LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Monday,
October 31, 2005
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Mr. Ralph Eichler (
These are the reasons for this petition:
Insulin pumps cost over $6,500.
The cost of diabetes to the
Good blood sugar reduces elimination of kidney failure by 50 percent, blindness by 76 percent, nerve damage by 60 percent, cardiac disease by 35 percent and even amputations.
Diabetes is an epidemic in our province and will become an unprecedented drain on our struggling health care system if we do not take action now.
The benefit of having an insulin pump is it allows the person living with this life-threatening disease to obtain sugar control and become a much healthier, complication-free individual.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the Premier (Mr. Doer) of
Submitted on behalf of Joyce Davidson, Raymond Davidson, Morna Cook and many, many others.
Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
The background to this petition is as follows:
The Manitoba Government was made aware of serious problems involving the Crocus Fund back in 2001.
As a direct result of the government ignoring the red flags back in 2001, over 33 000 Crocus investors lost over $60 million.
The relationship between some union leaders, the Premier (Mr. Doer) and the NDP seems to be the primary reason as for why the government ignored the red flags.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba to consider the need to seek clarification on why the government did not act on fixing the Crocus Fund back in 2001.
Signed by Larry Hauber, Cheryl Hauber and Denis Simard.
Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House.
Earlier this
afternoon, preliminary results were released from a cross-Canada avian flu
survey of wild birds. In the early results from the survey, H5 avian influenza
has been detected in samples from two provinces,
The findings are not surprising and there is no need for public alarm. Avian influenza is often present in such birds as waterfowl. Of course, there are virulent forms of the disease which can pose a threat to other birds. Even highly virulent forms of avian influenza did not necessarily pose a risk to human health. The results of the survey do not indicate a highly virulent form of the virus but do indicate that further testing is warranted. Additional tests will be carried out within the next one to two weeks.
As I said, this result is not unexpected.
The purpose of this survey was to provide base line data so that the trends in
influenza can be monitored in future years. A similar survey conducted in
* (13:35)
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the update offered by this Minister of Agriculture on the state of a potential avian flu pandemic in our province. I think it is important that the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale), as well as the Minister of Agriculture, address this issue and that we are further prepared in this province than perhaps we are right now with the potential of this becoming a pandemic across Canada and in Manitoba.
I am pleased to hear at this point in time that there is no evidence yet to fear a flu pandemic in our province. I am, however, concerned about whether or not this provincial government is truly prepared in the event a flu pandemic outbreak occurs in our province. We have heard a lot from this government with respect to round table discussions, reviews, but no concrete plan in the event of an outbreak in our province, Mr. Speaker. That truly I am very concerned about and indeed Manitobans are very concerned about, so I think it is important that not only the Minister of Agriculture give updates on a regular basis in this House, but also the Minister of Health with respect to what their ongoing plan is to deal with a potential pandemic.
Again, we are very concerned about that, Mr. Speaker. We are happy that today we do not have to be concerned about this as of yet, but certainly I would hope that this government would stop just having the round table discussions because actions speak louder than words, and I would hope that the Minister of Health will come up with some sort of a concrete plan so that we do not have to fear what could potentially happen in our province. Thank you very much.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? [Agreed]
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for providing this report and update. I would, however, have expected at least two additional pieces of information which would have been very valuable in interpreting these results.
One wonders, for example, have there been analyses in past years to tell us to what extent this strain of avian flu may or may not have been there, and, clearly, we do not know from the information that the minister has provided whether this is something which is totally new or whether this is something which, in fact, has been present before but just not detected.
The second piece of information that I would have expected from the minister is that there are certain species of waterfowl which nest in Asia and then migrate through Manitoba and, certainly, if this was specific to the species of waterfowl which one might expect to have been breeding in Asia and then migrating south through Manitoba, coming, as it were, across the Bering Strait and down through here, that it would have had more significance in suggesting a means of transmission or a means by which this particular avian flu virus may have come from Asia, and that it might have come more recently.
So I look forward to further reports from the minister and hope that the next time she gets up we have more complete information. Thank you.
Bill 2–The
Private Investigators and
Security
Guards Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 2, The Private Investigators and Security Guards Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les détectives privés et les gardiens de sécurité, be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, this creates a new category known as the in-house security guard and requires that they be licensed to complete training and that employers of these guards become registered. In addition, the bill adds the requirement that businesses licensed to provide private investigators or security guards be insured.
