Mr. Speaker: Bill 300, The Jewish Foundation of Manitoba Incorporation Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for St. Norbert.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, I know that we have a number of people who are prepared to speak to this bill, so I will just move on and give the floor to the members who are prepared at this time.

Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to rise today to speak on Bill 300, the bill that has been brought forward by the honourable Member for Riel (Ms. Asper). I would like to say that this, I believe, is an excellent bill that the Member for Riel has brought forward. I certainly support it, and I applaud her for taking the initiative as a member of this Legislature. I do not know if these are her words, but I think what she is trying to do is to allow for the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba to come in to operate in terms of reality as we see in today's society.

I think the fact that the foundation has done outstanding work in the past has always been something that people have looked forward to in terms of their ability to recognize not only their place, what they do here in the province, but I believe their leadership, and I believe that they have always been a foundation that has done just outstanding work in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker.

I would say that all the amendments that the honourable Member for Riel has put forward I support. They make a tremendous amount of sense. The fact that the board has been able to do such good work to date with the situation that they find themselves in only, I think, speaks, Mr. Speaker, to the fact of their incredible dedication and their incredible ability to operate and look towards the future to do the right things.

I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, in acknowledging that this fund that has been set up, that the foundation clearly looks towards putting money into organizations and for individuals that are involved in the education, arts and culture, health, social services, recreation and religion as well.

I can tell you emphatically that when you look around the community of Winnipeg and, indeed, when you look around the province of Manitoba, I believe the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba has not only recognized the importance of the Jewish people in Winnipeg but their ability, I believe, to demonstrate that when people work together, when people have an understanding of not only the proud history that they obviously have, but I believe that the people that I have gotten to know and spent time with talking and learning about Judaism, I find that there is a real not only sense of pride from the history but a looking forward always to what it means for their children.

I believe that you get abilities given to you in life. I believe that a lot of the people involved in the Jewish Foundation, not only do they accept those abilities, but they pass them on. They pass them on to other generations because there is clearly a true, proud sense of heritage.

I very much would support Bill 300. I know the amendments that the honourable member has indicated clearly will help the foundation to grow, expand and operate as it should in today's society. We will find that the wonderful things that the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba has done in the past will again continue to grow in that proud tradition that I believe the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba has already bestowed on the people of Manitoba.

I notice, Mr. Speaker, and I will just make a side notion, that a lot of us are blessed in Manitoba. I know there are a lot of wonderful people involved in the Jewish Foundation. I think it is important, if I could just make a comment about the Asper family, for example; in Manitoba, they have done such wonderful things. I realize that this is perhaps out of the scope of the foundation, but I think it is important to make a note of what they have done for this community. It is unsurpassed; it is unselfish; and it speaks to the very heart of why the Jewish Foundation, I believe, is so important for the success and well-being of Manitobans.

The one thing that always amazes me is, through the hardships that the Jewish people have come through, they make an impact on a community because they believe in their heritage. But not only do they make an impact on their community for their own people, they open their doors and they welcome everyone into their home. It is that generous spirit of human co-operation that exists that I think we all can learn from.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would very much like to again offer my support to the Member for Riel (Ms. Asper). I applaud her for bringing this amendment forward, Bill 300. I would like to offer my support on behalf of the people of Kirkfield Park. I would like to congratulate and I would like to acknowledge my support to Bill 300.

Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the honourable member, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us from Deloraine Elementary School 25 Grade 5 students under the direction of Mr. Herb Horner. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire).

Also in the public gallery, from Garden Grove School we have 70 Grade 5 students under the direction of Mr. David Boult. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Labour and Immigration (Ms. Barrett).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.

* (10:10)

Mrs. Louise Dacquay (Seine River): Mr. Speaker, I, too, am pleased to be able to put a few comments on the record regarding Bill 300, The Jewish Foundation of Manitoba Incorporation Amendment Act. Our caucus will have one or two more speakers. Then we will be supporting this legislation and moving it to committee.

I did speak to Mr. David Cohen yesterday. He was very appreciative of the fact that I had touched base with him and that our caucus would be supporting this very worthwhile legislation. As the critic responsible for this legislation, I will just put a few very brief comments on the record.

