4th-36th Vol. 29A-Committee of Supply-Labour

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey), that Madam 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.

Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Committee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of the Department of Labour. Does the honourable Minister of Labour have an opening statement?

Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): I do. It is my privilege to present the Expenditure Estimates of the Department of Labour for fiscal year 1998-99. I believe we had a successful year last year working with the labour-management community. I want to start by commending my staff, the staff in the department. They are dedicated and hard-working professionals who are under the very capable leadership of my deputy minister, Tom Farrell, and provide valuable services to the citizens of Manitoba. I would like to thank them for their efforts.

I particularly would like to acknowledge the appointments of two of my senior staff to national committees. My deputy minister, Tom Farrell, sits as the president of the Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Legislation. Tom Farrell also participated as a member of the Canadian delegation to the first co-operative activity organized under the Canada-Chili Agreement on labour co-operation. This activity took place January 7-9 of this year in San Diego and focused on labour standards and occupational safety and health.

Geoff Bowden, executive director of the Workplace Safety and Health Division has been appointed chair of the hazardous materials information review committee. This committee deals with issues under the hazardous materials legislation.

For 1998-99, the total budget request for the Department of Labour is $13.139 million, representing an increase of 4 percent from the previous year. This increase largely reflects the salary increases for staff of the department under recently negotiated collective agreements, and the net increase in costs associated with the implementation of a government-wide desktop management strategy.

The Department of Labour will be one of the first departments to be transitioned to the new desktop environment that will eventually see all government computer users using standard computer work stations and related software. This desktop initiative will when fully implemented provide the Manitoba government with an infrastructure capable of supporting government-wide corporate initiatives in a reliable cost-effective, secure and flexible manner.

* (1010)

The Department of Labour recovers a significant proportion of its annual expenditures through its various sources of revenue. In 1998-99, the department projects to recover about 65 percent of its total budget as revenue.

As Minister of Labour, last year I had the opportunity to be part of an important international initiative with Manitoba's signing of the Canadian Intergovernmental Agreement on the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation. This will enable Manitoba to participate fully and directly in the implementation, management and further development of the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation.

Manitoba's Wally Fox-Decent has been appointed chair of the newly established national advisory committee created under the Canadian Intergovernmental Agreement. The advisory committee will provide independent advice and recommendations on the implementation and further development of the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation to the governmental committee of labour ministers which is managing Canada's involvement in the NAALC.

As members are aware, amendments to four acts were enacted in 1997. The Workplace Safety and Health Act was amended to provide for a tenfold increase in fine levels under this legislation. This change reflects the unanimous recommendations of the Advisory Council on Workplace Safety and Health. The council is comprised of members representing workers, employers and technical organizations.

The Pension Benefits Act was altered to clarify the legal responsibilities of administrators, trustees and agents as to the administration of pension plans and to enhance enforcement and penalty provisions of the act. These changes represent a positive step towards creating an environment that promotes the expansion and establishment of employer-sponsored pension plans, as well as ensuring that benefits of plan members are adequately protected.

The Retail Businesses Holiday Closing Act was changed to enable a more timely and efficient approach for special exemption permits by authorizing ways for establishments to obtain permits through special exemptions issued by the Minister of Labour without requiring the authorization of the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

The Steam and Pressure Plants Act was amended to eliminate the regular two-year inspection requirement for pressure vessels under the provincial act when these pressure vessels are subject to inspection under federal transportation of dangerous goods legislation. This has resulted in eliminating duplication of inspections without reducing safety requirements.

I also am pleased to inform you that a new Employment Standards Code has been introduced in the House. This code will consolidate, streamline, simplify and update three existing, separate but related employment standards acts. These existing acts contain many provisions and procedures that are redundant, outdated or inconsistent. At times, this has made it difficult for employees and employers to understand their rights and obligations under the legislation. To address this situation, an undertaking to develop a new consolidated code was initiated in 1996, in consultation with Legislative Counsel. The new code restructures and streamlines the legislation to make it easier to understand, and amend or eliminate outdated provisions. As well, amendments have been made to enable more efficient and effective enforcement of the law. This new code also incorporates recommendations made by the Manitoba Labour Management Review Committee. I am very grateful to the committee for its hard work, dedication and advice which contributed significantly to improving this important legislative initiative.

I am also pleased to inform you that the government will be proceeding with the review of the general minimum wage in Manitoba. In preparation for this, I have already asked employer and employee representatives to provide nominees for membership on the Minimum Wage Board. Once I have received the names of persons to serve, I will be reconstituting the board, and asking it to meet to receive submissions from interested parties, and to make recommendations to me on changes to the minimum wage.

I would like to recognize the important work undertaken and contributions made by the department's external advisory committees such as the Advisory Council on Workplace Safety and Health, the Manitoba Pension Commission and the Labour Management Review Committee. The time and efforts of all committee members are very much appreciated, and on behalf of the province I would like to thank all the members for their advice and assistance.

Since 1989, the Department of Labour has been pursuing a strategy of change, improvement and innovation. One element of the strategy was the development of a performance measurement and reporting framework feedback measures. Measurement and results-based performance have become an integral element of program and service delivery within Manitoba Labour. Last year the department built on its performance measurement efforts by addressing future strategic issues through a business planning approach. Manitoba Labour was one of three government departments to pilot Treasury Board's business planning and performance measurement initiative known as Manitoba Measures.

Another element of Manitoba Labour's commitment to change over the past several years has been its continuous improvement approach, which has assisted the department in focusing on both improving and re-engineering services and programs. Other examples of innovations last year include the redesign of workplace safety and health training courses and materials based on client feedback, more timely resolution of employment standards claims, sectoral targeting of program activities such as inspections, audits and public education and improved client and public access to program and service information through the Internet, and other on-line services.

Building on the successes of these initiatives, the department is taking further steps to be forward-thinking to serve Manitobans better. Senior department officials have been directly involved in the better methods and better systems initiatives which are designed to change government-wide business processes and systems. As part of the better systems initiative, the Department of Labour has established a team to examine and redesign its inspections processes in order to provide improved, more efficient services to Manitoba workplaces.

The Department of Labour is also a pilot department for the government-wide desktop management initiative. All these initiatives are in keeping with the department's vision, mission and strategic directions for the next three-to five-year period.

In summary, over the next five years the department will continue to pursue change that will result in improved quality, efficiency and relevance in programs and services, emphasized prevention, public education and dispute resolution strategies as a means to support effective administration of our legislative mandates, allocate resources on a risk assessment and value-added basis and increase emphasis on clarifying responsibility among stakeholders.

* (1020)

I would now like to highlight a few of the achievements and plans of departmental programs. The Workplace Safety and Health Division embarked on the business inspections project where it is looking at re-engineering its systems and data collection processes to make them more accessible and useful to field staff. The division is looking at how to place enhanced information about firms to be inspected on field staff computers to enable inspectors to have better client information available at the worksite. Program activities are being operated so as to encourage employers and workers to identify and solve their own health and safety problems effectively. Communications with clients are emphasizing the internal responsibility system and each party's role in ensuring safe and healthy workplaces.

More resources are being allocated to the high-risk, high-cost hazards in industries. Mechanical & Engineering Branch has catalogued all inspection violations for boilers. The branch is also in the process of reassessing its inspection workload by location and size of boiler. This will enable the branch to maximize its inspection activities with respect to higher hazard boilers and steam plants by isolating any high-risk trends that may be occurring and initiating corrective actions before problems occur.

