make sure that our clients can enjoy a higher quality of life than they
would enjoy if we followed NDP policy, which would be to destroy the Home Care
program. I refuse to play that game with
honourable members of the New Democratic Party.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I am still asking the
question under Supplies and Services, what the various breakdown is of dollars,
which I am sure the minister must have.
When I look at last year's Estimates, my notes tell me that Supplies and
Services includes VON and hospital co‑ordinated supplies. I do not know if that has changed or not or
if the minister can really break down the figures.
Surely the Minister of Health has faith in me that, when we
look at these numbers and put them into context, we are not doing this to find
technical decreases where we can stand up and rant and rave and say the program
is falling apart. For me, particularly
because I was involved in the program, it gives me a better sense of where we
are going with home care.
Mr. McCrae: I have asked staff to provide me with a
further breakdown of these numbers, and I will share with the honourable member
information that I can share with her about a further breakdown of these numbers.
Ms. Gray: Some of the other figures that we discussed
in last year's Estimates included just in simple numbers of where we were with
staff: who were direct service workers
numbers‑‑even though they are casual staff, we certainly know how
many are on the payroll; the number of LPNs and number of RNs, and a bit of a
breakdown of that compared to rural and urban.
I would ask the Minister of Health, and I do not know if he
has this information in this section or not, but in terms of the overall Continuing
Care Program, how many hospital co‑ordinators do we currently have? Have there been any changes in that in terms
of the number of home care hospital co‑ordinators that we have? And have there been any changes to that
program activity?
Mr. McCrae: I am almost like one question behind all the
time here. I have an answer to the
honourable member's previous question, and then maybe we will catch up here
yet.
With respect to the Home Care program, direct service
workers employed in the program as of April 1994: within the Winnipeg Region, there are 934
Home Care assistants, 552 home support workers, 45 registered nurses, and 27
licensed practical nurses.
In the Westman area there are 287 home care attendants, 75
home support workers, 54 registered nurses, and 16 licensed practical nurses.
In the Eastman area there are 251 home care attendants,
nine home support workers, 29 registered nurses, and two licensed practical
nurses.
In Central there are 347 home care attendants, eight home
support workers, 58 registered nurses, and 32 licensed practical nurses.
In Interlake there are 249 home care attendants, 41 home
support workers, 46 registered nurses, and four licensed practical nurses.
In Parklands there are 189 home care attendants, 41 home
support workers, 24 registered nurses, and 13 licensed practical nurses.
In
In Thompson there are 23 home care attendants, 37 home
support workers, three registered nurses, and six licensed practical nurses.
With respect to home care co‑ordinators at hospitals,
we think there are 23 or 24; we will get an exact number for the honourable
member.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Acting Chairperson, it is interesting to
note, as the minister is going through the figures, that when you look at the
Central region, the number of home support workers, it is eight‑‑virtually
nil. I am making the assumption‑‑and
perhaps the minister can confirm or clarify that‑‑is there a more
sophisticated or more extensive Support Services to Seniors in the
Central? It is interesting that the
number of home support workers are very, very few‑‑eight workers to
cover an entire region. One would assume
that a lot of those kinds of needs are being delivered elsewhere, whereas you
even look at Westman, which has fewer home care attendants than Central but 75
home support workers.
Mr. McCrae: In the Central area we have 38 Support
Services to Seniors projects‑‑the honourable member does not want
me today, I take it, to go through the list of all 38‑‑compared
with 25 in Eastman, 27 in Interlake, 14 in Parklands, 38 in Westman, 38 in
Winnipeg. Actually, that is on the
higher end of the scale when it comes to the number of Support Services to
Seniors projects. In the Central region
there is a total of 38 and that may account for the smaller number of home
support workers.
Ms. Gray: Just out of curiosity, if the minister knows,
with only eight home support workers in Central, are they at an apartment block
in the town of
* (1650)
Mr. McCrae: We would have to check to get clarity to
that. I think there is some action
happening. You will recall the question
that I asked the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) to answer and he would not
answer. That had to do with asking home
care attendants to do a greater variety of services. A lot of those are because the home support
worker traditionally, if there is such a thing with this program, did a lot of
those things, and home care attendants can do them, so that has been
happening. I think that may account for
larger numbers representing the home care attendants and the smaller numbers
representing the home support workers.
