LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, March 17, 2005
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Highway 200
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition:
Highway 200 is paved from
Due to unsafe conditions, many drivers look to alternate routes around this section when possible and time permits. The condition of the gravel road can cause serious damage to all vehicles.
Insufficient traffic counts are not truly reflective of the traffic volumes because users tend to find another route to avoid this section. Traffic counts done after spring seeding, during wet weather or during school recess are not indicative of traffic flows.
Maintenance costs for unpaved highways are high and ongoing. It would be cost-effective to pave this section.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) consider paving Highway 200 between highways 205 and 305 to ensure a smooth, safe and uninterrupted use of Highway 200.
Signed by Roger Saurette, Rick Krahn, Andrew Toews and others.
Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.
Riverdale Health Centre
Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for the petition:
The Riverdale Health
Centre services a population of approximately 2000 people, including the town
of
The need for renovation or repair of the Riverdale Health Centre was identified in 1999 by the Marquette Regional Health Authority (RHA) and was the No. 1 priority listed in the RHA's 2002-2003 Operational Plan.
To date, the community has raised over $460,000 towards the renovation or repair of the health centre.
On June 1, 2003, the Premier made a commitment to the community of Rivers that he would not close or downgrade the services available at the Riverdale Health Centre.
Due to the physician
shortages, the Riverdale Health Centre has been closed to acute care and
emergency services for long periods since December 2003, forcing community
members to travel to
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the Premier to consider ensuring that acute care and emergency services are available to the residents of Rivers and surrounding areas in their local hospital and to live up to his promise to not close the Rivers.
To request that the
Minister of Health (Mr.
This petition has been signed
by Regine Gamper, B. Gamper, Stan Runions and others.
* (13:35)
Minimum Sitting Days for
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
The background to this petition is as follows:
The Manitoba Legislature sat for only 35 days in 2003.
In 2004, there were 55 sitting days.
The number of sitting days has a direct impact on the issue of public accountability.
The Legislative Assembly provides the best forum for all MLAs to debate and ask questions of the government, and it is critical that all MLAs be provided the time needed in order for them to cover constituent and party duties.
Establishing a minimum number of sitting days could prevent the government of the day from limiting the rights of opposition members from being able to ask questions.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba to consider recognizing the need to sit for a minimum of 80 days in any given calendar year.
Signed by Ralph
Westman Area Physician
Shortage
Mr. Cliff Cullen (
These are the reasons for this petition:
The Westman region
serving
As a result of the severe
shortage of pediatricians to serve the Westman area,
The chiefs of the departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Family Practice and Anesthesia at the Brandon Regional Health Centre have publicly voiced their concern regarding the potentially disastrous consequences of the shortage.
Brandon physicians were shocked and angered by the lack of communication and foresight on the part of the government related to the retention of a local pediatrician.
The Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) has stated that Brandon has to put its best foot forward and recruit its own doctors.
Doctors have warned that if the current situation is prolonged, it may result in further loss of services or the departure of other specialists who find the situation unmanageable.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To strongly urge the
Minister of Health to consider taking charge and ensuring that he will improve
long-term planning efforts to develop a lasting solution to the chronic problem
of pediatrician and other specialist shortages in
To strongly urge the Minister of Health to treat this as the crisis that it is and consider consulting with front-line workers, particularly doctors, to find solutions.
To strongly urge the Minister of Health and the Premier of Manitoba to consider ending highway medicine now.
Signed by Andrew Smith, Donna Knight, Garry Sliziak and others.
* (13:40)
Ambulance Service
Mr. Ron Schuler (
These are the reasons for this petition:
In May 2004, 46-year-old Peter Krahn suffered a heart attack while exercising in East St. Paul and was pronounced dead just under an hour later after being transported to the Concordia Hospital in Winnipeg. Reports show that it took nearly 18 minutes for an ambulance to arrive for Mr. Krahn.
The Interlake Regional
Health Authority claims that 21 minutes is an acceptable emergency response
time, whereas the City of
Ambulance coverage for
The municipalities of
East St. Paul and
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the provincial
government to consider providing East St. Paul with local ambulance service
which would service both East and
To request the provincial government to consider improving the way that ambulance service is supplied to all Manitobans by utilizing technologies such as GPS in conjunction with a Medical Transportation Co-ordination Centre (MTCC) which will ensure that patients receive the nearest ambulance in the least amount of time.
To request the provincial government to consider ensuring that appropriate funding is provided to maintain superior response times and sustainable services.
Signed by Ruben Sawatzky, Anna Sawatzky, Kordelia Sawatzky and many others.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition:
The provincial government's Supported Living Program provides a range of supports to assist adults with a mental disability to live in the community in their residential option of choice, including a family home. There is a lack of group homes available and this means special needs dependants must remain in the family home.
The provincial government's Community Living Division helps support adults living with a mental disability to live safely in the community in the residential setting of their choice.
Families with special needs dependants make lifelong commitments to their care and well-being, and many families choose to care for these individuals in their homes as long as circumstances allow.
The cost to support families who care for their special needs dependants at home is far less than the cost of alternate care arrangements such as institutions or group and foster home situations.
The value of the quality of life experienced by special needs dependants raised at home in a loving family environment is immeasurable.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Ms. Melnick) consider changes to the departmental policy that pays family members a reduced amount of money for room and board when they care for their special needs dependants at home versus the amount paid to a non-parental care provider outside the family home.
To request that the Minister of Family Services and Housing consider examining on a case-by-case basis the merits of paying family members to care for special needs dependants at home versus paying to institutionalize them.
This is signed by Ruby Reimer, Kim Klassen, Susan Becenko, Ryan Becenko, Gord Becenko and others.
* (13:45)
Bill 23–The Workplace
Safety and Health Amendment Act (Needles in Medical Workplaces)
Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister of Labour and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale), that Bill 23, The Workplace Safety and Health Amendment Act (Needles in Medical Workplaces); Loi modifiant la Loi sur la sécurité et l'hygiène du travail, be now read a first time.
Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Labour and Immigration, seconded by the honourable Minister of Health, that Bill 23, The Workplace Safety and Health Amendment Act (Needles in Medical Workplaces), be now read a first time.
Ms. Allan: Mr. Speaker, for purposes of enhancing safety and health in medical workplaces, the provision of this bill will require the use of safety engineered needles in medical workplaces where hollow-bore or intravenous needles are used by workers.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion. [Agreed]
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all
honourable members to the loge to my left where we have with us Mr. Harry Enns,
who is a former Member for
Also in the public gallery we have from Louis Riel School Division, Arts & Technology Centre, 27 students under the direction of Mrs. Lucille Miller. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger).
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.
Rural Hospitals
Closures
Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, today we are voting against the budget introduced by the NDP government for a number of reasons. Despite unprecedented revenue from the federal government, this Premier still insists on bringing in sneaky user fees.
Despite unprecedented
revenues, Mr. Speaker, they did not fully eliminate the education tax off
residential property and farmland. They continue to make
Prior to the election,
this Premier gave his word that he would not close the maternity ward at the
Prior to the last election, this NDP Premier gave his word that he would not close a single rural hospital, Mr. Speaker. It would not be closed or converted. My question to the Premier is simply this. Does he stand by his word or is he going to flip-flop on that one, too?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, there are a number of issues raised in the question
raised by the member opposite. Members opposite, the would-have, could-have,
should-have party raised farmland taxation. They raised the portioning on
farmland. They talk a great game in the coffee shops in rural
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite mentions the whole issue of health care. The health care budget in Winnipeg and across Manitoba, the funding increases are 5.2 percent. That is not a slashing of budgets. That was in the old Tory days where budgets were slashed, when a thousand nurses were laid off. This money invests in health care.
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, on October 27, I wrote to the Premier and I quote from the letter, "While we have raised the issue with you before and have received your assurance that 'not a single hospital will be closed or converted,' due to the increased concern in our rural communities, I am simply writing to ask if you are standing by your earlier commitment or if you are, in fact, considering the closure or conversion of any rural hospital."
This Premier responded on November 8, with absolutely no assurance that he was going to keep his word, and so, Mr. Speaker, Manitobans have a right to know. I just want to ask a very simple question to this Premier. Will this NDP Premier stand by his promise, his word, not to close or convert a single rural hospital, or will he continue on his plan to slash health care services in Manitoba?
* (13:50)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we convert rural hospitals every day. We convert them every day. We put a MRI machine in the new Brandon general hospital. That is a conversion. We took a hospital that was closed in Gladstone and converted it to an open hospital. That was a conversion. We took Steinbach and increased the operating rooms and operating space and put a CAT scan in the Steinbach hospital. That is a conversion. We put more nurses on to the hospital floors and put more primary health care nurses across Manitoba. We put in a new palliative care unit in the Deloraine hospital. That is a conversion. We put a CAT scan in Thompson. That is a conversion. We put a CAT scan in The Pas. That is a conversion. We put a CAT scan machine in Selkirk. We continue to innovate every day.
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, Manitobans know full well that in this budget they did nothing to address waiting lists. They did nothing to address the doctor shortage. In fact, under this NDP government, not only do we have hallway medicine, we now have highway medicine.
Mr. Speaker, on top of that, this budget slashes health care services to Manitobans. Where does this Premier stand on his election promise not to close or convert a single rural hospital? Does he stand by his word, or are the NDP going to vote in favour of a budget that slashes health care services in Manitoba?
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite probably wants people to forget that in the 2003 election they committed themselves to 1% and 2% annual increases in health care.
Mr. Speaker, if you were to look at the numbers from 2003 to this budget, that would be a cut of $300 million, a $300-million reduction in health care investment. That would lead us back to the old days where a thousand nurses were laid off. We had less supply of doctors and we had less diagnostic equipment.
Mr. Speaker, we are
putting 5.2 percent more into
Obstetrical Services
Rural Manitoba
Mrs. Heather Stefanson
(Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, Dauphin and surrounding
areas will be losing their only obstetrician-gynaecologist this week. Yet
another example of how this NDP government is forcing women to travel to
Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I am informed that the capacity of the Dauphin Regional Health Centre to continue to provide quality service to women in that community is unimpaired and that the work is being done with Parkland to continue to recruit physicians as they successfully have done in the last year. I am confident that the care of women in the Dauphin general hospital will continue to be high quality care for the women and children of that region.
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, despite the Minister of Health's empty promises to
provide community options for women with respect to maternity, women from
Brandon, women from the Westman area and now women from Dauphin and surrounding
communities are being forced to travel to
Will the Minister of
Health admit that he has failed
on his promise to provide a community option for women with respect to
maternity, not only in south
Mr. Sale: No women have come from Brandon to have their babies since
Christmastime, Mr. Speaker. Over the years, women have always had to come from
rural
That is why we have
tertiary care and neonatology units in St. Boniface and Health Sciences Centre,
because women from the North and women from all parts of
* (13:55)
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Health gave his guarantee to
the women of south Winnipeg that, and I quote, "No woman will be put at
risk because of a capacity issue." Will the Minister of Health offer the
same guarantee to all women in
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, every day babies are born in Churchill. They are born in Thompson; they are born in The Pas; they are born in Brandon; they are born in Portage; they are born in Boundary Trails; they are born in Steinbach; they are born in Winnipeg.
Every day ordinary births
take place all over this province, but we have a very, very fine neonatal
mortality and morbidity outcome in this province. That is because we have
intensive and tertiary care for people who are higher risk. That will continue
to be the practice. Community births will continue to be the rule. The
exception will be coming to
Safe Schools Legislation
Codes of Conduct
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, Safe Schools legislation was passed almost a year ago saying that every school must establish a code of conduct which includes a statement that bullying is unacceptable.
I would like to ask the
Minister of Education if he could tell us if all of the schools in
Hon. Peter Bjornson (Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth): Mr. Speaker, bullying is indeed unacceptable, and we will stop the bullying. The Safe Schools legislation came out in June of last year, as the member opposite should know, and we have been engaged in the consultation process as members opposite have repeatedly asked us to do. We have engaged in the consultation process to bring forward the regulations around the Safe Schools legislation. The process is ongoing, and I look forward to the regulations being developed and brought forward very soon.
Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I am quite concerned by the minister's response right now because this legislation was passed almost a year ago. Bullying is an incredibly serious issue in our schools. I am very troubled by the minister dragging his heels on this issue and not having a higher expectation that schools would get these codes of conduct together to him on time. It is his leadership that needs to demand that.
I would like to ask the minister again how many schools have forwarded their codes of conduct to him and what is his deadline. What is his expectation as to when he should receive them?
Mr. Bjornson: Mr. Speaker, as part of the process around the Safe Schools legislation, the regulations were to be developed by consultation, and they are being developed by consultation with the stakeholders as we promised to do. When those regulations are developed and brought forward, then we will have the code of conduct submitted by the schools.
We have been doing a lot
of other things as a government to address the issue of bullying, including the
Ministry of Healthy Living introducing the Roots of Empathy program which facilitates appropriate child development and
understanding of interpersonal relationships so children at an early age have
an understanding of how their behaviour affects others. For the last three
years, we have had Dr. Mary Hall working
for
Mrs. Driedger: I am not sure why the minister is waiting for the regulations to be developed. The codes of conduct could easily be developed and sent forward. I do not believe he needs regulations in order to do that. What is lacking is his expectation and his leadership on this issue.
The Minister of Education completely left it up to the schools to identify disciplinary consequences for bullying. He basically dumped this issue into the laps of the teachers and the school divisions. I would like to ask this Minister of Education why his government did not take a leadership role and outline appropriate and consistent consequences of bullying in this province.
Mr. Bjornson: Mr. Speaker, that is what we are doing right now. We are working with teachers to outline a code of conduct, a very specific code of conduct that addresses the issue of bullying, and we are working with teachers and all of our stakeholders to address appropriate circumstances. We work with our stakeholders to address appropriate circumstances.
It would be naive to think that all of the schools had all the mechanisms in place as the Safe Schools Charter has requested. It was only 13 years ago that I worked on a drug and alcohol policy for Evergreen School Division because there was no drug and alcohol policy only 13 years ago. So we have in place a bill, The Safe Schools Charter, that is going to cover all facets of safety in the school. Those regulations are forthcoming, as well as a number of other initiatives to engage students and teachers in the dialogue around a very important issue. We are going to address bullying, Mr. Speaker.
Police Services
Resources
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen
(Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, reports indicate there
could be up to 70 City of Winnipeg police officers retiring before this summer.
All jurisdictions are competing for officers. Last year, the City of
* (14:00)
In this environment, can the Minister of Justice guarantee Winnipeggers that there will be more officers on the street this summer and not just unfilled positions, or was his announcement just political manoeuvring?
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to again reaffirm that in the budget, which goes to a vote today, this government has made a further commitment to public safety by investing in 54 new officer positions across Manitoba over the next two years.
Mr. Goertzen: What the minister gave us was 11 officers for
Has the minister ensured
that a real recruitment strategy is in place and that there will be more
officers in rural
Mr. Mackintosh: I know that the City of Winnipeg, the Chief of Police and indeed,
Winnipeg Police Service, I think, would be very concerned with where this
member is telling the Province to go, which is to take over the management and
responsibility of the Winnipeg Police Service.
Mr. Speaker, the Winnipeg Police Service is an excellent organization. It is well managed. It is responsible, of course, for the recruitment and training of its officers. The responsibility of this government is to help the City address issues of public safety, and we have done that by signing 23 new officer positions over the next two years for the city of Winnipeg.
Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, I am interested to hear the minister's comments about
the City of
Is this now the new
recruitment strategy in
Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, of course, no such thing was said. We have in this country the role of the federal laws. We have the role of police forces, often municipal. We have the roles of decisions of judges, but this Province, this government has looked to see how it can do more within that environment through prosecutions, through corrections, through crime prevention, trying and working with our partners including law enforcement, the federal government and others, particularly community agencies.
Mr. Speaker, I think it
is known to everyone that the Winnipeg Police Service does an excellent job. We
have worked with the City of
Budget
Competitive Tax Structure
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac
du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, every day the Minister of
Finance asks us to vote for the budget. I ask the Minister of Finance how can
he expect us to vote for the budget when in spite of record-high revenues he
lost the opportunity to offer meaningful tax relief to Manitobans and, as a
result,
Hon. Greg Selinger
(Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, since we have
come to office, there has been a half billion dollars of tax relief in this
province, higher than any amount ever offered in tax reductions in the history
of the province.
When we brought in our tax reform package in our first year, we increased the non-refundable tax credit by 39 percent. We brought in a family tax reduction that cut by 50 percent the amount of clawback the previous government had done on low-income families. We rolled back and provided for low-income families the National Child Benefit. This year's budget has $149 million in tax relief. The members opposite are going to vote against it when it is more than they ever did in the 11 years that they occupied the government benches.
Victoria Hospital
Maternity Ward Closure
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac
du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister
forgets to mention that also since coming to office we have $3 billion more in
debt now than we had in 1999. How can the Minister of Finance expect us to vote
for the budget when a vote for the budget is a vote to close the maternity ward
at the
Hon. Greg Selinger
(Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the amount of
money we put in the budget for health care is up 5.2 percent in
The kind of support we provide to young families so children can go to school, we have the lowest tuition fees for community colleges, the third-lowest tuition fees for universities. We brought back a bursary program. The kind of supports we provide for families are resulting in young people moving back to Manitoba, newcomers coming to this province, and the Manitoba advantage now is stronger than it has ever been. Members opposite should vote for the budget.
Financial Statements
Deficit Reporting
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac
du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has
stated that the Finance Minister has misled Manitobans concerning
I ask the Minister of Finance this. How could we vote for the budget? Indeed, how can members opposite vote for the budget when likely the Finance Minister has cooked the books?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, if the member has a specific allegation, he should make it. He is giving a hypothetical example. We have balanced the budget–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We balanced the budget under the legislation
they brought in, which the Auditor General now says that the balanced budget
legislation is inadequate. That was their legislation. They knew it was
inadequate at the time, but they insisted on passing it into law. We follow the
laws of the
City of Winnipeg
Funding
Mr. John Loewen (
I would ask the Minister of
Intergovernmental Affairs to stand in this House today and confirm to the City
of
Hon. Scott Smith (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to stand in this House and speak to the Building Manitoba Fund that has been developed through this government. We have moved away from the flat tax type of system with new revenues going into the City of Winnipeg, not only the City of Winnipeg but in fact all of Manitoba.
Mr. Speaker, last year
the City of Winnipeg received $139.9 million. This year the City of Winnipeg
will receive over $150 million from this government. It is a $10.7-million
increase to the City of
* (14:10)
We are proud of our efforts. We are proud of the fact that we have listened to Manitobans. We have listened to the people in Winnipeg, both rural and in the city of Winnipeg. It is a great budget increase which is probably why the mayor of the City of Winnipeg is coming out with statements saying he likes the efforts of the Province of Manitoba. We are doing a good job and he recognizes it. Too bad the members opposite do not.
City of Brandon
Funding
Mr. John Loewen (
Mr. Speaker, I would ask
the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs this. Will he stand up in the House
and in one simple statement advise the City of
Hon. Scott Smith (Minister
of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): Mr.
Speaker, this government is proud of the fact that we have increased the
budgets for both rural
Mr. Speaker, 40 new
police officers, and in fact, again, up to 54 police officers. The City of
Waverley West
Referral to Municipal
Board
Mr. John Loewen (
Mr. Speaker, I would also ask the minister if he would stand in this House today and confirm that the amendment they have to Plan Winnipeg, the by-law from the City of Winnipeg that may end up in the creation of Waverley West which has lots of people objecting to it; I would ask the minister if he would stand up today and confirm to those out there who do have a legitimate expectation that this by-law will be referred to the Municipal Board.
I would ask the minister today if he will confirm that this by-law will in fact be going to the Municipal Board before it is acted on.
Hon. Scott Smith (Minister
of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): Mr. Speaker,
as this government builds throughout
Mr. Speaker, it appears that he is opposed to a development in Waverley West, but what I can tell you is, in fact, certainly it is under review and it is under consideration. The member asked a number of questions, many questions. The simple fact is this government takes action on putting dollars back into municipalities throughout all of Manitoba, not a select few municipalities in Manitoba; largely investing in the City of Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson for transit systems and certainly up in the northern communities.
Mr. Speaker, the member
opposite wants to play around and shuffle around with numbers. The clear fact
is in the budget, $140 million to
Victoria Hospital
Maternity Ward Closure
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker, I look to
the advocates, I look to the members from
Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of
Health): Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the
record of
Furthermore, we believe
in investing in community hospitals, and in the
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed in the way in which this government
wants to gag, silence individuals who would oppose. I do not understand why the
Minister of Healthy Living (Ms. Oswald) would not take this opportunity to say
a few words in regard to the
When the current minister
was the critic, he stated back in August of '96, "
The question is actually
fairly easy and straightforward to the Minister of Health. If you believe in
community hospitals, how can you justify making the political decision? If the
issue is safety, then fix the safety issues. Why close obstetrics at
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, so far as I know, the member opposite is not a doctor and is not a planner in the health care system. When we receive advice from three separate bodies, the community board of Victoria General Hospital, the medical committee of Victoria General Hospital, the medical committee of the WRHA, all saying that we have a crisis emerging which has safety implications and where the phrase "dire consequences" is used, I am bound as a minister of this government to take that advice seriously and to respect the decision they have made. I do not like it. I am not happy, but I am bound to take medical advice and to say we have to protect the safety of women and their babies. We have to provide quality care, and we can do that in Health Sciences and St. Boniface Hospital.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, that is absolute and total garbage. You know, those
sorts of arguments were being presented back in 1996, '97, when they wanted to
close down the emergency services over at
Why are you choosing to believe this select group of bureaucrats? If you want to say it is strictly safety, then fix the safety issues. You do not have to close down the obstetrics. Because you have silenced your opponents, it does not mean that it is right. There is no reason why obstetric services cannot be continued at Victoria Hospital, and we ask this minister to do what is right, to do what he would have been asking for if he was in opposition and ensure that Victoria continues to deliver babies well into the future. Will he do the right thing today?
Mr. Sale: Back in 1998,
* (14:20)
Provincial Nominee Program
Business Investment
Mr. Bidhu Jha (Radisson): I understand that this government has been actively promoting business immigration to Manitoba through the Provincial Nominee Program for Business Immigration. Can the Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines inform the House as to the results of those efforts?
Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to report to the House that this is a very successful program that was begun in November 2000. Since the beginning of the program, more than 500 immigrant investors have been approved to the program. So far 72 have started businesses which have brought in an excess of $35 million to this province. Not only that, if those 500 come with over $300,000 investment each, it will bring over $183 million to the province.
These are people who have specific skills. They bring wonderful skills in manufacturing, small business investment. These are good people who will help us grow our business economy and employ new people. I am proud of this program. I am proud that we could create theoretically almost 1400 jobs in the very near future. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Child Care
Government Initiatives
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu
(Morris): Mr. Speaker, this NDP government
continues to disappoint
I want to ask the minister this. Where is the plan for sustainable child care in this province now and five years from now?
Hon. Christine Melnick
(Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr.
Speaker, I must thank the critic for the question, sincerely thank her. I would
be very happy to bring a copy of the plan to table. She could check on our Web site.
This plan was developed with the input
of over 24 000 Manitobans between 1999 and early 2000. The plan talks about recruitment, training,
retaining professional ECEs, the
development of space. We are in fact the only jurisdiction in
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Taillieu: Mr. Speaker, a spokesperson for the minister recently said the Province has had–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Taillieu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A spokesperson for the minister recently
said the Province has long had a problem with
Mr. Speaker, she is the minister; she is responsible. Where is her plan when she is left on the hook five years from now?
Ms. Melnick: Mr. Speaker, I again honestly thank the member for the question.
This is a government that has been investing in the community. We have been
investing in our child care system, an increase of over 64 percent. I encourage
members opposite, rather than playing partisan politics with the children of
Letellier Bridge
Closure
Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, I would just like to ask the minister of highways why he is closing the bridge on 75 highway and why he is not going to build a new bridge at Highway 201.
Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister
of Transportation and Government Services): Mr.