The previous legislation, dating back to 1960-something, I believe–1964 was when the Jewish Foundation was initially incorporated–is not practical for their purposes today. As a direct result, the legislation was very outdated, and it did not enable the foundation to govern its association most effectively.

There are three or four major changes. They are asking for increased representation on their board, and that, obviously, will bring them more talented people and more ideas around the table. The investment powers of the foundation are being expanded to allow them to invest and re-invest in more practical ways than they are currently allowed to do under the restrictions of the current act. This foundation does, indeed, support very worthwhile charitable associations and groups and their endeavours, and the amount of money that they handle and distribute is phenomenal. It is in excess of $40 million.

This foundation, through its funding, has indeed encouraged the creation and facilitates the creation and growth of funds that are indeed endowed to the association to allow the Jewish community to realize its potential. It distributes the grants that reflect the donors' wishes and community priorities, and it definitely provides leadership in the Jewish community.

I would like to thank the honourable Member for Riel (Ms. Asper) for bringing this very worthwhile piece of legislation forward, and, as I indicated earlier, we will be moving this to committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to thank the Member for Riel (Ms. Asper) for introducing this bill in the House. I am very pleased to indicate in the House that I am very supportive of this bill today.

The Jewish community is a very important and integral part of our community in Tuxedo, and I am very pleased, again, to just put a few words on the record regarding this bill.

The Jewish Foundation of Manitoba, in keeping with the Jewish heritage and values, encourages and facilitates the creation and growth of the endowment funds to enable the community to realize its potential. The foundation maintains effective stewardship over all assets entrusted to it and distributes grants that reflect donors' wishes and community priorities and provides leadership in the Jewish and general communities.

The fund consists of over $40 million, and the income from the fund is distributed to a wide range of organizations and individuals involved in the areas of education, arts and culture, health, social services, recreation and religion. The Women's Endowment Fund, which is operated by the foundation, was established in 1994 and currently consists of over $110,000 to generate financial resources for the benefit of Manitoba women.

Essentially what this bill does, Mr. Speaker, is it modernizes and allows the Jewish Foundation to operate in today's realities. In a nutshell, the bill increases the number of members allowed on the board from 20 to 25, which reflects the changes of the population. It clarifies and expands the types of investment products that can be chosen in a prudent manner by the foundation board. This, obviously, allows for diversification of the funds allowed, and we know that through diversification you decrease risk and increase the potential long-term investments, and those investments, the income from those investments eventually ends up back in the community which is obviously very, very beneficial.

The board also allows to establish the committees administering the affairs of the foundation. They were only allowed initially to have two committees, each consisting of five members, but now the bill allows to appoint such committees as considered necessary, which just makes sense.

So I believe this bill would be very beneficial for the Jewish community, as well, indeed, for the community of Tuxedo. On behalf of the constituents of Tuxedo, I would like to thank once again the Member for Riel (Ms. Asper) for bringing this forward and will indicate once again for the record that I will be very much in favour of this.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 300, The Jewish Foundation of Manitoba Incorporation Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

Mr. Speaker: Debate on second reading, public bills, Bill 200, The Electoral Divisions Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin.

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin-Roblin): It is a pleasure to rise today and speak on this bill that has been put forward. The way I see this, we have, when it comes to selecting our electoral boundaries and the rules governing elections in this province, a couple of competing principles. What we should strive to achieve in this Legislature is a balance between two very important principles.

On the one hand, I think anybody here, and I think most Manitobans understand, that you have to have a process that is non-partisan, a process that boils out the partisan politics that sometimes take place in this province in this Legislature. On the other hand, the other principle, the other very strong principle that we have to keep in mind, is that we need to reflect our constituents in this Legislature, not just in the policies we adopt and the laws that we make but reflect them also in the boundaries that we have set up to govern and the names certainly of the constituencies that we represent. We need that to reflect accurately our geographical locations. We need that to reflect the make-up of the areas of the province that we represent.

Now, I understand that the member who put forward this proposal here to the Legislature wants to reflect accurately the constituency that he represents. I have no doubts about that, Mr. Speaker, and that is commendable. What we need to do, however, in my opinion, is balance those two principles, the non-partisan principle that I think we all need to be committed to with the need and our desire to reflect accurately the people that we represent.