Ms. Gray: So are we moving towards then using home care
attendants to do some of the housekeeping tasks that traditionally you might
have sent in a different person to do?
Is that sort of a change in direction?
Mr. McCrae: Yes, in a word. We want clients to have some continuity of
service. We see that if the home care
attendant is able to do these various functions, then that ought to happen so
there is a higher level of quality and perceived quality on the part of the
client and fewer people frankly coming through a client's home.
I think that makes sense, and I support that. It was that area I was asking the member for
Kildonan to answer, and it does not surprise me that he did not want to answer.
Ms. Gray: In terms of that movement, because the home
care attendants and home support workers are unionized, has there been any
difficulties with the unions in terms of changing those kinds of duties?
Mr. McCrae: This is not a union issue. There has not been any problems that I am
aware of. This is not a union concern
apparently.
(Madam Chairperson in the Chair)
Ms. Gray: I am sorry I am jumping from subject to
subject, but that reminds me of another question. Perhaps the minister can answer in regard to
the self‑managed care project.
Some of the individuals who are interested in, not necessarily being on
the self‑managed care, but advocates‑‑Evan Burns, I am sure
the minister is aware of that young man who has been very involved in the
Manitoba Home Care Coalition.
I heard someone say he was a former Tory. I think maybe he is apolitical, but I think
the one thing about Evan, I would hope that the minister would agree, he seems
to be very much interested in working with the government and all political
parties for the good of individuals out there.
I give him credit for that. But
he had indicated to me, in a meeting with Peter Olfert, that he felt that the
MGEU had real concerns about the self‑managed care and were not
supportive. I am wondering if the
minister has been made aware of concerns that the union has about a self‑managed
care project being expanded?
Mr. McCrae: I am very acquainted with Evan Burns, and I
appreciate what the honourable member said about him because I think she is
probably right. I do not know if he is a
Tory or what he is. He seems to be very
genuine, and he is very genuine in his concern for people in
I do have the expression from the member for Kildonan. He says he supports self‑managed care
and then wants to change the subject very quickly. I met with Peter Olfert on this and other
topics, and I remember discussing this.
I do not recall Peter making his views clear on whether he is a big
advocate of this kind of higher quality and empowerment. He did not say one way or another. Maybe we should be asking him more directly
than I have.
I kind of said a few things about it and sort of just
waited to hear what his response was. I
could not divine from anything he said that he was enthusiastic in his support
for self‑managed care or supportive at all. So it would be interesting to know if Peter
Olfert is indeed supportive of self‑managed care.
I think it is nice to know that the member for
To the extent that we can do that, we are going to move in
that direction, but we do need the support of all parties in this House as we
deal with the federal authorities, and I have said already that I will be
looking for the honourable member's support.
I know that her influence amongst some of these people is probably a
little greater than my own, and I would ask for her help because I genuinely
feel, like Evan Burns, that this is an area where we should move and should
move in a totally nonpartisan way.
Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I am glad the minister
reminded me about the self‑managed care and some of the current
negotiations with the federal government and looking at the Canada Assistance
Plan, because I did make a note of talking to my federal colleagues to see
where that is at or what the position is.
I would hope, as the minister indicated, that it may be something that
is related to red tape that could be eliminated so that we can move something
through the bureaucracy for the good of a project and for Manitobans. We should all be working towards that goal.
One of the issues that was brought forward last year in the
Estimates was a concern obviously from a number of‑‑particularly
home support workers, about reduction of hours.
I know, and I recognize as do they, that most of them are employed on a
casual basis so there is not a guarantee of hours, but oftentimes in the past
there was a lot of work for people, almost could be full‑time work.
I am wondering if the department has any statistics on
average number of hours for home support workers and home care attendants and
if there has been any shift in that in the last couple of years.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, I think the information
the honourable member is looking for on this one is a little bit difficult to
put together in terms of the search we would have to do through records. I do not think there are very many fewer
people involved, but I understand that some have fewer hours. I would think that some will have more hours.