Speaker, we are not closing the
Mr. Speaker, I really want to thank the member for asking a question on transportation. Today we made a $227-million announcement on transportation. Also, since we became government, we put in over $1 billion in transportation in Manitoba.
Mr. Penner: Mr. Speaker, in 1998, there was an open house at Letellier that
indicated clearly that the bridge on Highway 201, crossing the
Mr. Lemieux: Well, thank you very much. The member essentially confirmed that they ran our transportation infrastructure system into the ground when they were in government in the 1990s. Eleven years of nothing is really what it amounted to.
I just want to comment that we are taking a serious look, our engineers are looking at that particular structure. We understand that there are some challenges related to that structure. We understand that we are going to be limiting the amount of tonnes that go across that bridge. There is a plan in place to ensure the safety. It is a safety issue that we have to address this bridge. We understand that and the department understands it. We are going to be addressing it this summer.
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
Mr. Speaker: Order. I have a ruling for the House.
During Members’ Statements on December 2,
2004, the honourable Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) rose on a point of order
regarding comments spoken by the honourable Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) in speaking to a point of
order that had just been raised previously. The honourable Member for Carman
asserted that the comments spoken by the honourable Member for
I thank
I have had the opportunity to review
Hansard and to read the remarks of the honourable Member for
* (14:30)
I would, however, like to
address a matter with the House. During this short session, we have seen quite
a number of matters of privilege and points of order raised, far more than we
usu
I am not saying that matters of privilege and points of order should not be raised, because indeed they should be as a protection of the privileges of members and in order to point out a breach of the rules and a departure from usual practices. What I would kindly urge members to think about are the situations where points of order are being used to rebut or to debate an argument or are used to attempt to seek the floor in order to carry out another action. I fear we are in danger of losing something vital and very important if we continue to go down that road.
Point of Order
Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a new point of order.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.
Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, as a result of yesterday's incident in this House, as a result of the Premier (Mr. Doer) not wanting to take any action as a result of that incident, as a result of the fact that this side of the House does not have any confidence in the Deputy Speaker assuming the Chair in this House, I would request that in your absence from the Chair, the Deputy Speaker not be called to the Chair but that the Acting Deputy Speaker would be called to the Chair to preside over this House.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order?
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Same point of order. We have made this point in the House yesterday, I think a couple of times, but in our view, the matter has been dealt with fully, Mr. Speaker. It was dealt with by way of a motion even at the end of the proceedings yesterday. Unfortunately, not only I would suggest the point of order is late, but even if you accept it for discussion, there must not be, according to the rules as I understand them, any reflection on an officer of this Chamber, whether it is the office of Speaker or the office of Deputy Speaker, as has just taken place. There are ways for members to deal with those issues but that is not the appropriate way, in our view.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
Mr. Speaker: The point of order raised by the honourable Official Opposition House Leader, before I make the ruling on the point of order I just want to explain a little something here.
Yesterday, the issue was brought up as a non-confidence motion on the Deputy Speaker. The House dealt with it. The House voted on it, and the motion was lost. If you look into our Manitoba rule book, it is very clear in the rule book, 13(5) if members wish to look it up, if the Speaker is absent from the meeting of the House, the Deputy Speaker must, it does not say, may be or whatever, it says must act in his or her place. If the Deputy Speaker is absent, one of the deputy chairpersons may act in his or her place. That is in our Manitoba rules. If members are not satisfied with our rules, we have a rules committee where it could be raised. There are avenues for that. So I must respectfully inform the House that the honourable member of the official opposition does not have a point of order.
Crocus Plains Plainsmen
Hockey Team
Mr. Drew Caldwell (Brandon
East): Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to
rise in the Manitoba Legislature today to honour the Crocus Plains Plainsmen
hockey team who this week won the Manitoba Provincial AAAA High School Hockey
Championship. This is a tremendous achievement. It is the first time
I, along with my
colleague from Brandon West, and all citizens of
The members of the Crocus Plains Plainsmen are: Chris MacDearmid, Stephan Lajoie, Matt Gulas, Josh Timmer, Adam Sefton, Sheldon Lee, Devin Bourdeau D'Hui, Aaron Steven, Braden MacKay, Kyle Grier, Josh Kindrat, Eric Truscott, Kelsey Connor, Matt Minshull, David Waldie, Joey Timmer, Bryan Therien and Melissa Kunzelman.
The Plainsmen are coached by Jim Ferguson, Bryce Birch and Shawn Baker and assisted by their manager Glenda Zelmer.
Congratulations, you have done your city and your school proud.
Crime Watch Forum
Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Mr. Speaker, this week I had the privilege of co-hosting a Crime Watch Forum in northeast Winnipeg with Joy Smith, the Member of Parliament for Kildonan-St. Paul. Short presentations were made by Vic Toews, the federal Conservative Justice critic; Kelvin Goertzen, the Member for Steinbach, our provincial PC Justice critic; Bob Ashuk, Community Resource Co-ordinator and Rick Joyal, retired police officer.
After the presentations, the floor was opened to comments from those who attended. A common theme was total frustration with the justice system and lack of consequences for offenders. Concerned citizens were asking for changes, Mr. Speaker, and we were listening.
Major concerns were raised about vandalism, the drug trade and car theft. It was loud and clear that we need more police resources. They wanted more officers on the streets and quicker response times.
There was strong criticism of the federal Youth Criminal Justice Act and inappropriate sentencing. Although there was a major focus on youth crime, comments were also raised about skyrocketing crime rates across the board.
Many participants felt that a community-wide petition would ensure that people's voices are heard, calling for stronger laws and to hold criminals accountable for their offences. Joy Smith and I both agreed to support and help their efforts.
Mr. Speaker, we also committed to work with our community police office, local schools and community groups who might be interested in developing Neighbourhood Watch programs. Participants strongly encouraged us to take their concerns and suggestions forward to both the provincial Legislature and the federal Parliament and to speak loudly for reforms that would protect victims, not criminals.
Mr. Speaker, we need to be proactive, not reactive when it comes to crime. We need effective justice policy that will protect citizens and give appropriate punishment.
Forums such as these are an important first step in engaging the community, forming partnerships and developing an effective justice system.
I would like to express my gratitude to the panellists and all community members who attended and shared their views. Thank you.
Ms. Marilyn Brick (St.
Norbert): Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw your
attention to a very important initiative that is happening in my constituency
of St. Norbert. The
As the vice-chair for the
Healthy Kids, Healthy Futures Task Force, I and my fellow colleagues have heard
many presentations on the importance of nutrition and, particularly, that of
eating breakfast before going to class. The majority of volunteers for the program are students from Fort
Richmond Collegiate and the
Mr. Speaker, I had the good opportunity to spend time with the staff and students at Dalhousie at one of their fundraising events called Breakfast with Frosty, which occurred last December. From the looks on the children's faces, I can attest to the importance of this program.
In conclusion, I would
like to thank the
* (14:40)
Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday morning of this week I had the opportunity to attend the 73rd annual general meeting of the Manitoba Trucking Association along with many of my colleagues. As the invited Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) declined to be able to be there, it was a great opportunity for our leader, the Member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Murray), to accept their invitation and to address their meeting and for our caucus to listen to their president's address from Vic Switzer of the Portage Cartage and Storage and liaise with the general manager, Mr. Bob Dolyniuk.
Mr. Speaker, it was
obvious that the Manitoba Trucking Association is very proud of its drivers'
record, and I would briefly like to commend the drivers-of-the-month recipients
for 2004. In January, Ronald Friesen of La Broquerie, who drives for Penner
International Incorporated, was awarded. The February recipient was Dennis
Schmidt of
Mr. Speaker, these drivers have too many awards for me to list them all, but collectively there are over 25 million accident-free miles.
Ms. Kerri Irvin-Ross (
I attended this event, Mr. Speaker, and was moved to see our youth involved in such an important cause. The Empty Bowls was an educational experience for students at Arthur A. Leach. Each ceramic bowl was handmade by Grade 7 students, who also researched the issues of poverty and hunger in our community and world. The Grade 8 students made the soup that was served to the students and parents. The Grade 9 students from the school's digital film and broadcasting classes also documented this event. Student representatives from the school will also be volunteering at Winnipeg Harvest. The lessons in poverty and hunger that these children are experiencing is invaluable, especially since many of those going hungry are children. Local businesses also supported this event such as Peak of the Market, Safeway, Casey's Food and the Sounding Stone.
In conclusion, Mr.
Speaker, I want to thank Kim Marinelli, principal Lisa Boles and
all the staff and students at
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
(Eighth Day of Debate)
Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government, and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray), and the proposed motion of the honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard), in amendment thereto, and the debate is standing open.
Mr. Cris Aglugub (The Maples): I really appreciate the opportunity to be able to participate in this debate over the budget that is before us.
Mr. Harry Schellenberg, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
Before I want to go into my remarks, I would like to express my confidence in the Deputy Speaker (Mr. Santos). We know that we have–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Cris Aglugub (The Maples): I think the members from the opposite side want to hang him to dry. Yesterday, he had already expressed his sincere apology over the incident. Today, they want to bring back that issue. We voted on it yesterday, and I think it is a very unfortunate incident that should have been handled quietly.
As the MLA representing the constituency of The Maples, Budget 2005 gives me much optimism and hope. As many of you know, The Maples is a very diverse community, ethnically and demographically. It is a constituency that embraces members from different social classes, family types, ethnic, religious and cultural groups. My constituents have many diverse interests, opportunities and challenges that are facing them. In talking to my constituents, I know that there are many areas that concern them greatly. This includes health and education, improving the opportunities for new immigrants, making sure our children grow up healthy and in safe communities, addressing the housing needs of families and addressing poverty, taxation and the environment. I am very happy to say that Budget 2005 addresses all of these issues.
This budget contains the details on what this government plans to do in the next fiscal year, and it is all about balancing priorities, building opportunities and investing in tomorrow. This budget is balanced under both the balanced budget legislation passed by the previous government and under the summary financial statement.
The budget is also balanced in another way. It is firmly rooted on four pillars of fiscal responsibility: paying down debt, making strategic investments, reducing taxes and saving for the future. Budget 2005 is the second straight budget that is projected to balance and to pay down debt with no withdrawal from the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. This is a first in the 10-year history of balanced budget legislation.
Budget 2005 continues to
pay down our debt and pension
liabilities by increasing this year's payment to $110 million, bringing the
total to $594 million in reductions since 1999. Moreover, this budget continues
to make a strategic investment in
Finally, Budget 2005 invests in our future with $340 million deposited into the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. This is the second largest deposit ever made into the fund, and it was achieved without selling off a Crown corporation.
Immigration has always
been a driver of economic growth in our province, and
* (14:50)
In 2004, we welcomed 7400
immigrants, the highest level of immigration in more than 25 years.
At the Canadian embassy
in
Part of this commitment
to attracting new immigrants to
Our commitment to recognizing the foreign qualifications of new Manitobans is both innovative and timely. In December 2004, our government, through the Minister of Labour and Immigration (Ms. Allan), posted a one-day foreign qualification summit. This summit brought together representatives from different licensing bodies, educational institutions and employers to discuss how to improve the recognition of foreign-gained credentials in our workplace.
It is important to put
into context how Budget 2005 will affect the city of
Let us now look at some
of these positive aspects. Strategic investment in our capital city is evident
in Budget 2005. Funding for the City of
Budget 2005 also presents
a solid and sustainable funding relationship between the City of
These announcements are great news for Winnipeggers and for residents of The Maples. This commitment means that Winnipeggers and residents of The Maples will drive on safer streets. It means that Winnipeggers and residents of The Maples can travel on a quicker and a more efficient transit system. It means that Winnipeggers and residents of The Maples will see their city invest in new buildings and in new or improved municipal services and facilities. It means that Winnipeggers do not have to worry every spring about widespread flooding that disrupts the economic, social and cultural life of the capital city.
Our commitments to the
city of
Our government, however,
is committed to making our streets and neighbourhoods safer. Just this past
Tuesday, the Attorney General for
Our budget increases our
commitment to young people in
Personal income taxes will be reduced again this year, saving Manitobans $30 million. In total, Manitobans will save $249 million annually as a result of personal income tax cuts implemented since 1999.