Motion agreed
to.
* (13:40)
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 the
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.
Reduction
Strategy
Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker,
Mr. Speaker, there are over 3000 gang members today under this Premier's watch. They are preying on our young people. They are terrorizing our neighbourhoods. The Hells Angels and the Bandidos have moved into this province under this Premier's watch. That shows how open this province is when it comes to gang activity.
I would like to ask this Premier why has he turned a blind eye to these violent and terrorizing crimes. Why is he doing nothing?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I would like to point out to members opposite
that, when they had an alternative to vote for safety in our communities last
year, with the 54 additional police officers we were putting in place in
Winnipeg and in rural Manitoba, when we were putting in place more Crown
prosecutors to deal with gang activity, they had their choice. They voted
against more police officers in
Mr. Murray: Well, Mr. Speaker, our police officers,
frankly, are underresourced. They need help to deal with these violent and
violent-related crimes. There are more offences per officer in
The City of
Mr. Speaker, I simply will ask this Premier why does he refuse to provide the Winnipeg Police Service with the required number of officers that are necessary to eliminate the kind of gang activity that we have seen under this Premier grow.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite did have a
plan and he brought it forward in the last election campaign. To fund some of
his outrageous election promises he had to use duct tape and put together a
fiscal plan that included zero percent for the Department of Justice for two
years. I want to point out to the member opposite that zero percent for two
years for the Justice Department, which was his plan before the
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, the Premier makes reference to our plan, and I am glad he does because I would like to table our plan Enough is Enough!. I would very much like a copy of this to go directly to the Premier so perhaps he can read it.
Mr. Speaker, the plan we presented, Enough is Enough!, and I hope the Premier has a chance to look at it, it is designed to combat the proliferation of violence in our communities. It is time this Premier and his NDP government stopped putting the safety of Manitobans at risk. We, the government, that is ready to take the steps necessary to combat the crime that we have seen in our province.
Will this Premier commit today to adopting our plan and working with us on Enough is Enough! to ensure that there is a plan that provides meaningful assistance to make our communities safer?
* (13:45)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I will table before the end of the day the so-called plan that members opposite took to the people during a democratic process.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Doer: They can howl all they want. They can yell and scream all they want,
but when they went forward to the people of
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we invested in real police officers. The 54 police officers that we funded last year was the largest increase–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: The 54 police
officers that we announced and funded in last year's budget was the largest
increase in police officers in the history of
Additional Officers
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, the Premier likes to talk about virtual police officers so let us talk about virtual police officers. Since last year's Throne Speech, the Minister of Justice has been telling Manitobans over and over again how they have put 28 more police officers into rural Manitoba to help on the highways and to help stop gangs from spreading into rural Manitoba. They may not want to clap too soon.
Can the minister today, a year later, indicate how many of those 28 officers are real officers on the streets and how many of them are virtual officers? I ask the Minister of Justice.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I certainly can confirm that, in this year's budget, Mr. Speaker, we have funded 54 additional police officers over the next two years for all across Manitoba, but I just want to remind members opposite that on Friday I was pleased to confirm that on top of the 54 new officer positions, we have just added nine more.
Mr. Goertzen: I think the Minister of Justice will want to
listen to this very carefully. Last week, in
The Minister of Justice and the Premier
(Mr. Doer) now have misled Manitobans. He talked about virtual officers. He
promised 28 officers last year, and the commanding officer here in
Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, that is what the members opposite
did wrong when they were in office when they cut funding to the RCMP. When
there are concerns about crime this side of the House increases funding for
officer positions. That is why our commitment is over two years, because if you
do not put the money in the budget they cannot seek the cadets from depot in
Mr. Goertzen: Let us examine how closely the government is
working with the RCMP. When asked in
Mr. Speaker: Order. All members in this House should know by now that all members are honourable members, and the word "lied" or "liar" is not acceptable by any Speaker in any Commonwealth country. I ask the honourable Member for Steinbach to unequivocally withdraw that comment.
Mr. Goertzen: I withdraw that comment, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: That should take care of the matter.
* (13:50)
Mr. Mackintosh: If they are looking at the transcript from
Mr. Speaker, the RCMP is one of the greatest police forces in this world. The FBI look to the RCMP as one of the most important commitments by Canadians to fight organized crime. They want to get rid of the RCMP. I say shame.
Wait List Reduction
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, promises made, promises broken. That is all we ever see from this government. Manitobans are tired of the empty rhetoric.