The Workplace Safety and Health Branch has identified foundries as one of the sectors in manufacturing where a high incidence of accidents are occurring. Proactive programs which target the prevention of illness and injuries will be delivered in 1998-99 to improve the general awareness of safety and health issues. The program delivery will include meeting with safety and health committees, conducting audits and establishing a partnership with the American foundry society, Manitoba chapter.

The Mines Inspection Branch developed for all chief mine inspectors a national registry of mine rescue capabilities for Canada. This is being placed on the Internet and the information circulated to all mines in Canada.

The Occupational Health Branch is involved with hospitals and doctors in Manitoba as part of the development of a national database on farm injury statistics. Manitoba's pilot was the model for the national system.

The Employment Standards Division continues to integrate a risk management approach into all of its functional areas. The division also continues to increase its efforts to resolve claims and issues quickly and in a nonconfrontational manner. The Employment Standards Branch's efforts to resolve claims timely and efficiently has been showing positive results: 35 percent of all claims are resolved in less than 30 days and 80 percent of claims are settled without the need for formal action. This has been achieved by providing alternative methods for claim resolution where appropriate. A quick resolution process is offered at the inquiry intake stage of a complaint, with 12 percent of all claims successfully resolved at this level. Another method used to resolve disputes is the Alternative Dispute Resolution process, which has resulted in a 50 percent decrease in the number of disputes which otherwise would have gone to the Manitoba Labour Board for adjudication.

Labour Board referrals are now down to less than 2 percent of all filed employment standards claims. Feedback from clients suggests that both employees and employers who use the Alternative Dispute Resolution service are highly satisfied with this service. These services have allowed the branch to reallocate more resources to high-risk areas and various preventative initiatives. As part of its Community Adjustment services the Employment Standards Branch has continued with labour adjustment services to Pinawa and expanded services to Bissett, Manigotagan and Seymourville areas. In supporting activities such as needs assessment interviews, regional labour markets sector analysis, investigation of retraining options and partnering in community health initiatives, the branch assists these communities in mitigating the effects of downsizing.

The Employment Standards Branch recognizes that youth are a higher-risk employee group. The branch is working with other jurisdictions of the Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Legislation to develop baseline information in this area. This project will assist the branch in targeting preventative programs to young workers. The Worker Advisor office ensures that workers and their dependents receive the benefits to which they are entitled under The Workers Compensation Act. The office continues to focus on providing more timely resolution of claims by concentrating efforts at the primary adjudication level of the WCB rather than the more lengthy levels of appeal. This effort has resulted in 76 percent of appealable issues being resolved at this level. The office has also been successful with their appeals where 58 percent of appeals to the review office were successful and 42 percent were successful at the appeal commission. A Worker Advisor office-client survey revealed that 70 percent of clients responding to the survey were satisfied or very satisfied with how the worker advisors handled their issues.

The Pension Commission continued its development of a risk management model for pension plans, which includes on-site inspections of administrative and financial systems used by the employer, third party administrator and actuary. Staff received training in risk management examination procedures from the office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. The Manitoba Pension Commission has struck a strategic partnership with Revenue Canada to save clients time and money and to allow for one contact for the clients for the purpose of processing annual information returns. Prior to the partnership, clients had to file similar information annually with both offices. Now clients only file one annual information return using the Manitoba Pension Commission as the entry point. Revenue Canada's information is processed by the commission staff and electronically transferred to Ottawa.

The Office of the Fire Commissioner has completed its second year as a special operating agency, and I am pleased to announce that the Office of the Fire Commissioner has achieved a balanced budget. The Office of the Fire Commissioner completed the construction of a new state-of-the-art practical training site located next to the Brandon Airport. The training site is built primarily for the Manitoba fire service. This will allow for the training of firefighters under real fire scene conditions. Live burn experience training is a requirement for the National Fire Protection Association standards. The private sector assisted in the financing of this training site contributing in excess of $200,000. Several corporations donated products or services to this project. With this private sector assistance, construction of the practical training centre was completed within budget.

Numerous partnerships have been developed over the years with opportunities for marketing both domestically and abroad. The Office of the Fire Commission has established marketing contacts in Chile, Brazil and Argentina. The Office of the Fire Commissioner signed a memorandum of understanding with the University of Santiago, Chile, on behalf of a consortium of educational institutions in Manitoba. The goal of the consortium is to provide the Chilean market with custom training offerings using the University of Santiago as the medium.

Conciliation and Mediation Branch has a long tradition of facilitating dispute resolution. The branch seeks to enhance harmonious industrial relations in the province. Its services are seen as vital by labour and management. During 1997-98, the Conciliation and Mediation Branch was active in 231 grievance mediation and 133 conciliation assignments. Over 95 percent of the conciliation assignments were settled without a work stoppage. The Manitoba Labour Board, as an independent and quasi-judicial body, serves as a forum for the resolution of labour relations issues in a fair and reasonable manner and in a way that will be accepted by labour and management.

The Manitoba Labour Board recently completed a review of bargaining structures in Manitoba's rural health care sector. The success of this process, due in no small part to the co-operative efforts of both labour and management, will create uniformity and bargaining units within rural facilities. The board is presently undertaking a similar initiative with the urban health care authorities. The board has also successfully managed the transition dealing with the voting procedures in the certification process.

Mr. Chairman, this completes my opening statement. I welcome a meaningful and productive discussion of the Department of Labour Estimates in the ensuing hours. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the honourable minister for those comments. Does the critic for the official opposition, the honourable member for Transcona, have an opening statement?

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Thank you, Mr. Chairperson, for the opportunity to add some comments. I have listened very closely to what the minister said in his opening statement comments here today. To maximize the amount of time that we have towards the asking of questions of the subsections of the minister's department, I am going to be very brief in my comments.

I have a number of questions with specific areas. As the minister might expect, those comments will be relating to activities of the Employment Standards Branch, Workplace Safety and Health, Fire Commissioner. I have some questions with respect to the minimum wage and actions in that regard and also dealing with mine safety. That is not to limit my comments, because I have a number of questions.

* (1030)

I do note though in opening that the minister has indicated that his department is responsible, I believe he said, for the desktop computer initiative for the government. I believe, if I understand him correctly, that is what he said. We will be having some questions in the opening in that area as well, looking at the cost factor that is associated or tied to that for his department itself.

So my two colleagues who are here with me today also have a few questions that will likely be taking place in the opening sections of the minister's Estimates here this morning, so I would be giving them the opportunity to ask their questions as well. With those few comments, Mr. Chairperson, I am, with your will and pleasure, prepared to have the staff come to the table and begin the process.

Mr. Chairperson: I thank the critic for the official opposition for those comments. Under Manitoba practice, debate of the Minister's Salary is traditionally the last item considered for the Estimates of a department. Accordingly we shall defer consideration of this item and now proceed with the consideration of the next line.

Before we do that, we would invite the minister's staff to join us at the table, and we ask the minister to introduce his staff present.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Joining me at the table are Tom Farrell, who is the Deputy Minister of Labour; Jim Nykoluk, the Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour; and Jim Wood, Director of Financial Services. I have other staff from the various branches. If the questions are going to range into those areas, we would invite them to the table at the appropriate time.

Mr. Chairperson: I thank the minister for those introductions. We will now proceed to line 11.1.(b) of the Executive Support, Salaries and Employee Benefits, on page 102 of the Main Estimates book. Shall this item pass?