What has been happening, I think, with defining need and
matching it to service delivery, is that some people are getting more service
than they used to get, some are getting less, and some that are getting less is
based on the fact that they are getting better, or they have been reassessed
and their condition is such that they do not need the level of service they
have been getting. That happens. Now some people will take that and use that
as an example of all the terrible problems that we have. I will readily acknowledge that those who
need more care, get more care; those who need less care, will get less
care. There is the odd time a dispute
will arise about that, but in terms of the number of hours of each different
kind of care provider, that information is not so readily available.
Madam Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being 5 p.m. and time for private
members' hour, committee rise.
Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
Madam Deputy Speaker
(Louise Dacquay): The hour being 5 p.m., time for private
members' hour.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
Res. 7‑‑North American Commission
for Environmental Co‑operation O ffice
Mr. Gerry McAlpine
(Sturgeon Creek): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the
honourable Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that
WHEREAS the North American agreement on environmental co‑operation
calls for an environmental centre to be established in
WHEREAS
WHEREAS Winnipeg has been Canada's sustainable development
leader since 1988, having the International Institute for Sustainable
Development, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, the Manitoba
Remote Sensing Center, the Center for Earth Observations, and the Canadian
Technology Advancement Corporation located here; and
WHEREAS the federal Liberal government awarded the North
American Commission for Environmental Co‑operation to Montreal over the obvious
choice of Winnipeg; and
WHEREAS the federal Liberal government promised an open,
independent, transparent assessment process with respect to the awarding of
NACE; and
WHEREAS the federal Liberal Environment minister said the
decision on the awarding of NACE was both personal and political.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly call
upon elected Liberals across Canada to apologize to the people of Manitoba and
that the federal Environment minister resign for her blatant manipulation of
the assessment process.
Motion presented.
Mr. McAlpine: Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise today to speak
on this bill with considerable remorse in the fact that the federal Liberals
have taken the stand that they did with this office.
There was an abuse of the process in the determination of
the site. The federal Environment
minister, Sheila Copps, has readily admitted that we are a political party that
makes political decisions. She said that
in March of 1994, and an honest declaration of the decision at the outset would
have been better understood and received than the sort of manipulation that
occurred. Copps stated that we want to
implement a process which is open, Madam Deputy Speaker, transparent, public
and objective and one which can be subjected to scrutiny. She said that in the House of Commons on the
24th of January 1994.
What did our local Liberals have to say about setting this
office up in
The honourable member who used to sit in this House, the
honourable member who used to be for Osborne, what did he have to say? Now, I hope he chooses his eating habits a
little better than what he is talking about here. I hope that he watches what he eats. I do not know whether he is that conscious of
it‑‑and I hope he never goes fishing in the St. Lawrence River‑‑because
he said we have to have bigger fish to fry.
I hope that he watches the fish if he is going fishing in the
None of these elected Liberals seem to care about the
potential of the 30 jobs that this office had to offer to
* (1710)
The awarding of this office to
The Liberal training deal is worth‑‑in the area
of supporting Quebec‑‑$140 million to keep Collège militaire royale
in Saint‑Jean open, money for one‑stop government service centre,
and an agreement to turn the other cheek if Johnson goes on the attack against
The awarding of this office to
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am getting some signs from across
the way there, and I do not know whether I am dealing with this in a complete
manner, but as far as my remarks are concerned, I would certainly bow to other
members here and give the opportunity for all members to have an opportunity to
speak. Thank you.
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): I have raised this issue with the Premier
(Mr. Filmon) in his Estimates. Very
rarely do we agree with members opposite, but we agree fully that the
leadership position taken by Manitoba on the environment and the international
community, the Brundtland Commission Report which we co‑chaired, the
International Centre for Sustainable Development which is here in Manitoba‑‑Manitoba
is the only place for the NACE environmental centre. We believe that all parties should work
together and pass this resolution so that everybody in
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
I am going to anticipate that the Minister of Environment
is going to put it very clearly on the record and clarify some of the
allegations that were put on the record from the current Leader of the
Opposition dealing with the environment of the
Madam Deputy Speaker, the resolution, in the format that
the member for Sturgeon Creek‑‑
Points of Order
Mr. Marcel Laurendeau
(St. Norbert): Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order,
there is a little bit of relevancy that concerns me here. Somewhere within here I read that it was
asking the Liberals to apologize. And
here is a Liberal hammering away at what has been positive about
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
(Second Opposition House Leader): Madam
Deputy Speaker, on the same point of order, I believe that the member for St.