Since we have taken office, we have also increased the provincial minimum wage by 21 percent. With Budget 2005, we will increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour. This increase will take effect in April 2005.
We are taking great strides in helping all Manitobans enjoy a fuller and better quality of life, but improving the quality of life for all Manitobans also means taking steps to improving our provincial health care system. Budget 2005 is committed to this, as well as enhancing our current healthy living initiatives: $3.6 million has been promised for healthy living initiatives, an additional $9.7 million in home care funding is forthcoming. This combines with our sustained attempt to make health care more accessible by increasing medical school spaces and funnelling new resources into hip and knee surgeries.
Budget 2005 also strives to keep the door of opportunity open for our young people once they finish high school. It does this by maintaining the 10% tuition freeze for the fifth year in a row. This ensures that quality education is more accessible for our youth who are interested in pursuing a post-secondary education. Indeed, enrolment is up 33 percent over the last five years. Furthermore, an additional $750,000 is promised in order to expand the student loan and bursary programs. As well, Budget 2005 ensures that accessibility to university education is complemented by greater access to technical and vocational training and apprenticeship programs.
I would like to summarize my remarks by pointing out that this budget managed to pay down debt without withdrawing from the Fiscal Stabilization Fund while simultaneously making a host of strategic investments that continue to build upon our past successes by a continued revitalization of Manitoba's infrastructure, persistent activity to ensure a clean and healthy environment and a host of initiatives designed to put people first and to enhance the quality of life for all Manitoba.
I am proud to announce
that Budget 2005 continues to pay down debt, makes vast strategic investment
and continues to implement tax savings for
I am proud to stand in support of this budget and I look forward to receiving the support of all members opposite. I invite them to join us in voting for the priorities and sound fiscal planning that are reflected in Budget 2005.
* (15:00)
Mr. Ron Schuler (
I did get a note earlier on today that she did watch Question Period to see what Dad was up to, so in case she is listening, I would like to say we are very proud of her. She is brave, and the staff in Children's Hospital, of course, are just tremendous. Anybody who has had a child staying there knows the kind of programming they do is just amazing. I would like to thank all the staff at Children's Hospital for a job well done.
It is a serious matter that has brought her to the hospital, and just for the members of the House, it started as an eye infection and, unfortunately, instead of coming out, the infection started to move backwards and that is very serious. But she is in good care and very good spirits. On behalf of all members, I wish Brigitta all the best, and we look forward to her coming home again.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Schuler: I thank members for that.
I would like to now proceed to the matters of the province and that being the budget. That having been said, before I do begin, I like to begin every speech by thanking those individuals who are, by and large, nameless, faceless, who are behind the scenes, who really do all the work for us as members.
I know that every member in this Chamber has individuals, whether they are paid employees or whether they are volunteers, who make democracy work. In fact, I think it is just a bewilderment for those who come from a budding democracy or those who come from a nation where they did not have a strong democracy, at the kind of volunteerism and the kind of excitement that there is for members by individuals.
I would like to begin
with my long-standing employee, Gayle Dowler, who works out in
To Matthew Pruse, who toils away in the office downstairs churning out those letters that I know government ministers just love to receive. In fact, he is one of these bright young individuals who, and I know the members opposite will appreciate this, every three to six months he collects all the letters that we have received no response from, tabulates them all in the letter and sends them back to the minister's office. I just imagine that someone opens these letters and goes, "Oh, my goodness, when are they ever going to quit with all these letters?"
Matthew, you are doing a tremendous job on behalf of those Manitobans who need access to the government, and we all understand that in this Chamber individuals need certain lobbying done or certain something or another. Anyway, Matthew, I appreciate very much your work on my behalf.
Gladys Hayward Williams, thank you for all your volunteerism; Karen Carey from Hazelridge, Manitoba; Lucas Golebioski, who, besides studying, works so hard on my behalf, I would like to thank him; Derek Williams, or, as we know him, "Two 'N' Glenn"; Conor Lloyd–to all of you, thank you so much for all of your efforts and work on behalf of the people of Springfield and, for that matter, the people of Manitoba.
We have before us a budget. I have had the opportunity to
represent
What a disappointment. What a disappointment this has been. I come from a very conservative tradition, very fiscally responsible in the household, immigrant parents who–my family lost everything twice due to no fault of their own. Decisions that were made by, yes, politicians that had gone wrong and came to this country with nothing. We understood that you turned every penny over once, twice, three times, maybe ten times before you spent it. Money was hard earned. You paid down debt and you moved ahead very cautiously. You did not spend beyond your means.
Unfortunately we have a
budget today that leaves me with great unease. It leaves me with great discomfort that what we have done is
moved the mortgage, that is a legacy, one of the legacies we leave behind as politicians. The mortgage
of
Let me give you a
comparison. With four million people,
If the federal government were ever to cut Manitoba back by $1 billion in transfer payments, my question to members opposite is how do you cut $1 billion out of an $8-billion budget, how do you make up for that difference. I do not think that this was a prudent move on behalf of this NDP government.
We have seen the NDP take this budget's yearly expenditures from a bit over $6 billion to well over $8 billion. That is far too fast of a growth in the budget that is not sustainable. When we are in public life, people entrust their tax dollars to us that we be good stewards of their money. That is what they would like us to be. I have heard it and it is with horror that I hear individuals say, "Oh, but it is only $100 million."
If there was $50 there on the step, I do not think there is member in this Chamber who would not bend down and pick it up, and yet you hear governments talk about $10 million, "Oh, it is only $10 million." We hear the Gomery inquiry. They talk about, "Well, out of a budget, what is $100 million?" That is an enormous amount of money. We should never be callous about the dollars and the pennies while we are spending $8 billion. That is an enormous amount of money.
* (15:10)
Are we being good
stewards of that money? Are we? That history will judge. From what we can see,
after spending $8 billion we are closing the maternity ward of one of our very
important hospitals on the south side of the city where they are talking about
building an addition to the city the size of Brandon. Now, if we would go into
Years ago we built a new church and they felt that the cost was a little too high, so instead of adding an education wing on we put a basement in because it saved us like $40,000. Today it is with regret that we did that, because what did we do? We put our future, the Sunday school rooms, in the basement. It was a mistake.
I say to this government to cut maternity wards where our future is. I know the maternity ward was just being renovated when Tanya and I were just starting our family, beautiful birthing rooms. That is not the place to be cutting when we are spending money all over the place recklessly. It is not being good stewards of our money. I would say what concerns Manitobans and what will concern Manitobans in the future is not just that we are leaving a legacy of an enormous mortgage for young people in the gallery who will be forced to pay that or they will be forced to leave. The mortgage payments must be made.
If that is going to be one of the legacies we leave, what is unfortunate is, with so much more spending, we are actually getting less services. There are not the quantifiable results for the amount of money we are spending.
It has often been said less is never more. In other words, less spending you can never get more. This NDP government has proven that more spending is also not more. With more spending we are getting less services. That is not prudent stewardship of the public's money.
We understand that roads and hospitals, having spent a considerable amount of time in a hospital lately, they have to be supported with taxpayers' dollars, and people are fine with that. But be good stewards of that money. Give proper care. Give proper services.
The other thing I want to
talk about is how do we make ourselves attractive as a province to attract
young families, to attract young people, to attract professional people, to
attract jobs, to encourage people to grow their businesses. We are not giving
that environment to individuals as a benefit to coming to
I want to finish off. I
am concerned about the ambulance service. I know the government has committed
itself over the years to improving things and has not. East St. Paul and
I also want to just talk
about the silence on the other side. I went into Hansard and the former Member
for
I want to close by saying I thought this was the year we would see a NDP government do the right thing with an enormous amount of money, provide the kind of services, provide the kind of stewardship of the money, give the kind of relief we need in this province that is so necessary, lift up, give a hand up to people and not push people down. This, unfortunately, is not a budget that I can support. It is not a budget that I will be voting for, because it is such a disappointment. It will be seen in history. University students in history will look back at this budget, and they will say it was the budget of what could have been. It is a budget of lost opportunities, of missed opportunities. It is most unfortunate that this government, that these politicians, did not seize the day, carpe diem, do something for this province, leave a proper legacy other than a mortgage that will hamper, that will restrict future generations of politicians from actually being able to do something in this province.
The mortgage and the inability to deal with competitive issues point to a budget that does not deserve the confidence of this House and I appreciate the opportunity to put a few comments on the record. Thank you very much.
Ms. Marilyn Brick (St. Norbert): I am proud to stand up today and express my thoughts as they relate to Budget 2005.
When my 16-year-old daughter, Janelle, recently took her driver's test, I reminded her to bring her birth certificate for ID and to be careful not to misplace it as it is time-consuming and expensive to replace. She looked at it and sniffed it and said, "Well, it is probably no good anyways; it does not have an expiry date."
This got me to thinking about the value of a driver's licence and the value of our youth. I am thrilled to be on this side of the House, where we know parents dearly love their children and want to see the best for them. The success of our graduated driver's licence system attests to the value we place on young people. We know they are our shining stars. We want to protect them, love them and ensure they have a bright and happy future. It is this kind of thinking that makes it so easy for me to support our budget. It is this budget that has increased capital spending for public schools by 135 million additional dollars over the next three years. This money will ensure that there are gymnasiums, music rooms and classroom space for students.
February is "I Love
to Read Month." I had the pleasure of reading books to the students at La
Barrière Crossings School, École Saint-Avila, Saint-Norbert immersion school
and the before- and after-school programs at
* (15:20)
Our government knows the
value of education. That is why we have been funding education at a level above
the rate of growth for the province, and, you know, the beneficiaries of this
are undoubtedly our children. I would be remiss if I did not mention
post-secondary education and the huge success our government has had in
increasing the affordability and the accessibility of post-secondary education
for people in
I am very proud to be an
alumnus of the
Just recently I received
a very interesting book in the mail titled Graduate
Satisfaction and Employment Report 2003-2004 for
Our government has placed
young people first by ensuring that they are provided with a high quality,
affordable post-secondary education. The opposition likes to paint
I ask you why they would want to hire more workers. If the position is correct and our province is sliding into a black hole, I can only conclude that our government's approach of fiscal management and economic growth is encouraging a strong economy. In our six years in office, we have seen the following private-sector investments in Manitoba: Boeing Winnipeg plant named as a key supplier of composite components for the new Boeing 7E7 aircraft; the opening of a new $150-million potato processing plant by Simplot in Portage; a $150-million expansion of the Winpak plant in Winnipeg; and consolidation of CanWest Global communications staff to Winnipeg, resulting in 1200 jobs.
Our government has been encouraging business development and growth by lowering for corporations the cost they pay for taxes to 14.5 percent in 2006. Small business rates will drop to 4.5 percent in 2006 from a high of 9 percent in 1999. During our term in government, we have experienced two credit rating increases from Moody's from an AA3 to an AA2. Their decision has been based on solid economic growth, balanced budgetary performance and reduced debt burden.
On Tuesday night, I was thrilled to be the guest of the Minister for Culture, Tourism and Heritage (Mr. Robinson) at the unveiling of Welcome to Turtle Island. The night was filled with hilariously funny stand-up comedy. Although I am Caucasian, I really felt welcomed there by everyone I met, and I can truly say that this is the exact same feeling I experience in working with the Behavioural Health Foundation in St. Norbert. This excellent facility helps individuals who struggle with addictions overcome their dependence.
This last fall, I had the
opportunity to experience a sweat lodge for the first time. I know the
grandmothers are watching my path as I travel it each and every day. I know
that our immigration policy has also helped to build stronger communities all
through
Today's newspaper story
talking about immigration and the fact that immigrants are boosting the
economy just shows how well our government is doing. By approving 56
applications for immigrants who are coming here, we can say that there will be $18 million additional being acquired
in terms of starting businesses. The success of
attracting immigrants is attributed directly to the business component of the
Nominee Program. Wow, immigration. Wow, what a great thought for here in
For the residents of St. Norbert, the security and safety of their homes is a key issue. In this budget, we see that the floodway will be receiving $56 million to support it in terms of floodway protection.