Mr. Reid: I want to start in dealing with the issue of the computer desktop system initiative that the government is now involved with. I have taken a look at the overall Estimates document for the Department of Labour, and there is a substantial cost associated with the involvement in this area. I would like to know--my questions will be regarding the savings, if any, that the department is going to realize as a result of this particular initiative. I would like to know of some of the capital costs that you have currently within your department dealing with computers, if you have an overall or a global budget figure for your department, that you would be involved both in the hardware and I would imagine the software side.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Depending on how much detail you want to get into, this initiative is housed in Government Services in the Desktop Unit. We are one of three departments that are involved in some pilot work. So there is a unit within Government Services that probably can give you in more finite detail what you might be looking for, but the Departments of Government Services and Labour and Culture are the three departments that are piloting the project.

Again, there is a Desktop Unit housed within the Department of Government Services, but there are some staffing changes that are reflected within our department. We have a net reduction of two full-time equivalents which results in a salary cost reduction of almost $73,000. Then, a total of $250,000 in additional funding has been included within what is called Other Expenditures, and this allocation crosses various branches within the department to cover the net additional costs of implementing the desktop management initiative across the Department of Labour.

The total costs of the desktop management are estimated to be $475,000 for '98-99, while offsetting cost reductions are estimated at $225,000, leaving a net increase in expenditures of almost $250,000.

So I do not know if that is the general sort of information you are looking for or whether you want to get into some detail with the Desktop Management Unit within Government Services.

Mr. Reid: I have done a calculation for the expenditures for the Department of Labour alone, of course, because I had the document available to me. The minister's total, at least what he is showing in his budget document here, is a little over $472,000. So your budget, 475, obviously you are within that particular budget. You are saying you are having an ongoing cost of $225,000, or cost, I should say, above and beyond--or $250,000, pardon me, beyond what your anticipated savings are.

Are there ongoing costs associated with this on an annual basis? What is going to be your annual figure that you have to expend for this particular service?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told that there will be changes ongoing with the development of the Desktop Unit, but the estimate of ongoing costs will be around $250,000.

* (1040)

Mr. Reid: So, then, on an ongoing, in perpetuity basis, the cost accrued to the Department of Labour is $250,000. Is that just purely for systems? Is that dealing with staffing, or what is the breakdown for those particular costs, and how long will that particular cost be ongoing?

Mr. Gilleshammer: That includes updating of equipment, and it also is a portion of the cost of what is called the help desk that we would be responsible for within the Department of Labour.

Mr. Reid: So we have full-time equivalents, 203 staff people, and we are going to spend $250,000 a year on ongoing computer costs for the Department of Labour. That is a heck of a cost. Would you have spent $250,000 a year on your ongoing capital and software equipment costs for your department? Do you spend that kind of money in a year, and what is your historical expenditures?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that historically we have been spending in that neighbourhood on capital costs and salaries.

Mr. Reid: Well, the minister says salaries. Could you give me a breakdown, please? With the greatest of respect to the minister and his departmental staff, I have to raise this right at the beginning because last year I had asked for a number of pieces of information to be forwarded to me and the minister undertook to provide that information. To this point in time, I have not received that information on a number of areas within your department. I do not know the reasons why that information did not come to me, whether it was an oversight on the part of your department or on the part of your office or on your part, yourself, as the minister, but that information did not come to me here.

So I am hoping at the beginning here to get an undertaking that you or your department will follow through with providing us with answers to the questions that we raise for last year as well as the questions that we raise this year, where you make a commitment to provide some detailed information.

Mr. Gilleshammer: We are always delighted to make our information available from the Department of Labour. We are very proud of the work that we do. If there is information you do not understand or that you feel you are not receiving we would be pleased to supply that for you. I am not sure in your question what detail you are looking for, going back to the desktop management.

Mr. Reid: I just want to get an understanding here at the beginning, because the minister did make commitment on a number of fronts last year, and we can go get copies of the Hansard for you if you would like and provide you with some detail, but I am sure your staff is aware of it as well, where you provided or indicated that you would be providing some information which has not been forthcoming to this point, a year later.

So that is why I am asking for some kind of an understanding here that when we ask questions throughout the process here where, in essence, I am trying to educate myself about the functionings of the Department of Labour that we would receive some information from the minister and that that would be forthcoming in what we would consider to be a relatively short period of time. One year seems to be quite excessive. That is why I am trying to get an understanding here up front.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, we would be pleased to have a positive influence in your education about the Department of Labour.

Mr. Reid: Will the minister define what this positive influence is and what kind of a time frame we are talking about here? Does he consider one year to be a reasonable period of time for me to be waiting for that information to come forward? It is in Hansard. I mean, I have asked a number of questions. You have undertaken to provide the information, and I do not recall receiving it. I have talked to staff. They have not received it either.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, if there is information that you feel you are lacking from previous years Estimates, we will try and identify that and provide that to you in a timely manner.

Mr. Reid: I will take the minister at his word. I did last year and, to be frank, I am disappointed that that information did not come forward, because each of us has our own credibility when we say that we are going to do or perform some certain service. If it is not followed through or carried through then it becomes more difficult for the opposition critics to undertake to understand the department, to ask hopefully intelligent questions about the workings of the department. That is why I was looking for specific pieces of information.

So when I ask about the desktop computer initiative, I would like to have a breakdown of the ongoing costs that you have. You said that you expend approximately $250,000 a year in ongoing costs, and that is both for equipment and labour costs. Could you give me a breakdown of that? If you do not have that information here, would you undertake to provide that, please?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, we will certainly get a breakdown for you. It is a number of individuals who spend a portion of their time doing technical work, and there are also capital costs. My deputy indicates that we can provide you some written detail that will go a long way to I think enlightening you in this very important area.

Ms. Maryann Mihychuk (St. James): I would like to go back to the desktop management program. Can the minister clarify, is this the deal with SystemHouse?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes.

Ms. Mihychuk: If I understand the program correctly, it includes an initial capital replacement. The computers will be upgraded to a certain standard, and then there is an ongoing annual basically maintenance cost where they replace certain capital components on a regular basis as well as provide service. Would that be correct?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes.

Ms. Mihychuk: Are the two individuals who were released from the department your computer staff people who provided that computer servicing?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that both of them are employed at SHL.

Ms. Mihychuk: For clarification, they did work for the Department of Labour and now are working for SHL.

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told one is employed by SHL and one by the Department of Highways.

Ms. Mihychuk: I am not sure that I really understood whether these two individuals were the computer people for the Department of Labour.

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told they were two of our group.

Ms. Mihychuk: The ongoing costs, which amount to approximately $250,000, will be this service provision that SystemHouse can provide on-line, I understand. Now, that is significantly more than the expenditure of those two staff people. Did the two staff people the Department of Labour had provide sufficient service to the department to service the needs of all 203 staff members?

Mr. Gilleshammer: They were certainly two people that were part of a team that provided technical service.

Ms. Mihychuk: Did the department have to contract out or bring in additional expertise to provide computer maintenance or technical advice?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that in the past we had two term people who were contracted to do some of that work.

Ms. Mihychuk: Has the department been offered the ability to service their own system? For example, if the department was provided with half-a-million dollars for this year and an ongoing grant or allocation of $250,000, would the department be able to self-serve their computer needs?

Mr. Gilleshammer: It is a hypothetical question. There are costs as we get into a new system that are one-time costs. The servicing was not entirely based on two people. They were part of a team.

Ms. Mihychuk: Perhaps I could ask again. Was the department offered that option of providing the service on their own?

Mr. Gilleshammer: That was not part of the plan.

Ms. Mihychuk: Did the department feel or identify a serious problem in their hardware component that required a significant upgrading?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed it is the view of the department that we did not have sufficient equipment or current equipment to work in a number of the initiatives that we are in the process of doing or headed towards at the present time.