Mr. Speaker, children continue to wait in pain for dental surgery as a result of this government's inaction despite announcement after announcement after announcement. Promises were made by this government nearly a year ago to complete an additional 600 pediatric dental surgeries in this province. Those targets have not been met and those promises have not been fulfilled for the children in our province.
Will this minister admit today that he is not on track to complete 600 additional pediatric dental surgeries by this year's end?
Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at the work that has been done at Misericordia hospital. There were challenges in implementing the plan that we presented to them. It was a challenging target. I am confident that by the end of the year they will come very close to meeting the 600. They are currently running at about 80 a month now which is much better than they were running. We expect that the news at the end of the year will be very good. Thank you.
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, this Minister of Health just admitted that he is not on track to complete a promise that he made to children in our province. That is unacceptable. More than 1000 children are still waiting in pain for pediatric dental surgery. This government received a proposal from a private clinic more than a year ago which would have already eliminated the wait-list for pediatric surgeries in this province, dental surgeries, yet this government refused to even consider it.
If this government truly wants to reduce wait-lists in our province, public-private partnerships for health care delivery would have been a part of their five-point plan that they announced today. Why will this government not put its ideology aside and do what is right for the children in our province?
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, recently four general
practitioners, anesthetists were employed to help bring the volume up in
* (13:55)
Mrs. Stefanson: What this Minister of Health and this Premier of this province have to understand is when they make promises to the people and to the children of our province that those promises should be fulfilled. Manitobans are counting on them to do that. The fact that this minister stands up today and says that he cannot or he may not complete those surgeries is absolutely unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. When Manitobans obviously cannot trust this Premier why should they believe him now?
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased with the work
that has been done towards our various targets. I am rather surprised that the
member did not ask about hips and knee replacement. I suppose that would be
because we are 33 percent ahead of last year's target at this point. I am
surprised she did not ask about access to cancer care because it is one to two
weeks in
Growth Strategy
Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, under this Doer NDP government,
When is this Premier going to wake up and
realize it is time to make
Mr. Speaker: Order. I would just like to remind all honourable members that when addressing other members, it is by their constituency or ministers by their titles, not by party affiliations.
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, asking a
similar question to last Friday, raises issues about the
Just recently, the average incomes in
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, the next thing, the political
rhetoric or the political spin, we are going to hear from this Premier is that
somehow the Hells Angels and the Bandidos are job creation. That is the kind of
thing that we are going to hear from this Premier. Under this Premier's watch
we have a $20 billion debt and climbing. The interest payments on
that $20 billion represent $767 million every year, $767 million. What does
that mean to the average
* (14:00)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker,
first of all, we have followed the balanced budget legislation and have been in
compliance with it since we have been elected. Point No. 2, on page 53 of the
summary financial statement, you will note the net debt in
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker,
this Premier likes to talk about a lot of political rhetoric. Let us stick to
facts. The facts are that middle-income Manitobans are the highest taxed in
Mr. Doer: The corporate
tax in
Government Loan
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, in 2001 the Doer government provided a favourable $1.5-million loan to Maple Leaf with no personal guarantees and took security by way of a third mortgage. The Premier then remarks that he feels very secure about this loan.
I ask the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) why would the Premier feel very secure by a third mortgage not personally guaranteed and ranking behind loans totalling $2.7 million. Is this simply because the Premier has no business experience or is he withholding information from Manitobans, in which case we need an independent public inquiry?
Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I wish the member opposite would get his facts straight. First, the loan was not for $1.5 million. It was for $1.2 million. Secondly, the loan has been paid on a regular basis. When it was originally taken out it was $1.2 million. I would like to inform the entire House that it is now $715,000. The principal and interest payments have been made on time regularly as per the agreement. Third, it is now, yes, it is secured as a third part to the building. It is a part of the mortgage, but it also has a guarantee from Protos International which is the parent company of Salisbury House. It is well secured, it makes sense and the MIOP program under this government made money. Under your government it lost almost $40 million.
Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, the minister should get his facts straight. That mortgage is registered for $1.5 million, not $1.2 million. Why did the Doer government provide, as the president of Maple Leaf put it, unprecedented support and assistance from the Province and the Premier?
I ask the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) was it because he received assurances from his union friends at Crocus that it was a good investment, or was it because his union friends were trying to support Crocus's $1-million investment by having the province throw money at Maple Leaf. Which is it I ask him?