Norbert is wasting very valuable time by standing up on a point of order,
knowing full well that he does not have a point of order.
In fact, I would like to indicate to you that I was being
very relevant in terms of the resolution that I am talking about. The resolution is talking about the agreement
or the location of the office in the
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Is the honourable member for
Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, I am, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am trying to demonstrate‑‑[interjection]
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
The honourable member for
* * *
Mr. Lamoureux: On a new point of order, I am seeking
clarification on your first ruling. Did the
member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) have a point of order or did he
not? I did not believe he did, and that
is the reason why I was standing up trying to explain that as the member for
St. Norbert said that I was not being relevant, in fact I was being very
relevant, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I apologize.
I neglected to draw attention to the fact that neither the member for
St. Norbert nor the member for
* * *
Mr. Lamoureux: I only have a little bit of time to be able
to speak on this particular resolution, and I trust that the member for St.
Norbert nor anyone else will want to interrupt debate.
Madam Deputy Speaker, as I was saying, the member for
Sturgeon Creek brings in a resolution, and I do not necessarily want to impute
motives, but I do believe that it is very important that the member for
Sturgeon Creek knows what it is that he is saying. I do not believe that the member for Sturgeon
Creek is aware of some of the facts on this particular issue. If I were to ask, for example, when did the
province actually solicit from the Premier's Office to have this particular
office located? Was it in fact prior to
that particular‑‑the city of
* (1720)
I, like everyone inside this Chamber I believe, would have
loved to have seen not only that office but every office that is created
located in the city of
An Honourable Member: Yes, it was.
Mr. Lamoureux: The Leader of the New Democratic Party
says: Yes, it was.
No, it was not.
There were 24, I believe, it could have been 26 cities that made application
to be able to have that particular office, throughout
I personally do not have the detailed list of all of the
explanations. Nor do I believe the
member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) has because if he did have that, I
believe he would have, at the very least, as a courteous member, as I know he
likes to be, would have provided that in making presentation for his
argument. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I
have to ask the question, why did the member for Sturgeon Creek introduce this
particular resolution?
In prior years, whether it has been Conservative government
or whether it has been NDP administration, they have this terminology that is
used: fed‑bashing. I know that I created a word in the
dictionary, I am told, by using the word "funky" in referring to the
Minister of Education earlier today.
Well, fed‑bashing is, in fact, I believe, something in which
everyone in this Chamber is quite aware of in terms of the meaning of fed‑bashing. The member for Sturgeon Creek gives new
meaning to the word "fed‑bashing." He likes to be able to exaggerate, to a
certain degree, in terms of what actually has occurred. All one has to do is read his throne speech.
I do not know what happened between the last session and
this session, but the member for Sturgeon Creek sure has been ignited to say a
few more words on the record and to take a much more active role against the
government in Ottawa, Madam Deputy Speaker.
I wish he would have been as strong as an advocate when the
Conservatives were in government. I am
talking with respect to the member for Sturgeon Creek, the member that never
stood up, in comparison to the number of times he has stood up here.
One has to question, because I like to believe that I will
be consistent, that if in fact this was a CF‑18, if you like, or if the
member for Sturgeon Creek was to be able to draw the comparisons of the CF‑18
to the environmental office and say, this is in fact how they are the same,
then he might have a bit more of a valid resolution in terms of bringing it
in. Then the then‑Conservatives,
not all of them because most of them were quiet, but the official line was to
criticize the CF‑18 contract and for a good reason. We all came down with that particular
decision.
Well, I would have liked to have heard some sort of report
from the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) in terms of what was the
difference. Does he believe that there
is any difference between the CF‑18 and the environmental office? I believe that the member for Sturgeon Creek
does know that there was a significant difference between the CF‑18 and
the current environmental office, and I believe that the Leader of the New
Democratic Party also knew that there is a significant difference. But what are both the Conservatives and the
NDP party trying to accomplish? They are
trying to accomplish, Madam Deputy Speaker‑‑
An Honourable Member: The truth.