Ms. Mihychuk: Perhaps the minister could articulate in some detail what those would be. The minister in his opening statement talked about this new desktop management allowing the department to act in a corporate manner. What exactly are we investing in? What is this corporate manner that now the Department of Labour will be able to comply with?

* (1050)

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am not sure how much detail the member is looking for, but basically so many systems in government were independent of other departments, and the technology is changing so rapidly. We are part of a corporate view of government where we can interact with other departments with the new technology. There are a number of initiatives that I talked about within my opening statements, and I would be pleased to go back and articulate some of them, if that is what the member wants. I think there was a feeling that we needed to upgrade the technology that we had within the Department of Labour and be part of a corporate view of information systems.

Ms. Mihychuk: Well, I am not an expert, but I do have a PC and I am hooked to the Internet and am part of a network with other colleagues. Would it not be then feasible to pay $40, like I do, to get onto the Internet and link with another department?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I do not know where my honourable friend wants to go with this. This is part of a government-wide initiative. I sense what the member is saying is that perhaps the Department of Labour does not need to be part of that, that we should continue to act and exist independent of other government departments. I do not share that view. I think the work we do is extremely important. I do not think that we need to take a back seat to other departments.

When you have a government-wide initiative, I think it is important that we be part of that, that we should not exist in isolation. I know my honourable friend, the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), who is the critic of this department, shares the view that we do important work, that we need to have updated equipment, that we need the most modern technology just as other departments do. So we are part of a corporate government, and it is a government-wide initiative, and we are part of it.

Ms. Mihychuk: Well, the minister is suggesting that I am somehow suggesting the Department of Labour is not useful. Hardly. What I am asking are serious questions about the commitment that this government has made with SystemHouse. You have gone into a program that is a massive undertaking of all government, that has significant expenditures, and I think that it is valid for the opposition to ask questions of the government's actions, and since the Department of Labour is one of the pilot projects, I would indeed like to continue on this.

The SystemHouse program, as far as I understand our analysis of it, has indicated that perhaps it could be done in-house at considerable savings. If that is the case, then the taxpayers of Manitoba need to know that. Is the government undertaking a program that is going to end up costing Manitobans a great deal more than had it been done in-house? Do we have to fire and lay off more civil servants just to hire and contract private corporations who are going to then gouge public citizens and taxpayers? What is the ultimate purpose of the SystemHouse deal, and if it is to interact with other departments, as the minister suggests, then I think the public needs to know that. Is that the purpose of the SystemHouse deal?

Mr. Gilleshammer: The member has put a lot on the record, and I did not get a chance to write it all down, but I will certainly review it in Hansard. It almost seems like we have a philosophical difference of opinion here. The member comes to the table badmouthing private sector corporations and uses words like "gouge." I cannot believe that the member wants to enhance the province of Manitoba and be proud of the work that is being done.

I mean, all of us noted with some delight that the unemployment stats are down to 5.2 percent in the province, and a lot of that is because of private sector development that is going on, an economy that is very hot at this time, and if comments like the one the member for St. James is making is that private sector corporations are out there to gouge everybody--you cannot trust them, that everything has to be done in government--that is simply not true. I am sad to hear those comments from the member for St. James. I thought she would have a more realistic view of the world than that.

If you want to get into the detail of the whole desktop issue, I would suggest you go to the Estimates of the Department of Government Services where the desktop unit is housed. This is a government-wide initiative. The member is suggesting that the Department of Labour does not need modern technology, does not need new equipment, that we should put band-aids on the equipment we have and patch things together, and that is good enough for the Department of Labour. That simply is not the case. We do very significant and important work. When there is a government-wide initiative, it is incumbent upon us to be part of that.

You know, we have given you the details of staffing and costs within the Department of Labour. I sense that what the member wants to talk about is that this is a wrong-headed initiative, that she is opposed to the whole initiative, and I say she is wrong. We are part of corporate government and it is up to us to upgrade our systems and be part of a corporate-wide system to try and give the best possible service we can to the clients that we serve. I am sorry that the member does not share that view.

Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, I want to ask the minister: you have mentioned that you have ongoing costs of $250,000 a year for the new system of which you are one of the test departments. You have about 203 employees for your departmental operations. Is each one of these employees going to have a computer system available to them or assigned to them as individuals? Are you going to have 203 systems within your department? If that is not the case, can you tell me how many you are going to have?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that we will have in the neighbourhood of 176 pieces of equipment within the department.

* (1100)

Mr. Reid: Can you tell me, with this new initiative that you are part of and looking at computer life spans--I mean, for the purposes of my job as an MLA, we buy pieces of equipment from time to time--a computer life span of the technology itself is about six months, one year at best, before it is superseded by something that is superior by way of equipment.

In the contract that your government has signed, can you tell me: are there going to be upgrades to the hardware equipment of the 176 pieces your department is going to be using? What type of upgrade process do you have within the contract itself that you have signed to keep these pieces of equipment current since you have ongoing costs of $250,000 a year?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I have indicated before and I will indicate it again that the desktop unit is not housed in the Department of Labour, and if you want to get into that level of detail, that would be the appropriate place to put those questions when the Estimates for the Department of Government Services come forward. That information is not housed in this department.

I certainly agree with the member that technology is out there, and it is ever-changing. It is going to be a challenge not only in government but in the education system, in the private sector, if I can say that word in this room. They are all going to be challenged to make appropriate expenditures on technology and make those decisions at the appropriate time so that they can maintain the service that they need, whatever their functions are. So, if the member is asking do I think there may be further costs in the future as technology changes, I think, yes, there will be.

Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, I am trying to get an understanding here. The minister says that his department is one of three departments to be involved in the government's new initiative, that I believe is going to spend some 35-million taxpayer dollars for this particular type of system. Government Services is one of those other departments as is Family Services. I believe Culture, Heritage--and you do not know, you do not have an idea what is in that contract and whether or not your people in three years from now are going to be working with antiquated pieces of junk that should be in the garbage. Is that what you are telling me?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I am trying to understand what the member is asking. He is saying that equipment bought today is going to be, in a certain time span, junk. I guess, if that is his view of the world, it would be so whether it was bought by the private sector or by a government unless he feels there is specific technology that is independent and used only by government. I have indicated to him that I agree with him that technology is changing very rapidly. That change is going to take place not because of things happening in Manitoba but things happening right across the world.

I have indicated that governments will face an enormous challenge, as will educational institutions, corporations, private sector companies, individuals, in trying to strike that proper balance of how much do you spend on technology, when does technology become obsolete, when do you reinvest. Well, my honourable friend says that all becomes obsolete in six months. So, in his view of the world, every six months there is going to be a turnover in all institutions using technology and that there is going to obviously be a tremendous cost. I do not think he is totally right. I believe that--[interjection]

Well, I certainly bow to his superior wisdom on this, but I am told that probably--at least people, what they are telling me--a lot of the equipment will be used perhaps for three or four years. So, if his view of the world is that all technology becomes obsolete in six months, maybe he is suggesting we should not get into it at all because the technology becomes obsolete too soon. I do not think that is the way the world is going, that we are going to have technological systems and we need across government to have some consistency. We need to be, I think, aware of what is happening in technology and be part of it, but at the same time, I suppose, we will be constrained by the number of dollars that we can dedicate to technology.

Mr. Chairman, he is absolutely right that these systems are going to change rapidly, and the challenge will be to make the appropriate changes at the appropriate times and spend the appropriate resources on that. I suppose I used the word "pilot" before. We are one of the pilot departments, and part of that is to ease our way into the systems to be able to test and pilot technology and hopefully provide good information for the decision makers within the desktop unit so that we can continue to update ourselves and update our department and make good decisions on technology.