I believe the process, as set out by the Electoral Boundaries Commission, finds that balance. It strikes the balance between those two principles. I want to give a very good example and brag a little bit about my constituents at the same time, so I think that is another very important principle that we need to reflect in this House.

* (10:20)

I want to use the Dauphin-Roblin constituency as an example by which, I think, all members here should follow. When the original proposal was made, the boundaries were carved out of our area. We took the area of Mallard and Waterhen and Skownan First Nation, and it was moved for all the right reasons into the Swan River constituency. There were good reasons to do that. It was a community of interest. There were connections to other communities within the riding of Swan River. The commission took the nine polls that are found in the town of Roblin and in the R.M. of Shellmouth and in the R.M. of Park up near San Clara and moved it from the Russell constituency into the Dauphin constituency. Everything was fine, but a number of us realized that when they just called this riding Dauphin, it was not going to reflect accurately the constituency that they had made.

So a number of us, myself included, the Member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), a fellow by the name of Lorne Boguski, who was a very fine Progressive Conservative candidate in the Dauphin-Roblin constituency, a representative of the Liberal Party, all made presentations to the Boundaries Commission and gave very compelling arguments in favour of changing the name that was proposed, which was just Dauphin, to add the word "Roblin" so that it would now become Dauphin-Roblin.

Everything was okay. The commission took that information, went back to deliberate; then they came out with their final proposal for the boundaries and for the names of these constituencies. You know what, Mr. Speaker? I think they did a very wise thing. They listened to myself and to the Member for Swan River and to Mr. Boguski, representing the Conservative Party, they listened to the Liberal representative, and they said that makes sense. Let us add the word "Roblin" there.

The word "Roblin" has always been reflected in this Legislature. It would have been a shame if they had just left the constituency called Dauphin. But the commission did the right thing. The commission added the word "Roblin" so that today my constituency, as I speak on the proposal put forward by the Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler), who thinks the world revolves around somebody other than him–that is kind of a shame–the constituency that I represent now accurately reflects, not only in boundaries but in name, our riding.

We followed the process, a very good process, a process that balances that principle of non-partisanship with the principle of reflecting our constituencies. I want to say, Mr. Speaker, every single one of us in this Legislature had that opportunity to follow the procedure and to do it correctly and to do it in such a way that we do not jeopardize the principle of this process being non-partisan.

So, Mr. Speaker, the process works. My encouragement to people is to follow that process, take every opportunity to reflect your constituencies both in boundary and in name through the process as it exists, because there is nothing more important to our democracy in Manitoba than solid processes and solid people following those processes. Thank you very much.

Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the debate of this particular bill, which is one that I appreciate and has garnered a great deal of thought in debate here in the Chamber and to recognize the input of the colleague from Dauphin-Roblin. I do appreciate his consideration, Mr. Speaker, of balance between impartiality that the Manitoba Electoral Boundaries Commission, in fact, reflects and should not be impeded in any fashion by special interest groups.

However, we as legislators of this Chamber have a responsibility to examine the recommendations that are put forward by the Manitoba Electoral Boundaries Commission and to modify, which on occasion, Mr. Speaker, has, in fact, taken place. I have researched this, and the Manitoba Legislative Assembly has with due consideration exercised its responsibility in review of the proposals and has made changes when oversights have perhaps come into play.

Now, the Electoral Boundaries Commission, as impartial that body is, takes into consideration all materials presented before it and also has an obligation to do research, to verify the information and, in fact, to put forward considerations that they believe are accurate and do indeed reflect support of their recommendations.

I do want to impress upon all members here that it is our responsibility to examine the recommendations and to alter, if we as a Chamber believe there is concrete foundation, to look in this case at the naming of a constituency.

In the naming of this constituency, the rationale the colleague from Springfield has put forward in this private member's bill reflects the historical nature of the constituency which he represents. Now, I want the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers) to take into consideration the history of St. Paul. St. Paul, in fact, provided to this Legislative Chamber an individual that is recognized as being the first Speaker of the House, insofar as Dr. Curtis Bird occupied the Speaker's Chair. [interjection] Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin for correcting me. I do believe that Mr. Bird was the second Speaker of the House. There was one predecessor to that.