Mr. Lamoureux: Not the truth. What they are trying to do is they are trying
to‑‑
An Honourable Member: Stand up for
Mr. Lamoureux: ‑‑say it is
Madam Deputy Speaker, if it were just a question of
standing up for Manitoba, the provincial Liberal Party needs no lesson from the
NDP and the Tories on how to stand up for Manitoba. I can assure you that, as regards the issues
facing the province of Manitoba, the provincial Liberal Party is, in fact, very
proactive in assuring that our interests are being protected. The Conservatives and the NDP can say
whatever it is that they want, but ultimately they are going to have to realize
that the federal Liberal Party will likely do a lot more for the
I do not believe that there is anyone‑‑[interjection]
The Leader of the NDP says that he would vote for a resolution of that
nature. He said that he might. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, I feel a whole
lot more comfortable in believing that the federal Liberal Party will, in fact,
do a lot more for the province of Manitoba than the Conservatives ever did.
All we have to do is to look at individuals like the former
Deputy Prime Minister Don Mazankowski and the jobs he took away from the
Those are the types of things in which there has to be some
concern, if there are not valid arguments that are brought forward to be able to
defend, and, Madam Deputy Speaker, I did not hear any of those arguments.
I had understood from the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr.
McAlpine), at least I believe I had heard‑‑he can correct me if I
am wrong‑‑I believe he keeps up to date on what is going on his
riding, was it the search and rescue team that has now been relocated to the
city of Winnipeg? It was done before; I
believe that is fairly recent. I think
that is a wonderful asset. I used to
work in
There are a number of things that
I believe, as I say, ultimately that
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired.
Mr. Neil Gaudry (St.
Boniface): Madam Deputy Speaker, it gives me pleasure to
rise on this resolution presented.
Listening to my Tory friends in St. Boniface when this came
out, in reply to the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings) when he was on
television and compared it to CF‑18, their first reaction was, there is
no reason to do that, because it is not the same thing, none whatsoever.
An Honourable Member: A principle.
Mr. Gaudry: A principle, okay. [interjection] Yes, she is
a good person like every other colleague in the Legislature here. I will not attack anybody, because I think it
is not my‑‑I do not have to apologize for anything.
We will stand for
When I listen here to the comments being made‑‑they
say it should stay relevant to it and they talk about Manitoba Day and it is a
great day here in
Now they talk that my colleague invented a word in the
dictionary. Well, I have to pass on
another word that was invented by the Tories.
I have a letter that I wrote. I
want an explanation what rateable impairment meant.
An Honourable Member: What did it mean?
* (1730)
Mr. Gaudry: I have not received a letter. I got a call from the minister's office. They said, well, we do not know. I said, look in the dictionary to see what the
word rateble means. They do not
know. I have looked in the
dictionary. It is not there but I am
still waiting for a reply. That is part
of the‑‑
An Honourable Member: Why did the Liberals put it in
Mr. Gaudry: Well, there is nothing wrong with putting
something in
I had four friends yesterday that came to the Legislature
during Question Period for the first time.
They were from the constituency of
I would not apologize.
I have nothing to apologize for, because I think
An Honourable Member: We have to wait for the Conservatives again.
Mr. Gaudry: The Conservatives were there for nine years.
The Premier from here says all he has to do is pick up the
phone. He has never picked up the damn
phone. I am sorry, I apologize.
[interjection]
No, he will do the same thing as I do. He will stand up for
Well, it is like the member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik)
says. They are the only party in
An Honourable Member: Neil, come and join us.
Mr. Gaudry: No, I would not do that. I will be faithful to my Leader and to my
party. No, I would not do like you,
Darren. The honourable member for Lac du
Bonnet used to be a Liberal; now he is a Conservative. He will probably be with the NDP on the next
run.
An Honourable Member: The Liberals never treated the province
well. That is why I left the Liberal
Party.
Mr. Gaudry: Well, and then you have the Tories that were
in the‑‑[interjection] The member for Lac du Bonnet was an
assistant to the member for‑‑
An Honourable Member: Provencher.
Mr. Gaudry: And what did he get us here in
An Honourable Member: Cornelius, just vote for this resolution.
Mr. Gaudry: No, my conscience would not let me.
An Honourable Member: Stand up for
Mr. Gaudry: I will stand up for
Well, that is what I am doing. I am standing up right now and I will stand
up for
An Honourable Member: Ask yourself how Louis Riel would have voted
on this.