Mr. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring all members attention to our record on MIOP loans versus the opposition's when they were in government. Our record is the following; we have given secured loans that have made money to many firms. In fact, under our watch, the MIOP program has earned $183,000 which includes the $640,000 that we just got from the New Flyer loan. Under your watch the cost and the write-offs totalled $40 million almost.
When you talk about business you gave loans below Crown rates. You wrote off companies. You wrote off Isobord, Winnport, Westsun. We have made money under the program; you lost it. I wonder about your business acumen.
Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, more than 33 000 Manitobans lost more than $60 million under this minister.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
* (14:10)
Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, more than 33 000 Manitobans lost more than $60 million under the watch of this government. This Doer government and this Premier gave unprecedented support and assistance to Maple Leaf. Clearly, taxpayers' money is being used to support Crocus investments and the Premier's fingerprints are all over it. The only way to get to the truth is to call an independent public inquiry. I ask the Finance Minister to advise the Premier to call an independent public inquiry.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister just reported to the House that the loan payments are continuing on schedule. I would point out, the members opposite, in spite of the fact that there were three separate MIOP loans to CalWest Textiles, which has now had its principals charged with fraud under the Tory regime and lost $3.2 million, there has been no call for an independent inquiry. There has been no call for an independent public inquiry over the loss of $7 million under the Tory regime and allegations on Shamray. There has been no call for the $7 million of Isobord.
Co-operative Agreement
Mr. Ron Schuler (
Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister of Labour and Immigration): Everyone in this Chamber is very familiar with
the longstanding dispute between the professional organizations, the architects
and the engineers. My department has been working fastidiously with both
professional organizations as well as the professional organization of the
interior designers. We are also in dialogue, Mr. Speaker, with the authorities
having jurisdiction over the Manitoba Building Code, the City of
Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, we have two professional
organizations that are trying to conduct business in
Why will this minister not be open with Manitobans and table the agreement referenced in last week's speech, or has an agreement even been reached? Will she table it?
Ms. Allan: Mr. Speaker, the scope-of-practice concern has
been in
Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, this minister is once again failing Manitobans in her inability to provide a solution to a problem that is crippling our construction industry today. I am going to ask again. When will this minister table the agreement that her government allegedly reached with both sides of the issue? Will she table it now?
Ms. Allan: We have had a respectful process with both
professional organizations, and we are looking to implement legislation that
will reflect practical solutions that will be in the best interests of the
public, Mr. Speaker. We are working with the authorities having jurisdiction to
enforce the Manitoba Building Code. We will be bringing in legislation that
will resolve this longstanding dispute that will be in the best interests of
the
Diagnosis and Treatment
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
Today I will make it
easier for the Minister of Justice tabling an abstract of a 1999
My question to the minister again. Is this government screening high-risk offenders to identify those with FASD–
Mr. Speaker: Order. Time for the question has expired.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, yes, the honourable member was at an announcement setting out our blueprint for safety initiatives. I am pleased that the member acknowledges that, indeed, there has to be not just suppression strategies, but prevention strategies as well. I was pleased that the commitment by this government is not one-dimensional, but recognizes there must be a balanced approach if we are going to make our communities safer.
Mr. Speaker, I can assure
the honourable member that Manitoba Justice in partnership with Manitoba
Health, in partnership with Children's Hospital,
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Gerrard: But, I asked the Minister of Justice how many youth have been screened. The information in the study that I tabled was available, widely available in 1999 before this Minister of Justice came to his current position. Mr. Speaker, this is a major preventable cause of criminal behaviour and the Minister of Justice has done virtually nothing about it in the six years that he has been minister.
I ask the minister when will he stop
stonewalling, get his head out of the sand and immediately screen all high-risk
offenders in
Mr. Mackintosh: Before the member yells he should perhaps ask some inquiries of people who have been working in partnership, Mr. Speaker, because under the watch of this government I am pleased that a number of initiatives have taken place.
First of all, the special
needs program in partnership with Child and Family Services and Health was put
in place, Mr. Speaker. That was a program that also involved Manitoba Housing.
It is a multi-system response to dealing with FAS special needs. As well, the
FASD youth justice pilot project was ushered in under the leadership of the
Government Support
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
I would like to cite, Mr. Speaker, Ed Broadbent says that our present system does not reflect Canadian voters' intentions. Fairness means we need a mixed electoral system that combines individual constituency-based M.P.s with proportional representation.