However, the distinguishing characteristic to Doctor Bird was, in fact, his caring, his compassion for the practice of medicine and all those in need of his consideration. It was that compassion that was played upon to lure the Speaker of the House to leave the Chamber and the security of the Chamber during that hotly contested debate of The City of Assiniboia Act. Many, many people within now the city of Winnipeg, as we know it now, wanted to impress upon this Chamber that that was a name in error. It should, in fact, have read The City of Winnipeg Act and not The City of Assiniboia.

* (10:30)

Doctor Bird left the Chamber and was confronted by a number of individuals that wanted to get their say on this matter and showed their displeasure as being called out of order when they wanted to participate in the debate in this Chamber, which we all know is not possible, the debate on The City of Assiniboia Act. They were in the Chamber and wanted to participate in the debate and were ruled out of order by the then-Speaker of the House, Doctor Bird. So for this ruling of out of order, Doctor Bird, when confronted by these individuals, after being lured out on the compassionate plea for medical assistance, was promptly tarred and feathered.

There are times, I guess, the responsibilities as Speaker may throw you in harm's way, but that is well over a hundred years ago.

In any event, I do want to bring to the Chamber the information that St. Paul's has delivered to this Chamber through election very distinguished individuals, one of whom I speak, so I feel it is imperative as a tribute to their legacy within this Chamber that St. Paul's is reflected in name as a constituency, perhaps not in whole, but perhaps in part, as this private member's legislation requests. So I want to leave with all members here this morning the point that we have a responsibility to review, and it is this responsibility that I ask all members to consider very strongly in this case to support this legislation and amend so St. Paul's is reflected in name in honour of the many individuals that represented St. Paul's in our history.

I just want to add others to that list of Curtis J. Bird, Alexander Kamloop Black and Samuel Clark Biggs as other members that represented St. Paul's in the early, formative years of our province.

So, with that, Mr. Speaker, I conclude by once again requesting all members' sincere consideration of this bill and to support the change in name to St. Paul's-Springfield. Thank you.

Ms. Nancy Allan (St. Vital): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers), that debate now be adjourned.

Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Member for St. Vital, seconded by the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin, that debate be adjourned. Agreed?

An Honourable Member: No.

Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of adjourning the debate, say yea.

Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.

Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Yeas and Nays.

Mr. Speaker: Yeas and Nays has been called for. According to our rules, when a division is requested during private members' hour, that division shall be deferred to the next private members' hour when it will be conducted as the first item of business, so at 11 o'clock, we will have our vote.

Mr. Speaker: Moving on to the next, Bill 201, The Electoral Divisions Amendment Act (2), standing in the name of the honourable Member for Transcona.

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to add my comments to Bill 201, The Electoral Divisions Amendment Act (2). It was introduced just a short time ago by the honourable Member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer).

Of course, in second reading of this bill, we are to speak to the principle of the bill, and that is what my intent is here today.

With this piece of legislation, I have had a chance to read through it and, of course, had a chance to look back on some of the historical aspects with respect to the Electoral Boundaries Commission in our province and the role and the function that they play in the process of establishing boundaries and names for the different constituencies in our province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, as probably most members of this Legislature will know or recall, the Electoral Boundaries Commission is struck every 10 years. I know I looked back on the comments by my colleague the honourable Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) with respect to her comments that she has made on this particular bill. She has obviously a great deal more experience than I do and knowledge about the process, and she studied it at some length a number of years ago.

The Electoral Boundaries, of course, as its name would reflect, looks at the boundaries of the constituencies in our province, and I think back to the process that we had that occurred during the 1990s, when I was a member of this House as well. The Boundaries Commission is also responsible not just to look at the boundaries but also to look at the names of the different constituencies in the province. As my colleague the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers) has indicated here, during the course of those last hearings the Boundaries Commission undertook during the 1990s, there were representations made by the three parties in that particular constituency of Dauphin-Roblin with respect to adding the name of Roblin to that particular constituency.