Mr. Gaudry: Louis Riel would have voted for
Also, we wanted to recognize Louis Riel as a Father of
Confederation. We asked for Louis Riel
to be rehabilitated because he deserves his rights.
An Honourable Member: He was a Conservative member of Parliament.
Mr. Gaudry: It does not matter, but he was a good
man. He was not a Conservative. He was not allowed by the Tories to sit in
his seat in Provencher in the House of Commons.
In 1985, I personified Louis Riel in the House of Commons
for the 100th anniversary, but again they would not allow me to sit in the
House of Commons. They wanted me to come
in the House of Commons. They said,
no. That was the Tories again. I was going to say hypocrisy, but it is not a
nice word, and I will not use it, because my friend from Assiniboia would not
like if I said things like that, and I will not. All my members are nice people.
I will not apologize, because we will continue to fight for
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The
Maples): My honourable colleague tells me I should
talk about Louis Riel, but I do not have the expertise that this man has.
An Honourable Member: Well, then sit down and we will vote.
Mr. Kowalski: No, I do not think I will sit down. I missed my opportunity the other day to
speak so I will take full advantage of it today.
The environment is very important to all young people, and
I have been asked a number of times what my position is on the Young Offenders
Act.
(Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Speaker, in the Chair)
We have been asked, and we have been pointed at in Question
Period. When we have an opportunity to
question the minister, the minister has pointed her finger and asked, what does
the Liberal Party believe in‑‑position on the Young Offenders
Act? What I want to say about our
position on the Young Offenders Act is that we support the federal government's
position to review the Young Offenders Act.
We support that. [interjection] As my colleague says, that is standing
for Manitobans.
This resolution by the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr.
McAlpine): WHEREAS the North American
Agreement on environmental co‑operation calls for an environmental centre
to be established in Canada‑‑we all agree that this is a noble
event. I think the people of Canada are
looking for a higher level of integrity and conduct in politics, and I think
that as such we should not be looking at just what is politically expedient and
we should not be using decisions‑‑[interjection] My honourable
member refers to Sheila Copps, who will be here next week, and I hope he has an
opportunity to meet her. Now, this
decision of where to put this, the minister responsible, Sheila Copps, even
though her own riding was in contention, showed no favouritism in putting it
into her riding. Instead there was a
criteria to make this decision, and based on the criteria a location was
chosen.
Yes, we agree, we would have all loved to see the decision
to be made for
* (1740)
The decision based on that criteria I am concerned about,
as all Manitobans should be concerned about.
But if we want decisions based on the best information, and we want free
trade amongst the provinces, as the ministers have recently met and discussed.
An Honourable Member: We want fairness from our imperial masters in
Mr. Kowalski: We do not have masters in
This resolution saying the obvious choice was
The federal government, Chretien and his Liberal government
in
An Honourable Member: And they will work with the
Mr. Kowalski: That is right, as they have worked with the
This province is benefiting from the federal Liberal
government in
Yes, our Liberal cabinet ministers, our Liberal members of
Parliament are busy people because they are doing a fine job in
Mr. Acting Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for
Points of Order
Mr. Doer: When the member for The Maples moved his
amendment, the member for
The Acting Speaker (Mr.
Penner): The honourable member does have a point order
unless‑‑
Mr. Lamoureux: On the same point of order, Mr. Acting Speaker,
I think that it is a fairly dangerous precedent to say that if in fact you are
not sitting in your seat, and I know that the rules say that you have to be in
there, but I believe that individuals have been standing up beside their seat
before and I was standing up right beside my seat.
(Mr. Speaker in the Chair)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Let us deal with two points of order here,
the first one being the one of the Leader of the official opposition (Mr.
Doer). His point of order was very
clear. The honourable member for
The honourable member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) in the
meantime chose the honourable member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), who was in
his seat. So that finishes that point of
order.
Now, the point of order raised by the honourable member for
That is very clear.
That is not a dangerous precedent.
That is a precedent and a rule of this House.
* * *
Mr. Kowalski: I will start from the beginning again, Mr.
Speaker.
I move, seconded by the member for St. Boniface (Mr.