My question to the Premier is will the Leader of the New Democratic Party, the Premier, join me, the leader of the federal NDP Jack Layton, better known as wacky Jack, possibly, and the NDP icon Ed Broadbent and acknowledge that we need reform, electoral reform.
This is a press release that was issued October of this year. It is an important issue. Will the Premier be in sync with his federal cousins, and I would suggest, too, your own membership, Mr. Premier, and support electoral reform in this province today?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I recall the day the member was re-elected in this Chamber a few years ago, and I remember that the member opposite was more worried about where he was sitting than he was about every BSE cattle rancher that was in the Chamber in this House.
Mr. Speaker, the first principle of
democracy is listening to the people, especially those who need you. The member
opposite only cared about where he sat, not what was happening to cattle
producers in
* (14:20)
Reduction Strategy
Ms. Marilyn Brick (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, over the last two years we have seen the Department of Labour embark on a more proactive approach to workplace safety and health in this province. Could the Minister of Labour inform the House what the latest statistics are for workplace injuries.
Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister
of Labour and Immigration): We have been working very hard to reduce
workplace injuries, Mr. Speaker. In partnership with the WCB, we launched the
SAFE Work campaign, Spot the Hazard, Assess the Risk, Find a
Donations to Political Parties
Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, the Premier is not interested in electoral reform. We know where he sits but no one knows where he stands. Perhaps we could ask a question of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh). Does the Minister of Justice support only individual persons making donations to political parties?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): You know, Mr. Speaker, the Chief Electoral Officer is responsible for all issues dealing with donations, filing of returns. Members opposite would know there have been occasions, people, individuals convicted under the elections law that may even actually hold the same portfolio on a former basis as the existing Minister of Justice. That is why it is removed from the Legislature. Members opposite should know that better than anybody.
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, we know full well it was this government that introduced the last amendments to The Elections Act. I want to know does the Minister of Justice support all in-kind donations being reported and accounted for?
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, last year at the committee I and the Chief Electoral Officer raised a couple of concerns that did not have to do with the legality of the law and the filings, but of some of what he called to be grey areas. A year ago I promised that we would amend those. We will be amending sections dealing with bundling. We will be amending sections dealing with borrowing up to $100,000 from an individual. There are a couple of those issues that I have concerns about and have already promised a year ago we would change it.
Legal Sanctions
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, the Premier is quick to leap into answering questions on behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh). This question is to the Minister of Justice. What does he believe the consequences for breaking the laws as currently written should be?
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I would refer members opposite to Hansard last year where the Chief Electoral Officer answered this question on the law, on the legality. There are no charges but we will change it, and all political parties have a record–[interjection]
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will be making the amendments in this session in the Legislature.
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
Ms. Kerri Irvin-Ross (
SMART stands for Seniors
Maintaining Active Roles Together and is a province wide community-based
program designed for adults who are over the age of 55. Recognizing that
seniors are one of the fastest growing age groups in
The program itself emphasizes prevention through such exercises as walking, strength training and taking one's own pulse. The benefits of SMART are legion: more social interaction, a chance to form friendships with like-minded seniors and, most importantly, an improved level of energy and overall fitness level. Ultimately, SMART helps seniors take control of their own health and remain independent members of their communities.
Led by certified instructors who volunteer their time and are seniors, this program in my constituency alone provides a service to over 75 seniors a week at two different locations, the Victoria Community Club and the Adamar apartment block.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this time to recognize the excellent work done by the dedicated volunteers who make this program a reality for our seniors and would like to thank, most particularly, Mr. Raul Paragas, the co-ordinator of the SMART Program, who works to ensure that seniors have access to a community-level fitness program that suits their needs. His and all the other volunteers' hard work are to be commended. Thank you.
Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, as was just referenced a few moments ago, The Elections Act was amended in this province and it was introduced to provide, I think the intent was to provide for fairness, equity in the manner in which political parties receive funding. Yet we still see significant concerns about how particularly the government party in this province receives funds. In the collection of monies and how they are forwarded, there is a significant concern that has been brought forward.