Mr. Reid: One of the things I have learned since coming to this place is that technology does change very rapidly. I have indicated that six-month life span in the current technology that is on the marketplace now, and I know this from personal experience. I also know it from the cost side because technology that you are using today, that you are paying a fee to operate--and use the Internet for an example. If you have staff that are working on the Internet, or an e-mail system that utilizes the Internet services, your costs of operation are going to be at one level today because the equipment operates at a slower speed.

But if technology passes you by and comes out with a new piece in six months or a year and you do not keep current with that equipment, your costs could be reduced if you went to the new equipment. There is going to be a cost saving that is involved with that if you are able to purchase your equipment on a planned basis to keep current. You even yourself talked about not having current or sufficient equipment within the department. I suspect and I hope that you want to keep your costs under some kind of control there and to, wherever you can, effect cost savings. But if you do not utilize the technology that is available to allow you to do that, the software and the hardware that would be available on the market to allow you to do that, you are not going to be able to effect those savings.

If you do not know, if you are linking yourself in with this SHL SystemHouse system that is going to have you a $250,000-a-year ongoing cost, and you do not know whether or not you are going to have equipment upgrades at all or over what period of time, and the software changes that are coming on the market now that average about two to two to three years on upgrades for those particular software packages, it may be more applicable to the staff people that you have in this room and the people that work for them. You are not going to be able to take advantages of the improvements that are available in the technological side.

So I would like to ask you: since SHL SystemHouse is involved in this process and they are going to be setting it up, have they not told you, has Government Services not told anybody in your department whether or not you are going to see hardware upgrades over what period of time, if any? Who has licensed ownership of the software equipment, and what type of confidentiality of the records and the operations of your department do you have in place to protect third-party confidentiality that your department so often tells me is essential to the operations of your department?

* (1110)

Mr. Gilleshammer: It is the view of the senior staff in my department who work with this that we have ironclad confidentiality agreements, that they feel very comfortable with. You are right; we do have information, whether it is in the Labour Board or whether it is in Employment Standards. I am sure all departments of government have confidential information, certainly on the staffing side. I am assured by my senior staff that they do not have any feeling that confidentiality will be breached.

Part of the government-wide initiative to move in this direction is to be able to access and use contemporary software. One of the difficulties in government is the ability to employ technical staff and experts in the whole area of technology. I know that we have lost a lot of senior middle-management staff to private corporations simply because of the incentives and the pay scale that the private sector is offering. As a result, we have lost a lot of key people across government simply because we cannot compete with the wages that are being paid in the private sector. Part of the rationale for moving to this system is to be able to access that expertise in technology that we need.

It is not only within government that this is happening. I meet young people that were former students of mine or young people that have grown up in my communities who are very mobile, that are able to access jobs, high-paying jobs in the U.S., across Canada and here in Winnipeg, simply because of the demand for the expertise that they have. Government does not want to find itself vulnerable that we no longer have enough expertise.

One of the ways of mitigating that is to outsource some of this from companies like SystemHouse. There will be software upgrades on a regular basis. As I indicated earlier, the hardware upgrades will be on a three- or four-year renewal cycle. What I hear my honourable friend saying is in the work that he has done in this technological field, that everything becomes obsolete in six months and that systems will have to be replaced every six months. I do not think he is right there, although he perhaps has more knowledge in this area than I do, but I do agree that the changing technology will be a challenge, not only to government but to the private sector and others as well. We will do our best to stay as current as we can with both the software and the hardware.

You know, I do read a bit about it in the paper and about the challenges of the year 2000, and in journals and so forth. Sure, there is a nervousness across the world. Are we going to meet that challenge that is coming at us in the next short time? A lot of money is being spent by corporations and governments all over the place to try and meet the year 2000 challenge, and we will continue to have those challenges after that to try and keep current, to manage our resources so that we can make the appropriate decisions and appropriate expenditures when necessary.

Mr. Reid: I am still worried about the confidentiality, because the department does do work that is quite sensitive. I know I have personal friends that are in the computer business for one of the employers right across the street from this building here, works out of his home, works on a PC, but he is an employee of the company, and he does troubleshooting within the systems that that particular company has.

I take it that with the contract that the government has signed with SHL SystemHouse that you are going to have the same type of activities, people working external to this building, because government offices are spread around, they are not just here in the Legislature, that the SystemHouse people are going to be working external to your operations and tapping into your operations if necessary to do any kind of troubleshooting that they have. So there is the possibility of security breaches.

You say you have an ironclad agreement that is in place. You are not going to stop a hacker from coming into your system and accessing your personal data files. You could, if it was internal to your own operations in your own office itself, have that security system built in, but you cannot give an ironclad guarantee that you will not have somebody external coming into your systems, because I do not think there is a system yet that has been developed. Even the military of North America has not been able to stop people from accessing their computer systems. So you cannot say that it is an ironclad agreement that you have of confidentiality, because I do not think there is a system yet that has not been broken. So I am quite worried about the files and the information that you have that is confidential being put on that and being put into the hands of a third party to access that equipment, perhaps from a remote location.

You still have not answered the question with respect to the software. You say a regular update. What is regular? Five years, 10 years? Do you have any idea what is in the contract here that your department is now one of the pilot departments for?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I guess the member says that he is concerned about confidentiality, as we all are. Yes, there are hackers from around the world that I understand access the information from the FBI and the CIA and CSIS, the military. What the member is saying is maybe no system is safe, that all of us would be subject to having somebody access information no matter what our system is and, to some degree, that is true.

My senior staff who sit with me at the table say that they are comfortable with the systems that have been put in place to ensure confidentiality. I do not know whether the member would ever be satisfied that you would have absolute, total control of all information. Heavens, I understand sometimes even briefing notes end up in the NDP caucus room, and I do not know how that happens. But--

An Honourable Member: Thanks, Harold. Thanks for sending them.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, he says somebody sends them to him. Well, that is unfortunate. If these are confidential documents that are handled by professional staff we have to have a lot of trust and faith in them. So I guess no matter who is in charge of the system, people are going to be concerned about confidentiality. I have indicated that my staff who are working with the changes within the system are satisfied that the system will provide confidentiality but, having said that, someday maybe some of this information will fall into the wrong hands.

* (1120)

I can remember back in the mid-'80s when there were health records found in a back alley somewhere in the city of Winnipeg, hard copies of information on individuals who were accessing medical attention at hospitals and clinics. I guess there were people in charge of that and something went wrong. So perhaps I should not have used the word "ironclad." All I am saying is, my staff who have been working on this are very comfortable that the safeguards have been put in place.

If somebody working with that information chooses to release it to you, contrary to what they should be doing, that would be unfortunate but, whatever system you have, and you have referenced some of the major spy agencies of the world who occasionally have some information get out on them from what he termed hackers. I recognize that is true, but that does not sort of freeze us into suspended animation that we do not go ahead with this. We are part of a government-wide initiative; we are one of the pilots; work is progressing nicely. I have indicated that we will not be renewing our total equipment and our software every six months, as the members suggests, but that the generally accepted thinking within government is that hardware will be on a three- or four-year renewal cycle and that there will be regular software upgrades. I think my honourable friend is wondering what "regular" means.

Mr. David Faurschou, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair

Well, as new software comes onto the market and becomes available, it will be incumbent upon staff to look at it, evaluate it, and determine whether it is appropriate to make those changes. We have said that there are going to be ongoing costs, both for staffing and for hardware, for technology, and, within our department, we would be setting aside a certain number of dollars to be sure that our systems are compatible and modern in doing the job we feel we need to do.