Gaudry), an amendment by deleting all the words after the first WHEREAS and
substituting the following:
More information is needed respecting the NAFTA
environmental office.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this Legislative Assembly
request the government of
* (1750)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I have to remind all honourable members
again, indeed this happened yesterday and is happening again today. When honourable members want to move an
amendment such as the honourable member for The Maples has, we need five copies,
sir, to facilitate the working of the House.
We need one, Hansard needs one, the table needs one and one for each of
the critics. I would ask all honourable
members, next time you want to try such a procedure, bring forward five copies,
please. Now we will have to wait for a
few minutes.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: It is in order. It is an alternative proposition.
Point of Order
Mr. Lamoureux: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, out of frustration
I expressed a word that is not acceptable for inside the Chamber. I do not know if Hansard picked it up or not,
but I do apologize for using the word that I had used, as a number of
individuals in the Chamber had heard it.
Whether or not you heard it is irrelevant. I do regret saying it.
Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable member for
* * *
Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this
opportunity to speak to the amendment that has been put forward from the member
for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski).
The primary reason, Mr. Speaker, that I felt it was
necessary to support the member for The Maples for introducing this particular
amendment is because we would like to see what the government has done to
accumulate some information to deal with why it is that the decision was made
in the fashion that it was, in particular to bring in this resolution, because it
will be interesting to see if in fact we will be now seeing information coming
forward and then that the debate around this whole issue will be all that much
better in the sense that individuals will have the facts in front of them. That is what the resolution is asking for.
We believe that there is a need for the government to look
into getting some of the factual information on why
I would have liked to have seen the government bring
forward more information in terms of what it is they did in order to bring the
office to the city of
Mr. Speaker, I want to make it very, very clear to all
Manitobans, as I am sure they know, that the provincial Liberal Party has and
will continue to stand up for the province of Manitoba. The province is, in fact, our first priority,
and if at some point in time the provincial Liberal caucus does feel that we
are not getting a fair share from the Government of Canada. Whether it is through equalization payments,
whether it is through job transfers or the capital investments such as the
infrastructure program and so forth, I am sure that you will hear the provincial
Liberal Party speaking on those and addressing our federal counterparts in
Ottawa, as we are just as concerned as the government of the day in Manitoba or
the official opposition.
I do have a lot more faith in the 12 members of Parliament
that are representing the Liberal Party‑‑
Mr. Doer: They are representing
Mr. Lamoureux: ‑‑and the constituencies that
they represent, all Manitobans.
Mr. Doer: There are 14 M.P.s.
Mr. Lamoureux: Out of the 14, 12 of the 14, as the Leader of
the New Democratic Party points out, as a start. That is for sure, a good start. It is a wonderful start, 12 of the 14.
But there are some very high expectations that are there
for all 12 of the 14 Liberal members of Parliament, Mr. Speaker, and over time
we will see whether or not they are able to live up to those expectations. Hopefully, eventually what will happen is,
through time, of course, we will see whether or not the federal government has
treated
No doubt, Mr. Speaker, there are decisions that are going
to be made and have been made that will be called into question, and that is
fine. That is the way that politics
works, and I would anticipate that there are some things in which we will agree
with on some of those decisions and some of the things that we will not agree
with. There have already been cases of
both in terms of what the federal caucus has done and some controversial issues
also, where we have not necessarily been in sync with our federal counterpart,
much like the provincial Conservatives who were not in sync with everything
that the federal Conservatives had done.
I would even hazard a guess that there are some things that the current
government supports the federal Liberals in doing.
We see, for example, the infrastructure program which, in
fact, is a major aspect of the budget.
One would like to believe with this particular program, if you will,
If the government was able to put the facts on the table
and say this is the reason why Montreal received it and Winnipeg has all of
those assets, those facilities, and we have legitimate reason to call into
question, in a very strong way, the actual decision given that it should have
gone to Winnipeg, then fine. But let us
hear that, Mr. Speaker. We have not been
hearing that from the government. All we
have been hearing is that this is no different than the CF‑18.
What information that I have seen, there is a significant
difference. That is not to say that I do
not personally believe that the decision ended up seeing this facility go in
the city of my choice. My choice of a
city, sure it would be
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House,
the honourable member for
The hour being 6 p.m. then, the House is now adjourned and
stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow (Friday).