The concern, Mr. Speaker, is that we have a Premier (Mr. Doer), we have a government that bragged and bragged about how they were changing The Elections Act and now, of course, they believe that through a quick flip of the wrist they can undo what may have been some significant oversights in the writing of that law. I want to make one point for anybody who would read this Hansard some point in the future. There is a difference between the letter of the law, the intent of the law and the spirit of the law and how it is administered and how it is handled by the parties that are involved with complying with the law. That, to me, can be best capsulated when I talk about the fact that a grandmother who brings pumpkin pie to a fall supper for a fundraiser and has to be held accountable for what kind of monies she is generating by doing that and that will be quickly precipitated into properly accounted donations that must be designated and properly tracked.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage the governing party in this province to take a serious look at how they intervene in the upcoming amendments that they propose to this law.
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to pay tribute to John Pullen who passed away October 2, 2005, after a lengthy battle with cancer. Mr. Pullen, or Johnny, as he was affectionately known was committed to the trade union movement. He was a social democrat, he was a veteran and he was a much-beloved family man.
Throughout his life, John
was dedicated to improving the lives of working people. This commitment started
at an early age. John was born in
In the 1970s, he joined the provincial Department of Labour as an electrical inspector and, in 1976, he became the executive director of the Manitoba Government Employees' Association, now the MGEU. John later served as the vice-president and later president of the Manitoba Federation of Labour. As president of the MFL, John brought together 70 000 workers from bakers to bureaucrats. John's commitment to working Manitobans was tireless. Throughout his career he served on several boards and upon his retirement he continued to work as the president of the government retired employees' union.
John was an ally to those involved in the social justice movement. He was a recipient of several honours and awards, including the Order of the Buffalo Hunt.
* (14:30)
On behalf of the members
of the Legislature, Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my condolences to
Winnie, John's wife of 54 years, to his son David, to daughters Joan, Carol and
Diane and his grandchildren and six great-grandchildren. I know in visiting
John in the hospital when he was ill that John expressed great pride in his
family, and we are proud of John's accomplishments and contributions to life in
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen
(Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, today we learned the lesson of
virtual officers versus real officers that the Premier (Mr. Doer) puts forward.
You know, we heard in the Throne Speech last year about these new officers that
were going to be coming to
So now we have a Throne Speech and announcement on Friday about new initiatives, apparently new initiatives, Mr. Speaker, but you only have to look at the track record when the RCMP has to go to Ottawa to clarify what is truly happening with RCMP numbers in the province because the Minister of Justice will not come forth and tell Manitobans what is happening, because the Premier will not come forth and be clear about what is happening. When he uses catch phrases like virtual officers and phantom officers when, in fact, 28 officers that he promised, 28 officers that he said were on the street, were, in fact, phantom officers.
The Premier can rant and he can rave and he can go out and say that these officers are there, but the record has been set straight. It was not set straight by the Premier. It was not set straight by the Minister of Justice. The commander of the RCMP had to come forward and say, "Not only do we not have the officers, the reason we do not is because this government never even asked for the officers last year." Shame on this Premier, and if he wants to get up and refute the commanding officer for "D" Division, then he should get up and refute that.
Ms. Marilyn Brick (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure of attending
the Congress of Black Women's Annual Unity Dinner this past October 8. At this
event, over $2,500 in scholarships was given out to deserving young black women
from
Mr. Speaker, this dinner was also
important because it marked the beginning of Women's History Month. An annual
commemoration, it gives all Canadians the chance to learn more about women's
history and their significant contributions to
It is with the spirit of recognition in mind that the theme of this year's Women's History Month concentrated on black women. Black women faced discrimination on two fronts; for being women and for being black. Yet these women persevered and with endless determination and courage forged their lives in this province. In this manner they became the next generation's role models.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Kathleen Huggins, president of the Congress of Black Women, as well the executive directors of the organization, the guest speaker that day, Ms. Rita Shelton Deverell, and all the volunteers. Their hard work in building recognition of a strong community of black women will help ensure that women everywhere will receive the opportunities that are their due. For this they are to be commended. Thank you, Mr. Speaker
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
(Second Day of Debate)
Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Member for The Maples (Mr. Aglugub), that the following address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray), who has unlimited time.
Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition):
Mr.
Speaker, I rise today in making a reply to the Speech from the Throne, and I
always think it is important to put in context what a Throne Speech should be.
Manitobans expect their government, when they bring in a Throne Speech, it is
an opportunity, really, to have a vision, to have a blank canvas to sort of
paint a picture to Manitobans that we can be the best province in Canada on a
whole host of ideas, that if Manitoba wants to we can succeed and compete with
the best anywhere in Canada.