Now, I do know that that is perhaps the appropriate process for those boundary names to take place. There is a very fundamental or underlying principle that occurs with respect to establishing the boundaries in our province and that the Boundaries Commission undertakes that work.

The principle that I believe it follows is the principle of non-partisanship, and that is, I believe, the process that we want these particular names and the boundaries' borders of the various constituencies to take. Now, I recall, during the 1990s, the Boundaries Commission was struck by the then-government of the day, and I know members opposite were a part of the government when that Boundaries Commission was struck.

The Boundaries Commission is comprised of three very distinguished and honourable people who would sit in as members of the Boundaries Commission. They are the president of the University of Manitoba, the chief justice for the Provincial Court in Manitoba and the Chief Electoral Officer. These three non-partisan individuals would act as a group as a part of the Boundaries Commission.

The Boundaries Commission work would involve looking at the historical divisions or boundaries that would occur, whether it be particular rivers or particular sections of our geography in the province that would be considered to be natural boundaries, and that would be part of the process that they would consider. They would also look at the layout or the geographic layout of the various communities within our province and how those communities would fit into an electoral boundaries map and the natural links that those communities would have with one another.

Now, the Electoral Boundaries Commission, after they have looked at all of these features of the different regions of our province, would come forward with a draft set of recommendations and a draft map. I recall as a member of this Legislature receiving a copy of that map. Of course, there were proposed constituency names that would be attached to that process.

Now, upon receiving that map, of course, each sitting member of the Legislature has the opportunity to review the boundaries, to look at them and to see the natural fit with the various communities that each of us represent under the existing map at the time and whether or not there was any significant changes.

* (10:40)

I do recall, during the 1990s, the Boundaries Commission indicated in my own constituency, and I know in the bordering constituency of Radisson that my colleague represents, where we were, in the sense relating to the population base of our province, slightly underrepresented on average, compared to the average constituencies in the province. There were a number of other constituencies that obviously had larger populations, but the underlying premise of equal representation in this Legislature is, I think, a principle that we have to follow, and that is another one of the guiding criteria that the Boundaries Commission looks at. So I think that is something that this Legislature has to be cognizant of as well.

Now, after that, the Boundaries Commission proposes and sets forward a draft proposal where members of the Legislature have the opportunity to comment on those draft recommendations. The Boundaries Commission then strikes a series of public hearings around and throughout the province. It gives members of the public the opportunity to come forward at those public hearings and to make representation to the Boundaries Commission. The Boundaries Commission, Mr. Speaker, also accepts and receives written submissions from interested groups or individuals in our province and will take into consideration the recommendations that they receive from the citizens of Manitoba with respect to the boundaries and the names of the various constituencies.

I know my colleague here, the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale), has indicated to me that, during the review of that last process, it was proposed by the Boundaries Commission that the constituency that he now represents, the Boundaries Commission had proposed that the name of that be "Montcalm." The minister has indicated to me that during his research and the research of his community that was comprised, in a large part, by the Fort Garry area, that they could find no attachment of the name "Montcalm" to any living individual. There was no street name. There was no community club. There was no war hero that we were recognizing and honouring in the process.

An Honourable Member: No Plains of Abraham.

Mr. Reid: Perhaps that was one of the things that they were considering at the time, but the name "Montcalm" did not, from the best of our understanding, represent any significant part and was not a part of the constituency that the Boundaries Commission was considering to name it after.

So I know my colleague the minister made representation to that Boundaries Commission and suggested that perhaps they would want to reconsider the decision with respect to the boundary name. The process was followed in that case, and the name was then subsequently changed to Fort Garry. There was a natural process that was followed with respect to the changing of constituency names.

So I think that that process was followed during the Boundaries Commission's hearings, and, of course, at the end of that process, the Boundaries Commission will come forward with their report containing obviously recom-mendations with respect to the boundaries for the 57 constituencies in the province, but at the same time, they will also recommend constituency names. That report will come back to the Manitoba Legislature where the government of the day and the Manitoba Legislature and all 57 MLAs will have a chance to again comment on the constituency boundaries and the constituency names, and, of course, that legislation will then be voted upon by members of the Legislature. That will form the basis under which the constituency boundaries are set for the future provincial general elections or by-elections and, of course, those names and the associated names that would be attached to those constituencies.