Mr. Reid: Well, do I understand the minister correctly, Mr. Chairperson, when he says that the staff is going to evaluate new hardware, then I take it that the SHL people are not going to be responsible--for the software, I should say--if the staff are going to evaluate the new software in the department. Can you talk, as part of your contract, to the supplier of this software and hardware equipment and say that this is the type of equipment or software we would like to have in place for our particular operations because it would better meet our needs? Do you have that flexibility under this contract?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I really hate being redundant because your time is so valuable and this committee's time is so valuable, and the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), of course, is here, too, and we know how valuable her time is, but I have indicated that the Desktop Management Unit will be co-ordinating the needs of departments and the direction this is going. I have suggested to him twice or maybe three times that if he wants to get into the detail of this whole initiative, the more appropriate place would be to sit in on the Estimates of Government Services and the Desktop Management Unit and pose those questions.

But if the member is asking are staff from our department going to occasionally or often interrelate to staff within the Desktop Management Unit, the answer is yes.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me--and I may have misspoke myself really when I said $35 million, I believe it is much higher than that, around the $85-million range for this overall contract. This particular contract I take it is not in perpetuity, it is not going to be there forever, and governments obviously builds option clauses into the contracts that they sign so that they can re-evaluate based on needs.

Can you tell me, the equipment you have in place now--and I take it you must have some equipment in your overall operations that is fairly current--what happens with the equipment that you have, both current equipment and perhaps some pieces that are not so current? Do you still retain responsibility for that, or where does the responsibility lie for that equipment, or what is going to be the disposition for that equipment?

Mr. Gilleshammer: The final decisions on the future of that equipment have not yet been made.

Mr. Reid: So, you have built money into this year's budget. You have got an ongoing cost of $250,000. You have got two staff people who have been pulled away from your operations as a result of the decision to get involved in the desktop initiative. You do not know what is going to happen with your equipment in your operation or when you are going to get the new equipment to come into your department. Is that what you are telling me?

Mr. Gilleshammer: No. We have the new equipment now. What you asked, or one of the parts of your question, is what is the future for the old equipment, and I indicated that the final decision on that had not yet been made.

Mr. Reid: So then the 176 pieces that you have talked about, or the 176 systems that you have talked about for your staff, are new pieces of equipment that have come in. You are not using existing or current pieces of equipment that were currently or had been used by the department prior to the decision.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes, I am informed that we have 176 pieces that have been transitioned into our department, and this is new equipment. I think the member earlier referred to old equipment as garbage; I do not see it that way. There is going to be value in that old equipment, and there are some issues around its disposition that have not been totally resolved at this time. Again, that will be done on a government-wide basis, and the Department of Labour will not be working in isolation.

Mr. Reid: I understand you will not be working in isolation, because you are part of a pilot project for the overall government involvement in this area. Can you tell me if this contract was to end, who has ownership of the equipment, the hardware equipment?

Mr. Gilleshammer: The member is getting into the world of "if" and asking hypothetical questions, and I do not know whether he wants to go there or not. We will own the equipment.

Mr. Reid: It is built into the contract then that all government operations that are going to be supplied with computer systems, including the 176 units or pieces that Labour has, will be owned by the department when this contract ends. Can you also tell me what happens to the software licensing agreements that go with the hardware equipment? Who has ownership of those?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Again, the contract is housed with the Desktop Management Unit within the Department of Government Services. They will have the ownership of that software that the member asks about.

Mr. Reid: Okay, so that the desktop initiative unit people, which is an arm of government, will be responsible for all of the computer systems and software systems that the government will be using, and they will be responsible for the ownership of that equipment and the maintenance of that equipment.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes, we are unanimously agreed that you are right on that.

* (1130)

Mr. Reid: I thank the minister for the information. I am trying to get an understanding here of what happens, because I do not want to see the Department of Labour or any other government department caught short, if somewhere down the road there is a change of heart, because a particular contract does not meet the needs of the department or their overall government operations.

That is why I am asking questions here to get an understanding on what flexibility you built into the process that you are now setting up and of which you are one of the pilot departments, and, also, what the future holds for the department itself with respect to hardware and software flexibility in the future. Having bought equipment in 1990 for the operation of my own office--and the government knows, anybody that works with computers knows, what the value of a 386 computer is today. I have seen them used as doorstops when you go into some of the computer shops. So it tells you how quickly that technology can pass you by. Even more current equipment is used as doorstops today.

I am not saying it cannot be used somewhere, because the older equipment which is still functional can be used in some cases for educational purposes to allow school systems in the province of Manitoba to utilize that equipment to train our young people. Perhaps I should ask the question on whether or not your government, your department, is involved or has provided advice to this desktop initiative group and whether or not that equipment should be allocated to the various school divisions in the province if it is functional still to allow the school children the opportunity to make use of this equipment.

Mr. Gilleshammer: I agree with the member, what he referenced as garbage to government might be useful somewhere else. I would--[interjection] Well, sure, that is right. I remember when we moved from manual typewriters to electric and electronic ones and it was--

Mr. Reid: That is way before my time.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, some of us will remember that. I remember officials from the Department of Education having to tell school divisions that probably they would make good boat anchors, because there was no longer any use for them.

Mr. Reid: Do you still have them?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, the member knows that this becomes obsolete, but the school system certainly could benefit. I know many corporations take some of their obsolete equipment and donate it to schools, school divisions, and if it is, to use his word again, garbage to them or garbage to government, maybe it has some use for other people.

Mr. Reid: It is not my word though. Check Hansard; I did not use that word.

Mr. Gilleshammer: I believe the member did use the word "garbage" and we will check Hansard, sure. It will, I am sure, find good use somewhere, that if there is value in it, certainly somebody else should be able to benefit from it.

Mr. Reid: I will leave that with the department then. I just do not want to see this equipment, if it is still functioning, not put to some good use. It is in the sense of the minister's word of garbage to him and his department. If he wants to call it garbage, I mean, that is up to him. He can do that, but it may be useful and serviceable to other areas of the people of the province, whether it be school systems or other nonprofit agencies that may want to make use of that equipment. So I will leave it with the department, if you are talking with the desktop initiative unit people, to make sure that the serviceable equipment that is now surplus to your operations would perhaps be turned over to some worthy operations to give it the opportunity to make use of that equipment.

I want to ask questions with respect now to some of the things that have also been happening in this area. I know the minister has struck the minimum wage review board to take place. Can the minister tell me, because when I had asked him in Estimates this time last year, he said there was not a need to have the minimum wage review board struck. In fact, I think he said that no stakeholder had asked him to convene the board to look at the minimum wage in the province. At that time--just before that time, in fact, I think currently Manitoba is third last or tied for third or tied for third last in minimum wages in the country.

Can you tell me why you have had a change of heart to now strike the Minimum Wage Board to review that when, last year at this time, you chose that it was not a priority for you, your department, or the government? Why have you had a change of heart with respect to the Minimum Wage Board?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Just going back to the previous topic, I think we are on the same wavelength as the honourable member, that the technology that is obsolete to government I am sure still has tremendous value, and the Desktop Unit I am sure will bring forward recommendations. I would be very much assured that it will be put into the hands of people who can use it and the appropriate thing will be done.