I would like to say that it is my pleasure to represent St. Norbert, and I really want to commend our government on the excellent job they are doing and on this budget.
Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): It is a pleasure to rise today to speak to the budget presented by this NDP government in the Legislature last week.
Members opposite speak of the shining stars and of our youth, and I would like to speak of two little people that are important in my life, Mackenzie Rowat, who is nine years old, and Cameron Rowat, who is ten. These are my two children whom I think the world of and will do anything for, and partly to that commitment is why I ran and why I am here representing my constituency today is for the future of the young people within my constituency in rural Manitoba as well as all Manitoba young people who, I feel, are being short-changed by this government.
First, I would like to thank the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray) for his comments shared earlier this week or at the end of the last week, and I certainly agree that his comments and support that he has provided and the positions and the support that I give on the same issues. I would also like to put on record my support of the comments and positions presented by my caucus colleagues over the past week.
I will start by saying in recent discussions with Harold Gilleshammer, the former MLA for Minnedosa, he shared his many experiences in speaking to past budgets. He shared his thoughts on the importance of a budget. Based on the fact that he once held the position of Finance Minister, I believe his advice is worth taking.
Mr. Gilleshammer shared three important points that a budget should include. First, the budget is a document that should outline the policies of government. Second, the budget should outline the direction of the government. Third, the budget should outline what the government is going to fund.
On Tuesday, March 8, 2005, the NDP government presented Manitobans a budget that boasts a revenue increase of $525 million, but, in a disturbing trend, the government continues to spend almost every dollar it takes in while increasing the level of debt. As the Leader of the Opposition stated in his response in the budget, and as many of my colleagues have indicated before me, this government's budget did not continue a vision or direction on where it is going to with their policies in the coming year.
How did the NDP
government manage to accumulate over $3 million in new debt since 1999 without
anything, really, to show for it? If the NDP government was concerned about the
growing problems with gangs, guns, grow ops and auto thefts, why did it only
add $7.5 million to the annual policing budget this year? What is the Minister
of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh) going to do about the 50-plus police officers in
I believe the Doer government has a golden opportunity to use this financial windfall to deliver meaningful tax cuts to Manitobans and to provide Manitobans with a long-term economic strategy. Instead, this government chooses to continue to spend more money and add to our growing deficit, a disappointing choice that all Manitobans will have to pay for in years to come. Cameron and Mackenzie Rowat will have to pay for in years to come.
I think most people who
studied the budget found it very much lacking in terms of a vision for the
province. Programs were re-announced. New programs were vague in terms of
timelines and implementation. This budget does nothing to inspire our young
people, nothing to encourage our agriculture sector, nothing to entice or
excite our business community and if not for the federal windfall for health
care, nothing would have been addressed in health care crises facing rural
* (15:30)
What I learned most from this budget was that, despite telling Manitobans he was not elected to raise taxes, this Premier also believes, based on the budget contents, that he was also not elected to reduce taxes either. This NDP government created a low expectation for tax relief. The Finance Minister kept referencing no increases in different areas but he should have gone the other way, decreasing or eliminating the fees. Accounting and legal fees have hurt many Manitobans, especially the non-profit groups such as women's shelters, food kitchens and others that need to make sure that every dollar counts in helping people less fortunate than us. To help lower-income earners they should have moved toward personal exemptions. The fine print in the NDP budget shows most benefits will not be seen until 2006. The fine print is what we really should be looking at.
For Manitobans, this
year's budget represents a lost opportunity,
a missed chance for this government to use its financial windfall to
completely eliminate education taxes from residential properties. Instead, this
government chose to spend over $500 million of this new money while allowing
The NDP government
continues to neglect our universities and colleges and deny them the funding
and freedom to develop as quality institutions of higher learning. They forget
that there is more to providing a quality of education for
Members opposite spoke of
To make matters worse, the budget announced on March 8 was a disappointment in regard to provincial funding for post-secondary education. The NDP government has used the issue of tuition freeze as a political tool and has not provided adequate funding to supplement the losses universities and colleges have been absorbing since the tuition freeze was introduced. Bottom line, our educational institutions need to have a vision and basic goals for the future, and this is impossible to do when their resources are restricted and the funding from the province is unpredictable on a long-term basis.
While some have argued that the tuition freeze be maintained, they have failed to address what happens when the province does not provide universities and colleges with sufficient funding to maintain their infrastructure and programs. What costs are the students really paying for under the tuition freeze? I would question if it is a price they or the university can really afford.
Colleges and universities
must have a fiscal flexibility when it comes to providing high-quality
education and a reputation that can compete with other provinces. Presently
ACC is also experiencing the snub of the NDP government. A $3-million culinary arts program is nowhere to be seen which, if not addressed, could possibly affect the accreditation of this award-winning program.
The reputation of Brandon
University and the ACC college depends on the availability of strong
academic programs and also the retention of programs such as at Brandon
University, the athletics program, which has brought the school and the area a
great deal of national recognition. Not only will this recognition evaporate if
the programs are cut, but it will also affect the quality of student life on
campus and will help in the demise of it. Currently,
Can the university really attract students and faculty in the years to come if this government does provide better funding? To maintain the quality of education, it is essential that the Province increase operating grants or look at the tuition freeze and determine long-term decisions that can be made to slowly eliminate it, while providing a manageable and predictable future for both colleges and universities and the student population. Post-secondary education cannot maintain quality in the present fiscal environment. Long-term planning is necessary to ensure that this does not happen.
To make matters worse, the NDP government's budget speech created the false impression that it had deposited $314 million into the rainy day fund for future unforeseen events. In fact, $155 million is federal government funding for future health care spending, while $150 million is a repayment of money temporarily borrowed from the fund that was supposed to be put back in almost three years ago. In other words, this NDP government only deposited $9 million in new money into the rainy day fund.
This budget has no vision to grow the economy or decrease personal income taxes, and very little support and confidence was shared by this NDP government for the agricultural and rural economy.
In this budget, the NDP
did nothing to make
The Manitoba Bureau of
Statistics estimated that lower farm
cash receipts for both livestock and crops in 2003 reduced net cash income by
over 40 percent, and this has only gotten worse, but the Minister of Finance's
(Mr. Selinger) speech failed agriculture by short-changing any types of
meaningful supports. As KAP president
David Rolfe indicated in a press release, "Where is agriculture? Everywhere but the budget."
Considering it is an industry that touches the lives of every Manitoban, where
farm income declines, all
The BSE crisis continues to be ignored, and despite the impact it is happening on our farm families, my children's friends, my neighbours, all the rural communities within my area, within Manitoba, this Minister of Agriculture and Food (Ms. Wowchuk), who is also the Minister responsible for Rural Initiatives, refuses to provide a much-needed cash advance, and where are the slaughter capacity plants? Where are the plants? No new investments were announced from within the farm gate and, most importantly, the budget failed to decrease farmers' costs. Last year, the Brandon Chamber of Commerce passed a resolution that called on the NDP government to introduce an aggressive program of tax credits or incentives to encourage investment in value-added processing facilities. Press releases occurred. Only words.
Obviously, this government has no interest in their electoral partners. While farmers welcomed the news of a 50% reduction on the special levy paid on farm land, they are very concerned about how this is structured. Typical NDP government announcements.
This past year, the government department faced a restructuring. This was very concerning to the communities that have Agriculture Department people working in their communities. The Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings) has lost his agriculture rep in his community and has worked hard to get that position retained or reinstated and has had no luck from this minister to reinstate that individual in that position. These people within the community are our livelihood. They provide the resources and the supports to the farmers and to the families within the community. They are part of our chambers of commerce. They are part of our economic development groups. They are part of the initiatives to bring economic development to the communities. When you take them and remove them out of the communities you help in dismantling and destroying our rural communities.
* (15:40)
This minister, this
Premier (Mr. Doer) put Ag Department families into a crisis because often a lot
of these people that are working in these Ag Department positions have family
members that are in the agriculture sector. By putting these individuals into
more stress and more risk of losing everything that they care about, you
destroy the spirit of rural
I know this NDP
government has gone on about the importance of ethanol to our province and to
the
On the other side of this, this government has also made promises to other communities on ethanol projects. I feel sadness and despair that this government would lead communities on and let them put hundreds of thousands of dollars into feasibility projects and initiatives in trying to get these projects and get these companies interested in their communities to no avail. I am very disappointed with this government for again misleading the province, misleading these communities, giving them false hope and then walking away.
Hopefully, the NDP government will announce their ethanol strategy for the community of Minnedosa. The residents of the Minnedosa constituency can see the rewards of Husky's planned expansion, and the community can continue to enjoy the economic benefits of such a successful business partner as Husky.
Child care. This NDP
government has missed an opportunity to address the serious staffing shortages.
Recruitment and retention of staff for child care centres is critical for the
sustainability of several communities. I am not talking just about rural
The Minister of Family
Services (Ms. Melnick) is failing families by her arrogance and non-interest in
dealing with this crisis. Centres are closing around her and she continues to
speak of how moving forward this government is on this issue. I find that very
discouraging, and I will quote
The way the minister is responding to questions in this House and in the community, I seriously wonder if she really knows and understands and can appreciate the crisis that is out there in regard to the child care crisis. How can this government crow about their accomplishments while the system is falling apart around them? Address the issue. Address the issue. Universal child care must include all options, must include profit, not-for-profit, and the option of the parent to remain home and be provided a tax credit. This is what a universal child care system would entail, and I am embarrassed that this government cannot address this in a serious manner.
This government has introduced millions in new taxes and fees for families and seniors on low income and fixed incomes. Insufficient notice, lack of proper consultation, this is becoming a common thread within this government's efforts to push legislation that is often flawed and not reflective of the stakeholders' interests. This government has just created another means to grab more fees from the taxpayer.
Despite increases to the health care budget, over $1 million in the last four years, this government has decided to take more money from those who can least give, another 5 percent in this budget. The increase will only work as a short-term solution to the rising costs of health care. I find it troubling that this decision to raise Pharmacare deductibles is on the heels of another NDP policy, taking Alzheimer's patients off their medication.
Why has the wait list for hip and knee surgeries increased over time when this government has put almost $200 million in new federal money to health care? Rather than make use of it, it appears that Minister Sale is out of touch with the electorate. If he actually spoke to the many people waiting for care, he would respond differently and most definitely act quicker.
We have rural hospitals being closed, despite a Premier (Mr. Doer) and a Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) continually saying, "It is not our policy to close hospitals." The fact is, closing our hospitals is the wrong way to go and it does not save money. Who do you believe will work in our best interests, of our communities? An election promise made by a Premier or the RHA? Yet, over and over again, we see rural hospitals losing their services. We are seeing the emergence of highway medicine in this province.
When a patient is at a hospital at a significant distance from home, there is a tendency to keep the patient in the hospital longer as the patient cannot get back as quickly or as easily if complications develop. The greater distances also make home care more expense and less available. Patients will not stop getting sick if the hospital is farther away. If adequately staffed and equipped, smaller hospitals can generate better outcomes.
The NDP record on mental health is nothing to be proud of. Budget numbers show a decrease in commitment. It is difficult to understand how the system can be working when you learn of stories that share how Manitobans suffering with mental illness, along with their friends and families, encounter obstacle after obstacle in the mental health system. I believe it is important that a person with personal challenges has a proper personal safety in a place when moving toward independent living. I look forward to the inquiry into Sharon Horn's death. A review is necessary to determine if any mistakes were made in allowing Mrs. Horn to live on her own. We need to ensure that incidents like this can be prevented.
What is this government doing to ensure that the necessary supports are in place for persons who suffer with mental illness? That is a question I ask this government. Vision from this government is building casinos, dikes and debt.
The bottom line is this
government is forcing
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Great endorsement of the government. This is the second one today. The Member for Morris (Mrs. Taillieu) asked the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick) when she is Minister of Family Services five years from now, will we be able to guarantee that the child care money is still in place? When you members opposite read Hansard, they will notice the members opposite are throwing in the white flag. They are already surrendering, because this budget is so good for Manitobans.