So I think there was an underlying principle here, that the Boundaries Commission has a duty and a responsibility to establish, in a fair, open, and with public consultation, non-partisan process under which the constituency boundaries and the constituency names would apply.

So I think, Mr. Speaker, that the members opposite would do well, the next time the constituency boundaries are under review by the Boundaries Commission, when it will be struck, of course, in the coming years, that the members opposite or any member of the public, for that matter, could come forward and make their representation to the provincial Boundaries Commission, Electoral Boundaries Commission, and at that time they could suggest or recommend names. It would also give the opportunity for other members of the public that perhaps do not agree with them to come forward at that time and to make their suggestions perhaps for an alternate name other than the one that the members may be proposing.

So I think that we have a process that we need to follow, and that process would be through the Electoral Boundaries review commission and that we would follow that process in a fair, open and non-partisan fashion.

So, Mr. Speaker, with those few comments, I would conclude my comments with respect to Bill 201.

Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity once again to speak to a private member's bill that is intended to reflect the changes that have taken place in electoral boundaries as proposed previously by the Manitoba Electoral Boundaries Commission. I really, truly appreciate the honourable Member for Transcona's (Mr. Reid) remarks in regard to the process. In fact, it is a good process and, for the most part, is accepted in whole by this Legislative Assembly because of the good work that these distinguished individuals of our province provide to us with their recommendations.

However, sometimes not all of the information is, in fact, provided to these distinguished individuals, and also perhaps not all of the weight of this particular researched information is regarded by the individuals at that time. Yes, we as legislators did have the opportunity to review the naming of constituencies when it came to this Chamber.

However, Mr. Speaker, a number of us were not here at that time. We did not have that opportunity of which the Member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) speaks, specific to this private member's Bill 201, the request to change the constituency name which is now known as Gimli to include St. Andrews.

Now, Mr. Speaker, St. Andrews, once again, has a historic placement in our province. It was one of the first 24 constituencies recognized in this Chamber by an elected official. I want all members to know how historic that election was because it was St. Andrews that provided this Chamber with its very first premier, and that, at the very least, should be recognized. Premier Boyd led this province in its first days after entry into Confederation, and I think that is very, very significant. Not to have it recognized within this Chamber I think is an oversight.

I do believe that Premier Boyd and the constituency which he represented in the first days of this province should be reflected in constituency name today. I want all honourable members to appreciate that we have a responsibility to recognize the heritage and the history of our very proud province.

Mr. Speaker, I know my time is limited so I will move on. I will move on from Premier Boyd's day to another very distinguished elected representative from St. Andrews, and that was another premier, Premier John Norquay, a very, very distinguished member of Manitoba's community at that time who represented St. Andrews as well.

Mr. Norquay has a number of distinguishing historical facts attributed to himself. In and around Portage la Prairie, we had a provincial park named after Premier Norquay. It was known as Norquay Provincial Park. He sat on the government side of the House, and, indeed, he was a Conservative, a time-honoured tradition coming from Portage la Prairie. I will say that the park was renamed Portage la Prairie Campground, but the park, for those residents who reside close by, is still affectionately known as Norquay Park.

* (10:50)

So, Mr. Speaker, we have two former premiers of Manitoba that are wanting for recognition of the constituency of St. Andrews which they represented in this Chamber, and I think it is very important that we recognize that. I do understand that there is a process, but if all processes had been followed in the past and it was not recognized because of areas of deficiency or oversight, and I am not suggesting this is the case in this particular report from the Manitoba Electoral Boundaries Commission, but for some reason I believe that not enough weight to the historical presence of the name St. Andrews was, in fact, evaluated at the time of discussion.

So I believe it is imperative upon us as legislators to recognize that, because it is ultimately important that we as members of this Legislative Assembly recognize the contribution of those who sat so proudly in these seats in this Chamber before us.