Now, my honourable friend wants to talk about the minimum wage and characterized our discussions last year, I think, in a kind of negative light. I would say to him that the history of the Minimum Wage Board is that it is called from time to time and not on a regular schedule. I do recall saying, and my honourable friend would remember that I had just been in the department for a couple of months at that particular time, and quite correctly the issue had not been brought forward by any group at that time, as I was getting to meet some of the labour and management people within the province of Manitoba.

Since then, I have had the time to review the issue with my staff and take a look at it, and I am of the opinion that it is appropriate to strike that board at this time. I have sent letters to the Manitoba Federation of Labour and, I believe it is, to the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, to provide me with some names of people who would serve on that board and do a community consultation.

I have just received some response to that in recent weeks, and I anticipate additional response in the near future. As soon as I have received that information and have been able to designate a chair, we would be reconstituting that. I anticipate what we would do is probably do a press release indicating as much information on how the board is constituted and where they are going to be and try and make interested parties aware of the process. I am anxious to proceed with that.

Mr. Reid: Mr. Chairperson, can the minister tell me--because last year he said that none of the stakeholders had requested, and he has referenced the Manitoba Federation of Labour and the Chamber of Commerce representatives. Has either one of those asked you as stakeholders to review the minimum wage, and, if so, will you identify which one?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Numerous people including the member for Transcona has brought it to my attention. I know that I indicated in the House one day in a question that he asked me about this issue. I told him at that time that we had recently had a very positive meeting with the MFL, it was one of the issues that they raised, and I responded in a positive way to that.

Since that time other individuals who are part of organizations have also asked me about it, and it is generally understood that the Minimum Wage Board is going to be called. I would hope that we have them functioning in the near future.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me: have representatives from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business or the Chambers of Commerce for the province of Manitoba asked the minister to review the minimum wage in the province of Manitoba?

Mr. Gilleshammer: I am sorry, you said the Manitoba Chamber or the Winnipeg Chamber?

Mr. Reid: Manitoba Chambers of Commerce. All of them.

Just for clarification, Mr. Chairperson, the province of Manitoba has many Chambers of Commerce in it. I know they are represented by one body, the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce, but not to exclude others in the province of Manitoba, to find out which, if any, of those may have requested as stakeholders in this process, whether or not they have requested the minister to review the minimum wage level in this province.

* (1140)

Mr. Gilleshammer: I will indicate that my honourable friend from Transcona was the very first person to raise it and it was last year in Estimates. Secondly, it was raised by the Manitoba Federation--

An Honourable Member: In the year before.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, my honourable friend says the year before. I was not the minister the year before. We have only been through this process once, and this is our second time. But I do give the member total credit. He was the very first Manitoban, the very first member of the Legislature to raise it, and I took it very seriously, and we have indicated that we are going to proceed with that.

It was secondly raised with me by the Manitoba Federation of Labour, and in my response to a question that you asked me in December, I believe, I indicated that we were going to start the process. Since then, because other people knew about it, they have certainly inquired and they have certainly talked to me about it, so it has not been a secret. I think it has been covered in the press in December. I think I heard it in the electronic media, and I am prepared to give my honourable friend full credit. He was the first one to ask, and I am pleased that we have been able to respond positively to him.

Mr. Reid: Just for the minister's information, I did ask him to strike the minimum wage review board, but I did so at this time last year, a year ago. I did not ask in December, although my concerns would still be relevant in December. I have asked the previous Minister of Labour, as well, to have that situation under review.

Instead of having ad hoc minimum wage adjustments, has the minister and his government given any consideration to attaching the minimum wage of the province to the average wage composite index for the province of Manitoba, so that we do not have to have these ad hoc adjustments, so that there would be an orderly process that would be in place so that people who are working at minimum wage jobs in the business community would be aware of changes that would be coming and that it could be done in an orderly fashion. Has any consideration been undertaken in that? Are you looking at many changes in that area?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, first and foremost, we are going to follow the process that is in our current legislation, and I am sensing that what the member is asking is for us to bring forward legislation to make amendment to the minimum wage act.

We are not planning that this session. If I have not indicated to my honourable friend before, we are bringing forward only one piece of legislation this session, and it was tabled the other day. I think the member has a copy of it, and we have offered to spend some time with him. I know that it will not be next week, but I think that what our discussion yesterday was, that when you have time you will let me know, and we will set up a meeting within days to brief you on the legislation. So we do not have any plans at this time to make any amendment to that legislation.

Mr. Reid: So then the plan of your government is then to just continue to do ad hoc adjustments to the Minimum Wage Board, and as we have seen historically through the performance of your government, that it was done just prior to or around the 1990 election time. It was done just prior to the 1995 general election, and we are now approaching the 1999 provincial general election if you follow historical voting patterns for the province.

So it seems like just before every election, you strike the minimum wage review board for the province, and you are starting to develop quite a history here of timing with respect to the provincial general election. Is there not some way that we could have a more orderly process in place so that this could be tied to the performance of the economy of the province of Manitoba that would take this away from ad hoc adjustments done purely for political purposes?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I was not here during the 1980s when the member's party was governing this province and where rates such as Autopac were set at the cabinet table. Maybe that is where the member gets this idea that these things have some connection to political exercises in the province.

I have never seen it that way. In fact, because of the way that his party managed issues such as the government auto insurance, where the entire province was in an uproar because of the way those rates were fiddled with at the cabinet table, one of the first things we did was turn that over to an external third party to review them. So, I mean, our history is very clear that a third objective party should review rates like that.

The history of setting Autopac rates was not a very good one. I think in this case we have legislation that we live by, that the previous government lived by. They did not see fit to change it, but I would make a commitment to have my staff bring forward for discussion internally the current legislation and to look very closely at it.

I am told that there is not a jurisdiction in Canada that has indexed rates. Now, that is the advice I am given from my staff, so I do not believe the province of Saskatchewan or British Columbia or wherever socialist governments are in power follow that practice. I do not think Liberal governments follow that practice. I guess what my honourable friend is asking us to do is to pioneer a new way.

An Honourable Member: Hmm, that would be an interesting concept.

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, we followed your good advice last year, so, you know, I have given him the commitment that I will review the legislation with my staff, but I can tell him very clearly we are not bringing it forward in this session. We have tried to table the majority of our legislation early in the session, and other legislation we have indicated to critics, at least I have, what we are doing, bringing forward a particular bill.

That is the only bill that we will have this session, but my commitment is to spend some time with staff to look at the existing legislation and I think look at existing legislation in other jurisdictions. I am told that nobody else indexes it. Maybe the member has information from his fellow travellers in Saskatchewan or B.C. that they are going to do this. I am not sure.

Mr. Reid: I take it you mean life's travellers; we are all life's travellers down the road. I have talked with other jurisdictions about their minimum wage. It is interesting you note the social democrat provinces in your comments, Mr. Minister. Saskatchewan is still considerably ahead of the Province of Manitoba in minimum wage. In fact, I suspect that when you have your Minimum Wage Board, you will just barely meet or slightly exceed the minimum wage of Saskatchewan, but purely for political reasons. The province of B.C., the minimum wage is $7.15 an hour.

An Honourable Member: Their economy is ramming through the floor, is it not?

* (1150)

Mr. Reid: Yes, and you have got an out-migration of a significant number of people in the province here in Manitoba. They cannot find jobs here, so they are going elsewhere in western Canada. While they were the best performing economy in Canada during the recession, Manitoba was in the toilet, but the Minister of I, T and T did not see fit to make comment at that time. You can tell that he was not too worried about the B.C. economy when they were steamrollering along, as your Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) likes to talk about.