Certainly, the economy is doing well. There are certainly challenges in the farm economy, with trade and other measures, with the commodity prices. But to hear the pathetic comments of members opposite that BSE is not "mentioned in the budget." Let me read back the comments, because we do not think BSE is the problem. Members opposite may think that BSE is a problem. We do not think it is the problem, because every case has been inspected, detected, and rejected. The problem is not BSE. The problem is the Americans are keeping the border closed.
* (15:50)
They are giving aid and comfort to the Americans. The first question for the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) is BSE. Our statement is that the livestock industry strategy is very, very important. We recognize the setback cattle and ruminant producers are experiencing following the recent court decision to keep the American border closed. That is the problem.
There is not a problem of
BSE because we always reject it here in
I am proud of the fact that this budget builds on four pillars. The Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings) never had a budget built on one pillar, let alone four pillars. He never had one budget built on four pillars. They go to the Chicken Shack and they go to the Chicken Chef and they go to the coffee shops and they swagger in there and, you know, NDP, we care more about farmers. They raised the tax on farmers. We are lowering the tax on farmers.
This budget builds on
four pillars: debt reduction, it builds on investments in priorities, it
invests in maintaining the tax reduction promises we had promised in the
election campaign and more, and it further builds upon saving for the future.
Four pillars. Name us one budget the Tories ever produced that had two of those
four pillars. You cannot find one of them. We have a budget here with four
pillars to build for the future of
Members opposite are
looking for little weasel words to
vote against it, pointing fingers here,
pointing fingers there like a little weather vane going around, swinging around
in the breeze. It used to be the Liberals that were the weather vane in
The first pillar is
paying down debt. The members opposite did not even pay one quarter, one
nickel, one penny to the pension liability for the civil service here in
We have also invested in terms of pension debt reduction in direct debt. Our debt payment now has gone up from $96 million to $110 million. When we came into office, it was $75 million. It has gone to $96 million; it has gone to $110 million. That basic debt payment is not coming out of the rainy day fund.
The last debt payment the Tories made was $75 million, and the rainy day fund had an extraction of $185 million in '98 and another $185 million in '99. That is why Norm Cameron, who was on their fair tax commission said, and I quote, "You are running a deficit because your rainy day money is greater than your debt payment."
Our debt to GDP has been
reduced dramatically here in
I do not know, maybe we will get a third accounting measure. We are balanced under the Filmon balanced budget legislation; we now have a $400-million current budget surplus under GAAP; and we have another $195-million surplus. You know what? Members opposite are going to vote against it, and shame on them. They will be accountable.
The second pillar in this
budget is investing in the future of
Secondly, the members
opposite are voting against the floodway. Ed Schreyer moved an amendment to
deal with market gardens, but then he voted for the floodway. Ed Schreyer is
smarter than members opposite because he did not want to be on the record
voting against the floodway. The Liberals voted against the floodway, and they
will never, ever form government in
Members opposite are
voting against an 8% increase for municipalities. They are voting against 54
new police officers. They are voting against it, and they are voting for a new
transit agreement that increases transit grants to
Those numbers are absolutely irrefutable, because 1 percent in one year and 2 percent the next year produces a certain amount of money over the budget, and that is $300 million less, so you are not only closing Victoria hospital, that is $54 million, you are closing Seven Oaks, you are closing Brandon general hospital, you are closing the Gladstone hospital that we reopened, you are closing Concordia Hospital. That is what you would do, and you cannot vote for a 5% increase for health care for the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority? Shame on you.
We are also investing in education, public education. You know, there was a little article the other day comparing the 1996 budget and this year's budget. What they failed to mention, there was a 2% cut, $15 million. Fifteen million dollars was cut out of education in 1996, resulting in a major increase in property taxes and a major reduction in services. That is why people do not believe you. They know that taxes went up 68 percent under your mean regime of the past. They know that taxes went up. You are going to see when you read your tax bill, from your property tax bill, this year the education portion has gone from being higher than the municipal tax when we came into office, then lower than the municipal tax when we came into office. Five years later, we are chipping away on it. The public knows your record, and they know our record.
* (16:00)
In terms of education and
training, what is their policy on education and training? They went from a
leaky roof at the
We are also building the
capital.
I would remind people to
go out of this building and look which way the Golden Boy faces. It faces north
with the future of this province, and members opposite do not understand that.
We have now
Mr. Acting Speaker, $80
million in clean-up of water across
Well, you joined the Conservative Party. You joined a party that cut the nutrition for babies, and you also joined the political party that clawed back a Liberal child poverty benefit. I think it is shameful.
We have increased the child care spaces. We have increased the number of people in training for child care. I am very proud of the fact that we have introduced BabyFirst, 5000 babies now; our mothers are getting investment, many of them in First Nations communities, because we believe in reducing the number of underweight babies and increasing the amount of babies that are born in good health who can have a life of dignity. Again, a program–[interjection]
The member from Steinbach, in his Darwinian voice, speaks against this program, but we know that this is better early childhood development. He could stick his hand on the horn and continue to be mean and extreme, but I am proud of the fact that we are bringing a program that puts babies first.
You know the member opposite complains about labour laws. Putting workers first has resulted in a 60% reduction in the number of people with days lost, strike and lockout and the health and safety laws that we brought in that were opposed by that shining light of benevolence, the member from Springfield, has resulted in a 19% decrease in injuries at the workplace.
I could go on all day long about inclusion of people. I could go on and on. When you look at that bench and when you look at this bench, you will see people from all walks of life, from all parts of Manitoba and from all the various parts of the rainbow that make Manitoba a great province. That is also what we believe in.
Our third pillar is tax
reductions. I remember that the member from
Every tax reduction we have made is consistent with our election promise. We promised to reduce the middle-income tax bracket. We now have gone up to a 19% reduction in taxes. We promised to lower corporate taxes. We now have lowered the corporate tax from 17 percent to 14 percent in this budget, and you are going to vote against it. You never lowered any corporate taxes. We are generating more corporate income, more corporate profits. The reduction has led to positive results in the corporate sector. We have new provisions for the manufacturing tax. Unlike members opposite who raised property taxes by 68 percent in the 1990s, we promised to increase the property tax credit from $250 to $400, done. We promised to start phasing out the second education tax on home-owners and residences, and it is now two thirds gone with this budget, saving people $125 a year on their property tax bill. Again, a promise made and a promise kept.
We did more than that,
because the agricultural sector was in a lot of difficulty, we are lowering
beyond our election promise the education tax on farmland. Members opposite can
squirm, they can wiggle, they can try to do something about it, but, you know
what, they are voting against the largest tax reduction for education tax on
farmland in the history of
Finally, we are saving
money. I remember the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) saying, "Oh,
you know, they should balance under BBL." Then a couple of months later,
"Oh, they should balance under whatever." Then whatever the Auditor
said they said something else. He also said we should put money into the rainy
day fund. When we came into office, the rainy day fund was $240 million. Today
it is close to $390 million. Some of the equalization–[interjection]
The member opposite talks about three more years, but the member from Morris talked about five years later. I want to thank her for those very generous comments.
We now have $390 million in the rainy day fund. We did not take some of the negotiated money, which by the way as a percentage of revenue is lower than the equalization money in the 1999 year. We did not take that money and squander it. We put it all away in the rainy day fund.
* (16:10)
We do not exactly know
what is going on with the
Now here we have a budget that pays down debt, puts money into the investments that are priorities for Manitobans, keeps the tax promises we made to people, lowers taxes. It lowers taxes more in one year than members opposite did in 11 years. It also saves money. We go up to $390 million, the money we negotiated, which is not larger as a percentage of the budget than 1999 equalization. We did not spend it. We saved it.
Here you have saving, debt reduction, tax reduction and you have investments in health care, post-secondary education, community colleges, water, floodway and farming. You have BSE investments and slaughter house investments, transit investments.
So I want to give members some unsolicited advice. In 1999 when the former government actually brought a budget in, well, '89 they brought a budget in that was exactly out of our election promises, and we voted for it. We voted for it.
In 1999 they started to put more money into health care and a little bit of investment in areas that we thought were important after 10 years of neglect. We voted for the budget. Do you know why? Because the public does not like opposition parties acting like Pavlov's dog. They want opposition parties that do not just bark when something happens, do not just wail at the moon. The public wants opposition parties that are governments-in-waiting and are thoughtful and are beyond partisan politics.
We had editorial writers criticizing us. I had editorial writers say, "You voted for the budget. You have nothing." you know, blah, blah, blah. Well you know what? The public is sick and tired of barking opposition parties. You have a choice today to vote for something, to vote for tax reduction for farmers, to vote for education and training, to vote five percent more money in health care. You have a choice to vote for something or continue to bark in the wilderness. I would recommend you vote for it.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Schellenberg): Please be informed–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Schellenberg): Order. I just want to advise the House, please be informed that we will be giving the Leaders unlimited speaking time on the budget debate to the Member for Lac du Bonnet. This is given by the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray).
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac
du Bonnet): On behalf of myself, my family, and the
constituents in Lac du Bonnet, I would like to extend my condolences to the
family and friends of the four RCMP officers who lost their lives in
Having had the benefit or detriment of listening to the Premier (Mr. Doer) talk about the budget today, I can tell you that, having heard what he said, all I can say is that he obviously confuses volume with accuracy, and that is just like the Finance Minister of this province, it is just like other members opposite as well. He uses the excuse that the BSE problem is there solely because the border has closed. In reality, the problem is this Premier, the problem is this Minister of Finance, and the problem is the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk). The problem is the NDP. That is the problem, and their lack of action.
I heard the Premier say
that the NDP will build the floodway. Well, I have news for the Premier. The
floodway has already been built. It has been built by the Conservative Party of
Manitoba. That is who built the floodway. He talks about that we have narrowed
our appeal in
I have listened to some of the comments by members opposite, some of the ministers in this budget debate, and I have read some of them in Hansard, and I can tell you that I am somewhat dismayed by the comments made by the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) and the Minister of Finance, particularly, when they tell me that government cannot have both meaningful tax cuts in this province and responsible spending. Unlike members opposite, I can tell you that on this side of the House we can chew and walk at the same time. We can chew gum and walk at the same time.
The Member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), in his comments made just a few days ago, said that there were a number of projects done in the Lac du Bonnet constituency over the last six years and those projects, when I calculated the value of those projects, they come to about $20 million. There has been $525 million in new revenues in this province. There is more than enough for inflationary increases to program spending. There is more than enough for meaningful tax relief. I make no apologies for representing members of the Lac du Bonnet constituency, and I challenge the member from Elmwood to tell my constituents that. Bring out the true facts. I represent the members of the Lac du Bonnet constituency. I represent the constituency well, and, because of my representation, I brought those improvements to the Lac du Bonnet constituency. That is who did it, and if he wants to tell members of the Lac du Bonnet constituency that, I will, in fact, pay for the ad. I make no apologies for that, and I make no apologies for asking this government to reduce debt. I make no apologies for asking them to live within their means. I challenge him to tell my constituents that, because I will certainly support that.
When the NDP came into
power in 1999, they inherited a province that had recently weathered a
crippling recession, experienced hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts in
federal transfer payments. They battled the flood of the century and had a
$380-million surplus in this rainy day fund. Six years later, the NDP benefits
from a rejuvenated provincial economy as well as fully restored and increased
federal transfer payments, significant changes that have helped drive the
annual provincial revenues up each year, to the point where
What makes this troubling situation worse is the fact that the NDP government has resorted to misleading Manitobans about the province's true financial status, a point that the provincial auditor made when he criticized the NDP for their made-in-Manitoba accounting practices. It seems that a recent government report of a $13-million surplus was in truth a $604-million loss. So today's NDP cannot live within its means. It has raided the province's savings account and is now running up the provinces credit card debt to make ends meet. The question is why, and what happens when there is a downturn in the provincial economy. If the provinces financial house is not in order, all Manitobans can expect to experience the consequences of this government's mismanagement practices.
* (16:20)
We have repeatedly pressed this NDP government for its long-term economic strategy and so far they have refused to reveal any economic strategy or vision for the province, probably because it does not have one. There is no plan to reduce or eliminate education taxes from residential property tax bills. There is no plan to significantly reduce personal income taxes for low- and middle-income earners. Of course, the NDP government has already acknowledged it has no grand scheme for health care.