Now, the Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers) did suggest that there was a previous Speaker of the House prior to Doctor Bird, and that was Mr. Thomas Spence who was a proud member of the community of Portage la Prairie at one time. In fact, he drafted resolutions that were passed by residents of Portage la Prairie to provide for, as we now know, the Republic of Manitoba, the first area within Manitoba prior to entry into Confederation, where laws were implemented by an elected body of officials, and these particular laws governed the area in and around Portage la Prairie. It was the first opportunity in now what we know as Manitoba, where residents had the rule of law imposed upon them. I think it is a very significant fact for which I thank the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin for bringing me to order on that particular point, because Thomas Spence is a very dynamic character and certainly aided in the drafting of the initial laws of our province of Manitoba.

Before I leave the debate on this particular bill, I do want to say that I truly am very proud to represent the area of Portage la Prairie, proud constituency, one of the initial 24, I might add. However, as populations move and get more concentrated, specifically in and around Winnipeg, and we have seen the changes in electoral boundaries here within the province, I would like to say that the constituency of Portage la Prairie now, in fact, encompasses in whole three constituencies that were part of the 1870 original Chamber membership, that being Portage la Prairie, High Bluff and Poplar Point.

Mr. Speaker, the constituency of Portage la Prairie today also encompasses parts of the constituency of Lake Manitoba, the constituency of Baie St. Paul and the constituency of St. Peters. So, proudly, I represent now in one chair what was formerly represented by six individuals, and I take that responsibility very seriously, that I now have to do the work of six individuals to get that same representation, that same clout you might say, that was present in this Chamber in 1870. I want to say to all members present that I will undertake this with all the energy that I can muster.

Therefore, I ask all members to consider the support of this particular bill, and there is doubt on this side of the House that you as members of the governing party will support this bill. I do not share that doubt. I look to all of you and appeal to your sense of fairness and understanding and your commitment to the responsibility as members of the Legislative Assembly to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I will conclude because I believe my honourable colleague from Lakeside has a couple of historical facts which I have not mentioned at the present time and, I believe, that he experienced within his lifetime rather than myself just experiencing it through history books I have been able to peruse. With that, I appreciatively yield to my honourable colleague from Lakeside. Thank you.

Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment my colleague from Portage la Prairie for some very diligent research. As an old hand at politics, I was trying to urge him to extend that research to St. Andrew, the venerable saint within the Christian community. That might just have had some influence on this particular member of the Government side to come and support this bill. My friend the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale) might have been persuaded to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am simply wanting to rise and support my colleague, my long-time friend and neighbour in the Interlake, the Member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer), in his, I think, very understandable request to have recognized in a broader way what particularly we rural members have faced in the last number of redistributions as our rural areas get larger and larger. They obviously encompass different geography, and that is true for my friend the honourable Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler), and that is certainly also true for my colleague the Member for Gimli.

I myself, as much as I have a great deal of pride in being the representative for the constituency of Lakeside, there are nostalgic moments when I remember that the seat that first gave me entry into this House has been wiped off the electoral map. Rockwood-Iberville was the seat that I first ran in. It disappeared because, as my colleague from Portage la Prairie indicated, populations shift, and there have been, as we all know, regrettably, substantial depopulation in rural areas, and our rural seats get larger.

So I make an appeal to honourable members opposite. This is not a political issue. This is not a political matter. It should not be addressed in this Chamber in a partisan way. I appeal to members opposite; I do. My friend–I am trying to remember her constituency–from St. James who, I am beginning to appreciate, has some rural roots and friends–I find her hobnobbing with some of my constituents from the Lundar area. That caused me a little bit of concern. I have been able to, over these many years, convince them that there is only one way to vote.

So I appeal to honourable members opposite that these bills we have before us, this particular bill that I am speaking to, surely we can set aside partisanship in this Chamber and support it. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: When this matter is again before the House, the honourable Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) will have 12 minutes remaining.

* (11:00)

Mr. Speaker: The hour being 11 a.m., a recorded vote having been requested on adjournment of Bill 200, call in the members. The question before the House is the motion of the honourable Member for St. Vital (Ms. Allan) that debate on Bill 200 be adjourned.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 24, Nays 19.

Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

* (11:10)

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you canvass the House to see if there is leave to call it noon.

Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement to call it 12 o'clock? [Agreed]

The hour being 12 o'clock, we will recess and reconvene at 1:30 p.m.