So your minimum wage in your social democrat provinces of this country is doing quite well, and no doubt they will be making some adjustments to their minimum wage in the not too distant future. If it is a good idea to have the minimum wage tied to the average composite wage for the province of Manitoba--I always thought that your government, or at least you like to tell us that you want to be leaders in initiatives in the country, so I do not know why you would not give some consideration to this.

An Honourable Member: And, indeed, we are.

Mr. Reid: Well, that is not what the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer) has just said here a few moments ago. I know you want to inject yourself, Mr. Minister of I, T and T, want to inject yourself into the conversation here today, and you are more than willing to pull up a chair at the head of the table here and inject your comments and ask about the labouring people of your province, but I am sure you are not too worried about that. You have other interests that you are taking care of to make sure that you have feathered the nests of your own friends.

Mr. Chairman, I digress, and I want to get back and ask the minister with respect to the minimum wage. What is his implementation time line with respect to the changes and the recommendations that would come back from the review body that he has now struck, since it is an ad hoc body only at his call?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, what I heard the honourable member say--and I am sure he wants to listen because he does ask from time to time thought-provoking and intelligent questions--he stated that he thinks that we should be compared with Saskatchewan, and I do not think he is wrong there. I know that when we look at many comparisons, it is unfair to look at, say, the cost of living in Toronto compared to what it is in western Manitoba. We do have many comparisons with Saskatchewan, and I know that we have in some ways similar economies. We have similar sized populations. We both tend to lead the country in terms of the unemployment statistics. I did not see the figures that came out today, but I did hear on the radio early this morning that our unemployment rate is now 5.2 percent, and I know Saskatchewan has always been very low too--[interjection]

I can tell the member that the stats that came out today had Manitoba with the lowest unemployment rate in the country, and I know that he would share my pride in that, being a fellow Manitoban.

Mr. Chairperson in the Chair

Any comparison that we have with the province of Saskatchewan tends to be relatively valid because we do share the same part of North America. I heard very clearly the member suggest that the Minimum Wage Board should perhaps look at what Saskatchewan is doing, and I will say very clearly I do not intend to interfere with them. I think that they should have public hearings and that they should hear any and all people who want to have some input and give advice to government on the minimum wage.

I would think that a natural part of their deliberations, besides hearing from Manitobans from all corners of our province, from the city of Winnipeg to the North, to the rural areas, to our growing cities like Steinbach and communities like Morden, Winkler, I think it is incumbent upon them to hear from Manitobans in all areas to have some input on what they think the current minimum wage should be. I would say that I expect them to be totally unfettered in the process that they follow, and I would direct them and encourage them to consult as widely as possible. It would be quite natural to look at interprovincial comparisons, as well, that reflect what other jurisdictions are doing. So I would hope that in the near future we can get the process started and give them the appropriate time to listen to Manitobans, to have their deliberations, and to bring back a recommendation to government.

I am informed by my deputy that historically the Minimum Wage Board would take about four months to hold those hearings and present that information to government. I know that just the time frame we are in that this may encompass the summer holiday period in Manitoba which might affect them one way or the other, but historically it has been about a four-month process, and historically governments have taken about two months after that to address the issue.

Mr. Reid: So it is going to be some time down the road later this year when you will make your announcement, likely early in the fall, with respect to the minimum wage, and the timing will be there for January 1. It just happens you have another budget coming out in April, and it will be the four-year mark for the government which has historically been the time for the provincial general election. I guess it is just coincident again, for the third time, third consecutive time, that you have adjusted the minimum wage dealing with the--coincidentally in timing with the provincial general election. So I guess it is just a pattern that is developing for your government, and it is nothing unusual, I guess, that we should not expect for you now, as we have seen develop in the past.

Just to let the minister know with respect to the unemployment stats for the country here--and we want to do comparisons between Manitoba and the province of Saskatchewan--Winnipeg's unemployment rate just came out today. Winnipeg is at 5.8 percent; Regina is at 4.9 percent. If you want to do comparisons, Mr. Minister, on the unemployment rates for the provinces overall, Manitoba for the first time tied Saskatchewan. We were both at 6.2 percent. So you have not beat Saskatchewan this time, and do not let the Minister of I, T and T or yourself put unfactual information on the record about the performance of the province in comparison with the province of Saskatchewan.

Yes, we are happy to see that your unemployment rate has for the first time matched Saskatchewan.

An Honourable Member: "Our" unemployment rate.

Mr. Reid: Yes, I stand corrected. Our unemployment rate in the province of Manitoba has matched the province of Saskatchewan who has been a leader in the country with respect to employment of the people, and we are happy to see for the first time that I can recall in my memory that you have actually matched Saskatchewan, since I have been in this building.

An Honourable Member: Why is that?

Mr. Reid: Why is that? Because you also have an out-migration in the province here, which probably says that you have less people available for the workforce.

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. I would remind all honourable members that any comments that they are going to make that they do make their comments through the Chair. That will eliminate any discussions back and forth and keep things in control.

The honourable member for Transcona, to finish your comments.

Mr. Reid: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. You are absolutely right, and I apologize to you for not directing my comments through the Chair, as has been my practice in the past.

I want to ask the minister with respect to his department--last time, I believe, in this area I had made some requests from him about the cost recovery for his department, and I think you had indicated last year at 63 percent--any changes contemplated within the fee structure? Are you contemplating any changes with respect to cost recovery for your department's operations overall?

Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, you know we have really had a pleasant discussion this morning, and I am pleased that my honourable friend shares the pride I have in Manitoba and the fact that the unemployment rate is so low. I think it bodes well for the future and the future of our province. We have worked very diligently to attract industry to Manitoba to provide jobs for Manitobans, and I know that there have been many initiatives in the city of Winnipeg here that are employing thousands and thousands more Manitobans. I would--[interjection] Well, the member interjects. On the one hand he says congratulations for having great numbers and tying Saskatchewan, and then in a breath shortly after that, he says why are your numbers so bad. You cannot have it both ways, you know.

I distinctly heard the member for Transcona say that he was pleased that the unemployment rate had gone down, and I would hope that is true, because surely he would not represent a fine constituency like Transcona and have some glee if there is unemployment in the province. So, again, I share that pride with him, and I think we can all brag about our province. I would even encourage him to come out to rural Manitoba. I know the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) was out there recently in Brandon, and there are tremendous things going on out there. It is unbelievable the energy and enthusiasm in the city of Brandon these day. It is not just the Maple Leaf development but many other factors out there and developments which contribute to this unemployment rate.

I would urge the member for Transcona to take some time on a weekend or intersessionally to get out to rural Manitoba. I would even invite him to the fine constituency of Minnedosa to see the developments that are going on there. [interjection] He has been there. We have a railroad there, too, and I am sure he would have some interest in that. But it is a booming community, and we honour, of course, the history of the railroad in Minnedosa. I know that my honourable friend would feel quite at home there. You know, you do not even have to go that far. You could just slip out to Elie and see the Isobord plant which is developing the product that they have ready to go, and other developments happening there.

One of the trends that the member should take note of is that the population in many areas of rural Manitoba is growing. We had been through decades where the city of Winnipeg--and a very unique part of Canada, where the city of Winnipeg continues to grow and is the only metropolis of that size within the province. It is heartening and encouraging to see rural communities, the growth they are having and the economic activity that is happening. That is part of the good news of these statistics that the Minister of I, T and T was communicating to you earlier.

So again we share a common cause I think and take pride in the fact that Manitoba is growing, jobs are being created out there, the unemployment rate is going down and the circumstances of Manitobans are improving.

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The time being 12 noon, I am interrupting proceedings, and the Committee of Supply will resume sitting this afternoon following the conclusion of Routine Proceedings.