We believe that the NDP
government needs a clear economic strategy for this province, a strategy that
will deal with the pressing issues, such as rising education taxes, escalating health
costs and provincial debt repayments. We believe that it is imperative that we
selectively and strategically cut taxes to put more money in Manitoban's
pockets, money that you can invest to increase the standard of living for both
you and your family, and in turn your investment will generate new economic activity
and new jobs for all of
The NDP's lack of an
economic vision and aversion to tax reduction has made
The Finance Minister runs the business of government. It is a foreign concept among members opposite. Is there a business member among them, I ask you? No there is not. Is there anyone of them that has any experience in business? No. Does the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) have business experience? Does the Premier (Mr. Doer) have business experience? Does the Justice Minister? Does the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology (Mr. Chomiak)? Does the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Lathlin)? Does the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Struthers)? Does the Minister of Education (Mr. Bjornson)? Does the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick)? Does the Minister of Advanced Education (Ms. McGifford)? Does the Minister of Water Stewardship (Mr. Ashton)? Does the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk)? How about the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr. Smith)? How about the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Lemieux)? How about the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism (Mr. Robinson)?
It is amazing, not one of
them has an ounce of business experience. They have no experience. More than an
$8-billion budget, no business experience on that side of the House. That is
scary. Manitobans should be concerned. No wonder this budget cannot be trusted.
There is absolutely no doubt that half of them, in fact I would guess that
probably half of them could not balance their own chequebooks, and we are
trusting them with $8.1 billion in the budget.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Schellenberg): Order, please. It is getting a bit too loud. I cannot hear the speaker, so just quiet it down a bit. Thank you.
Mr. Hawranik:Let me give you an illustration about members opposite and their ability to actually understand finances. I was speaking to one of the members opposite about a year ago, and it was with regard to the VLTs in terms of the expansion of VLTs in the province and the fact that it would cost $100 million to replace some of the existing VLTs with more addictive VLTs to ensure that government revenues were on track.
When I was speaking to them, I questioned them. That $100 million, is it really worth it? Should we really be spending $100 million of taxpayers' money to buy more VLTs? The reply I got from one of the members opposite, and they gave me this reply with a straight face, they said, "Taxpayers are not paying for those VLTs. We borrowed the money." That is the mentality of members opposite.
That is a good illustration of their inability to understand the finances of this province. They do not realize that borrowing the money, it has to be paid back. It has to be paid back with interest, and who is going to be paying back that debt? Our children and our grandchildren will be saddled with that debt.
Members opposite live in fantasyland when it comes time to the budget and with respect to the finances of this province. I have listened to some of the debates on this budget, and I can tell you that the numbers that have been given by members opposite in terms of what the debt is, what the deficit is, is all inconsistent. They cannot even get their message straight, because they do not know what their numbers are.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Schellenberg): Order. There is too much chatting going on. If you wish to chat, please go to the loge and let the speaker speak.
Mr. Hawranik: When we talked about fact and fantasy, as I mentioned before, just in case they did not get it, members opposite are living in fantasyland when it comes time to the budget, when it comes time for the finances of this province.
Let me give you some examples. They say that the debt has been paid down. I heard the Premier (Mr. Doer) say that just before I stood up to speak on the budget. He said the debt was paid down. That is absolute nonsense, they never paid down the debt. They only paid money toward the debt. The debt has increased in this province.
I heard other members opposite quote numbers from the budget papers, the Manitoba Budget 2005. They turned to page B30 of the budget papers, and they quoted only the General Purpose Debt. That is only part of the debt of the Province. There is the General Purpose Debt. There is a Manitoba Hydro Debt. There is Other Debt. There is Health Facilities. There is Government Enterprises. There is Capital Investments. There is pension investments. There is Pension Liability. There is Pension Assets. There is Net Pension Liability. There is Health Debt. They forget all those numbers. All they want to do is quote the General Purpose Debt.
When
I heard numbers from members opposite that, in fact, the debt has decreased. That is absolutely incorrect. The debt of the Province since 1999 has increased. The overall debt of the Province has increased by $3.462 billion since '99 under the watch of this Premier. In fact, in this budget alone, all they have to do is subtract the numbers. In this budget alone, the overall debt of the Province increased by $526 million. In this budget alone. That is $6,000 an hour. By the time I conclude my address to this budget, the debt of this province would have increased by another $6,000.
The total debt of the Province is over $20 billion.
Howard Pawley, I have mentioned this before in this House, would be proud of this NDP, because they are no different than yesterday's NDP.
I have heard comments by members opposite that they say the cost of servicing the debt is down. To a certain extent it is, but not to the credit of the NDP. It has nothing to do with what the NDP did. They increased the debt of this province by $3.5 billion since 1999. The only thing that decreased the cost of servicing the debt is the economic environment that we are in, and globally. In fact, the only thing that really has made an impact on the cost of servicing the debt is the decreased interest rates that we have experienced over the last five or six years.
* (16:30)
My concern is what happens if the rate of interest we are paying by this province goes up by one percent? With a debt of $20 billion, if the rate of interest goes up by one percent alone, that would be an extra $200 million taxpayers would have to fork out. That is not good news for the future. A $200-million increase would be more than the budget for the Department of Agriculture alone.
Another indication that members opposite are in fact living in fantasyland, when it comes time for the budget and when it comes time for the financial statements of the province, is that they believe the province has been spending taxpayers' dollars responsibly and that it is sustainable. The fact is that with a 6.6% increase in spending alone in this budget, how could that be sustainable when the rate of inflation is 1.8 percent and the real GDP increased by 2.9 percent? It is not possible to sustain that kind of spending, and in fact over the last six years, since 1999, the NDP has increased spending on an average of 5 percent a year. That is simply not sustainable.
Since 1999, the NDP has had an annual increase in expenditure in six years of over $2 billion. Over $2 billion on an annual basis of increased spending included with $3.462-billion increases in debt mean there is uncontrolled spending in this province. This province under this Premier and under this Finance Minister has a spending addiction. This year, the spending increase will be $506 million. That is one of the greatest single increases in spending in one year, plus the debt went up by $526 million.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Schellenberg): Order. There is too much conversation going on. It makes it very difficult for the speaker to speak.
Mr. Hawranik: Thank you very much. This government is addicted to spending. They had an increase in this year's budget of $506 million in terms of spending, but that does not end it. We have to also look at how much the debt is going to be increased as a result of this budget as well. When we look at the increase in debt as a result of this budget, it is $526 million. Total new spending, we are looking at the total operations of government, the total new spending will be over $1 billion. When I tell that to Manitobans, I think they would agree that we really need to send the Finance Minister, the Premier (Mr. Doer), and all of his Cabinet to the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba. They need help. The Addictions Foundation can obviously help them by trying to control their spending, and sooner rather than later.
Another indication that the government is living in fantasyland is that they believe the economy grew, and they believe this government is responsible for the increase in revenues. The fact is that the federal transfers are $393 million above '03-04 levels. Transfer payments have come in at unprecedented levels into this province. We are continuing to be a have-not province. We should be trying to grow our economy rather than going cap in hand every year to the federal Finance Minister to ask for more and more money. We need to grow our economy. We do not need to increase our dependence on federal government revenues.
I remember in one answer to one of my questions in Question Period, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) flippantly threw out the number that there has been a $10-billion increase in Manitoba's GDP since 1999.
Again, the Finance Minister
has been called by the Auditor General as misleading by omission, and I call
him today misleading by omission by that statement. What he refuses to tell us
is that
We do not have a long-term economic vision in this province, and that is something that members opposite ought to look at and ought to consider before continuing to spend recklessly the money that Manitobans have worked so hard to earn. Another example of the fantasyland that the NDP are living in is they believe that they replenished the rainy day fund. The fact remains is that the NDP is not responsible really for replenishing the rainy day fund; it had to do with the federal transfer payments. I heard some numbers thrown out by the Premier (Mr. Doer) earlier in his speech on the budget, and I can tell you I would like to correct the record. The balance in the fund in '96-97 when there was a Conservative government was $577 million. Because of the 1997 flood of the century, solely due to that, we had to withdraw $150 million from the rainy day fund, but we had an excuse. It was a disaster in the province, and we had to support Manitobans. We had to stand behind Manitobans who were affected by that flood of the century.
On March 31, 1999, there was $427 million left in the rainy day fund, not the number that the Premier put forward on the record, but it was $427 million in '99, when they took power in '99. Since that date, in '99-2000, the NDP withdrew $162 million; in 2001-2002, they withdrew another $73 million; in 2002-2003, they withdrew another $12 million; and in 2003-2004 they took out another $156 million. They took out a total of $348 million in five years. Those are not my numbers; those are not mine. They are the Auditor General's numbers. That is where that comes from, and $348 million in five years without any natural disasters, simply to try to balance the budget, simply to try to balance the books of this province. It has nothing to do with disasters like we had in '97 with the flood of the century, and in '03-04, all we were left with is $79 million in that fund. They raided it down to $79 million.
Then this year, because of the increased federal transfer payments, because of the windfall from the federal government, they put in $314 million. In reality, they did not put $314 million of their money into the rainy day fund. They put $150 million back, which they said they would repay in the year 2002. It took them three years to repay that $150 million and only because of the federal transfer payments, the windfall from the federal government that came into this province, only then did they replace the $150 million that they said they were going to replace in 2002.
They also took $155 million that was paid to the province for health care, an advanced health care payment, $155 million for health care in this province that came through federal transfer payments, so in reality–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Schellenberg): Order. It makes it difficult for the speaker to speak if we are in conversation.
* (16:40)
Mr. Hawranik The reality is that the province only put in $9 million out of its own revenues into the rainy day fund. The $150 million that they promised to pay back in 2002 was simply a repayment of what they took out of the rainy day fund just to try to balance the budget.
Members opposite are living in a fantasy. I will give you another example. The NDP say that they have been balancing the budget every year since 1999. That is what they say. They are living in never-never land. They are living in fantasyland. Let us tell the truth. I am only quoting from numbers given to me by the Auditor General. It is only political spin. That is all it is. The fact is, they are wrong. The fact is, they are dead wrong. I invite them to read the Auditor General's report. Obviously they have not. Read the Auditor General's report. You will get the full facts.
The fact is, in 2001-2002, they ran a $10-million deficit. The fact is, in 2002-2003, they ran a $184-million deficit. The fact is, in 2003-2004, they ran a $604-million deficit, all the while maintaining that they balanced the budget. If these were balanced budgets, my question is why has the total debt of the province increased by $3.462 billion since 1999 and the net debt of the province increased by over $3 billion since 1999.
I have heard the comment that they are proud of the fact that the debt-to-GDP ratio is going down. Well, I did some research. We are fifth-best among the provinces. That is all we are. We are not the best. We are not even above the Canadian average. The Finance Minister uses this as his benchmark to determine whether we can pay back the debt.
I was at a breakfast a couple of days ago with the Auditor General, when he was speaking at the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce breakfast–
An Honourable Member: Who was there?
Mr. Hawranik: There were not any NDP members there, not one. They are afraid to hear what the Auditor General had to say. That is what they are afraid of. They cannot defend their record. The Auditor General said that our debt-to-GDP ratio has actually been rising in the last two years. It has not been increasing. It has not been falling as the Finance Minister said, it has been rising. How can we trust this Finance Minister? I trust the Auditor General. The Auditor General is the watchdog for the province. He is independent of all political parties.
We cannot trust this Finance Minister. All he is doing is trying to give his own political spin to a bad situation. He has fudged the 2004-2005 health care numbers. He presented a budget in this House for 2004-2005 indicating that the health expenditure numbers under the budget, he presented this budget as being truthful and honest. We found out from the Health Minister that, in fact, those were not the correct numbers. How can we trust this Finance Minister's numbers? He fudged the numbers in the health budget and he fudged the numbers at least once. Who is to say that he will not do it again? I believe that he has done it again. We have no assurances that those numbers are correct in the budget for 2005-2006.
Another example of the
fantasyland that members opposite are living in. I refer to page 24 of the
budget papers, the Manitoba Advantage,
where they feel that it costs less to live here than anywhere across
They use categories such
as mortgage costs. Well, we have cheaper housing in
There are some things that they do not put in the categories. What about food costs? When will they put that in the Manitoba Advantage papers? The reason why they will not, especially up North, is that milk is at $5 a litre. They will not put food costs as a category within the Manitoba Advantage because they know it is not to their advantage. What about the cost of goods in this province? They do not include the cost of goods as one of the costs in this province. What about personal debt? Personal debt has increased in this province, and it has increased largely because of the outrageous personal income taxes charged by this government. They have had to pay increased deductibles under the Pharmacare program. They have had to pay increased hydro bills because of the hikes that have occurred under this government and increased under this government. Those are the realities in this province, and I present that for you for your consideration.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
Mr. Speaker, I will give
you another example about the fantasyland that this government is living in.
They state that we have got low personal income tax rates, and that their
reductions to taxes are substantial. That is their spin. The fact is eight
provinces have yet to report their provincial budgets to their legislatures,
and these income tax reductions that are proposed under this budget are not for
this year. They are for 2006. Middle-income earners are the highest taxed west
of
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Point of Order
Mr. Speaker: The honourable First Minister, on a point of order.
Mr. Doer: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is convention, at least was when we were in opposition, to allow the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) and the Premier to speak. I spoke for only 24 minutes. The member is over 32 now. The Minister of Finance is due. Normally, we have done this with some dignity. We tried to do it in opposition. I would expect equal courtesy.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on the same point of order.
Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I would like to, as the Deputy Speaker indicated, say that the critic of Finance does have a leader's latitude, and I also think that in fairness, and the minister will have time, he will have time, but we also know that the minister was the one who introduced the budget. He had full time to introduce the budget. We have heard from it, so I know that the members opposite have difficulty with the member from Lac du Bonnet bringing some truth and forthrightness to this debate. I know they do not want to hear that, and that is why they are concerned about it. He will ensure that the Minister of Finance has ample time and he is about to wind up.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, this is the First Minister trying to intervene, take up more time. I know the member from Lac du Bonnet was ready to wrap up. He was making some very salient points about why debt is going up in this province, and why this province has a spending habit with this. That is why he does not have a point of order, and clearly the member from Lac du Bonnet was just concluding his remarks.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised by the honourable First Minister, under our rules, we have designated speaking times. We have designated rules. Whatever arrangements are made by the parties, it is through a gentlemen's agreement.
According to our rules, when leaders designate their unlimited speaking time, that is what we in the House, and whatever arrangements the House makes, that is up to them. But our rules govern me, that the honourable member was given the leader's latitude, and the honourable member has unlimited speaking time. So the honourable member does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.
* * *
* (16:50)
Mr. Hawranik: I want to point out at least one more example about how members
opposite are living in fantasyland. They believe that the elimination of the maternity
ward at the
The NDP have
intentionally unravelled the maternity ward. They only funded 800 deliveries
under their watch. We will hold, I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, some of the
members accountable across the way for the way they are going to vote on the
budget. We are going to hold the members from
The question remains, Mr. Speaker, can the budget numbers be believed, and that is where we have problems. We cannot believe the budget numbers that have been presented by this minister. How can we trust the books that have been presented by the Finance Minister? They have a history of cooking the books.
Vic Schroeder in 1984, when he was Finance Minister, the provincial auditor, Bill Ziprick, and I will give you the exact quote, stated, "The NDP cooked the books." He said it right in the newspaper. He said they understated the deficit by $263 million. The auditor did not even sign off on the books. It is comforting to know that Vic Schroeder is now the chair of Manitoba Hydro. Is that not comforting?
Now, fast-forward to 2004. The expenses of the health budget were understated so that the '04-05 budget balances. How can we trust the budget numbers? We obviously cannot trust the budget numbers that are presented by this Finance Minister.
The '03-04 audit, Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister insists on a $13-million surplus when the Auditor General has stated that there was a $604-million deficit. How can we trust this minister, a $13-million surplus, how does he arrive at that? He counts revenue that is not really revenue. He does not count expenses that are really expenses. It is easy to balance the books then. It takes no magic to do that, just do not count the expenses.
Can we support this
budget? I say no. We do not know the real numbers, and we have lost an
opportunity forever for the residents of the
Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister
of Finance): The good news is we do not need the
amount of time they take to tell the truth to the people of
We have an economic plan for this province, Mr. Speaker, and because it is focussed and clear, we are going to put it on the record before we vote in seven minutes.
The first point in that
plan is putting education first. Members opposite know nothing about that. We
have had a 10% reduction in tuition fees. People have voted against it across
the way every single year that they have been over there. We have increased
college enrolment 31 percent. They are in denial about that. We have increased
college and university funding by 30 percent. They voted against it. We put
bursaries back in place in this province. These people cut the bursary program
for young people in this province. We brought it back. It is up over $17.6
million on an annual basis in this province. We put in place a 10% co-op
education tax credit. They voted against it. We have more young people in this
province and staying in this province than ever before. We built the
When it comes to building
through research and innovation, we have a plan. Ernst & Young said, "
Now, that is our second plank. We have got a centre for commercialization of biomedical technology, which we are expanding. We have got the Asper centre for research that is expanding research in this province. We have a nutraceutical centre that is being expanded, that is being built in this province. These members vote against every one of these initiatives, which lays a long-term foundation for innovation in this province.
Now, three: we have raised and retained investment through venture capital in this province. These members vote against all those initiatives. We have a $5-million partnership with several private investors for the $25-million CentreStone Ventures Fund. Members opposite are going to vote against it. We have a $187 million for the St. Leon wind power project, the first windmill project in Manitoba, the largest project in Canada, a perfect complement to Manitoba, a public-private partnership. Members opposite cannot find it in their hearts to support it.
We have put in place a community enterprise development tax credit. Members opposite vote against it, as they always continue to do.
Then we come to affordable government. Second-lowest per capita services in the country. Members opposite, they cannot accept that. They do not understand efficiency. Their concept of good government is to privatize everything. That is how they would like to do it. We have a higher credit rating than when these members were in office, but can they accept that? No, they cannot.
Finally, growing through
immigration. We have a very
diverse province. We have over 8000 newcomers coming to this province. We are
retaining more young people. We are going to go to 10 000 immigrants in
this province. We are going to help
Then our sixth point: building on our clean energy advantage. These folks did nothing in the nineties to expand our energy advantage in this province. They have done nothing on geothermal. They have done nothing on wind power. They did not build one additional kilowatt of hydro-electricity through the nineties. We are going to build it. We are going to put it in place. We are going to do it in co-operation with our northern Aboriginal partners, and we are going to make sure that everybody benefits from that as we go forward.
Finally, building our
communities. Under these guys opposite, downtown
An Honourable Member: Keep going, Greg.
Mr. Selinger: Got more time? All right. Excellent. There is going to be a new
There is going to be a
Kenaston underpass. The Member for
There is going to be
waste water treatment upgrades in this province. We are going to restore
We brought the centre for sustainable development to this province, and once again, members will vote against the resources to support that.
* (17:00)
What about our
neighbourhoods, Mr. Speaker? In the nineties, the members opposite presided over a decline in assessment values in
north
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. The hour being 5 p.m., pursuant to Rule 36(6), I am interrupting the proceedings to put the questions necessary to dispose of the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government and all amendments to that motion.
Therefore, the question
before the House is the proposed sub-amendment of the honourable Member for
Some Honourable Members: Dispense.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Mr. Speaker: Yes? Okay.
THAT the amendment be amended by adding thereto the following words:
And further regrets that this Budget also ignores present and future needs of Manitobans by:
(r) Failing to provide an effective plan to improve health and prevent sickness; and
(s) Failing to provide an effective strategy to deal with child poverty; and
(t) Failing to provide Manitobans with the approach needed to decrease childhood obesity and diabetics; and
(u) Failing to provide Manitobans with the legal right to timely, quality health care; and
(v) Failing to do any
better than the previous Tory government in improving the dental health of
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the sub-amendment?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the sub-amendment, say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the sub-amendment, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it.
* * *
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have support?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Mr. Speaker: Are there any members to support? You need four members to have a recorded vote. The members that support the recorded vote, please stand.
There is no support.
Therefore, the question before the House is the proposed amendment of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. The proposed amendment moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray) to the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger)
THAT this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.
Do members wish to have the amendment read?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Mr. Speaker: Yes. Okay.
THAT the motion be amended by deleting all
the words after "House" and substituting the following:
therefore regrets this Budget ignores the present and
future needs of Manitobans by:
(a) Failing
to offer any vision and to reflect the priorities of
(b)
Failing to provide a long-term economic strategy and tax reduction strategy
that addresses the fact that Manitobans are now, under the Doer NDP government,
the highest taxed west of New Brunswick, and make Manitoba a
"have" province; and
(c)
Failing to address the debt of
(d) Failing to
eliminate education taxes off of residential property and farmland; and
(e) Failing to offer a
"New Deal" which will meet the needs of
(f) Failing to provide
adequate funding for post-secondary institutions; and
(g) Failing to provide
relief for
(h) Failing to provide
for a meaningful review of the operation and administration of
(i) Failing to provide
a long-term plan for the reduction of health care waiting lists; and
(j) Failing to provide
an opportunity for publicly funded health care services in privately managed
clinics; and
(k) Failing to provide
child care options for parents by failing to support for-profit child care
centres as well as not-for-profit centres, and failing to provide a tax credit
for stay-at-home parents; and
(l) Failing
(m) Failing to support
(n) Failing to deal
with record numbers of auto thefts and record numbers of murders; and
(o) Failing to provide
a plan or strategy to break up existing gangs and prevent new gangs from coming
to
(p) Failing to deal
with the high number of grow-ops and labs manufacturing illegal drugs and the
proliferation of drugs; and
(q) Failing to
acknowledge their raid on Manitoba Hydro contributed to a 10% increase in Hydro
rates.
As a consequence, the government has thereby lost the
confidence of the House and the people of
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the
amendment?
Some
Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable
Members: No.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker:
All those in favour of the amendment,
say yea.
Some
Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker:
All those opposed to the amendment,
say nay.
Some
Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker:
In my opinion, the Nays have it.
Formal Vote
Mr. Murray: It is such a good amendment I think we should all vote
on it.
Mr. Speaker:
A recorded vote having been
requested, call in the members.
The
question before the House is the proposed amendment moved by the honourable
Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray) to the proposed motion of the
honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger)
THAT this
House approves the general budgetary policy of the government.
Do members
wish to have the amendment reread?
Some
Honourable Members: No.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Cullen, Cummings, Derkach,
Driedger, Dyck, Eichler, Goertzen, Hawranik, Loewen, Maguire, Mitchelson,
Murray, Penner, Reimer, Rowat, Schuler, Stefanson, Taillieu.
Nays
Aglugub, Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Bjornson, Brick, Caldwell, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Gerrard, Irvin-Ross, Jennissen, Jha, Korzeniowski, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McGifford, Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Reid, Robinson, Rondeau, Sale, Santos, Schellenberg, Selinger, Smith, Struthers, Swan, Wowchuk.
Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 18, Nays 36.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the amendment lost.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance
THAT this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Formal Vote
Mr. Murray: Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.
The question before the House is the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger)
THAT this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Aglugub, Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Bjornson, Brick, Caldwell, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Irvin-Ross, Jennissen, Jha, Korzeniowski, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McGifford, Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Reid, Robinson, Rondeau, Sale, Santos, Schellenberg, Selinger, Smith, Struthers, Swan, Wowchuk.
Nays
Cullen, Cummings, Derkach, Driedger, Dyck, Eichler,
Gerrard, Goertzen, Hawranik, Lamoureux, Loewen, Maguire, Mitchelson, Murray,
Penner, Reimer, Rowat, Schuler, Stefanson, Taillieu.
Madam Clerk: Yeas 34, Nays
20.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
* * *
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Estimates order, and just give notice that on Monday we will be calling, under Orders of the Day, Interim Supply.
Mr. Speaker, 5:30?
Mr. Speaker: Is it the
will of the House to call it 5:30? [Agreed]
The hour being 5:30, this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. on Monday.