Mr. Conrad
Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
Indeed,
why not
A Throne Speech is all about how can we as Manitobans dream to
be the best we can be. And yet, Mr. Speaker, what we hear in this seventh
Throne Speech from this NDP government is how mediocre can we be in
Mr.
Speaker, we just do not hear that from this NDP government. For some reason
they seem to be opposed to thinking big. They are opposed to being dreamers.
They are opposed to being visionaries. What they are more content with and,
again, it was confirmed in this last Throne Speech that they are satisfied with
managing the status quo and making sure that they do not ruffle any feathers,
because if you ruffle some feathers, it might mean that you are actually
thinking outside the box and looking at doing things differently.
Mr. Speaker, I said that what happened is this NDP government woke up to give this Throne Speech and then reached over and hit the snooze button.
An Honourable Member: That is an old one.
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, well, you know, the Premier says that
is an old one. Well, if he goes back and reads the last six Throne Speeches, it
is all regurgitation. That is old. That is old thinking. So I am delighted to
have the Premier–I hope the Premier does keep chirping as I talk, because there
is a lot to be said about his lack of vision for the
* (14:40)
Mr. Speaker, during this Throne Speech, we
heard the words "since 1999" 17 times. Seventeen times we heard the
words "since 1999." Well, is it not interesting that not once during
the times, those 17 times when he said "since 1999," did this Premier
mention, "I have added over $3.5 billion to the debt of Manitobans."
Not once did we hear from this Premier that since 1999 this Premier has
increased the debt of
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
Mr. Speaker, not once did we hear from
this Premier that since 1999 the Hells Angels have set up shop in
Mr. Speaker, we never heard any of that in
this Throne Speech. Why? Because this Premier is so concerned about lowering
the expectations that he wants to make sure there is every opportunity to meet
those low expectations. So where are these low expectations leading Manitobans?
Well, when you talk about finance, economic opportunity in the
Mr. Speaker, we had hoped
that this Premier might realize that being the highest taxed province in
Mr. Speaker, I would have expected in this Throne Speech that we might have heard something about a real job strategy. Now, we know that this Premier's economic growth strategy is more VLTs, longer VLT hours, but I know that the Premier always ridicules the business community. He ridicules them by calling them one-trick ponies or water bugs swimming across the water, whatever it may be.
Well, Mr. Speaker, that may be this Premier's position. Certainly he will never, I do not think, I may be wrong, but I do not think this Premier will ever refer to the union bosses as one-trick ponies. No, I do not think we will ever hear that coming from this Premier, but certainly when it comes time to speak fun or poke fun at the business community, he has no problem.
The only problem for Manitobans is that it
is the business community that understands that to have a strong economy, to
have a strong job strategy, we need to be competitive. But what does it mean to
be competitive? The Premier will tell us that when it comes to corporate tax,
they have dropped corporate taxes in
Mr. Speaker, we have
people in the
Mr. Speaker, we understand that if you are
going to create jobs like other provinces you need to have a strong economy.
The private sector has to understand that if they are going to invest money, if
they are going to invest money in capital, in training and in jobs, that there
is going to a be return on that investment. That is what business understands.
Business understands very clearly that an investment is a sound investment if
there is going to be a positive opportunity. Even though they are prepared to
take the risk, they want that positive opportunity, that return, to come back
so they then can re-invest in their business. That would be my vision for the
The current vision under this NDP government is to make sure that if businesses make money, grab that money and bring it into the provincial Treasury. Take that money away from those hardworking Manitobans and put it into the Treasury. Why? Well, the reason is simple. The NDP government under this Premier (Mr. Doer) think that they know how to spend hard-earned money, taxpayers' money. The government feels very strongly that they know how to spend hard-earned taxpayers' money better than those people that are earning it. Well, Mr. Speaker, I disagree with that.
If there was an opportunity for hardworking Manitobans, business people, to keep more of their money, that would stimulate the economy, that would grow the economy. But, Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that on this side, we understand that. We think hardworking Manitobans should be rewarded. On that side of the House, they believe that they should be punished. They want higher taxes, they want more of their money. Bring it on, we want more of the money. Why? They believe, the NDP government believes, that they can spend hard-earned taxpayers' money better than those people that make it.
I say that is unfortunate, and I think when you look at the fact that in this province under this NDP government led by this Premier, that the debt of Manitoba is at an all-time high, $20 billion and climbing, Mr. Speaker, $20 billion and climbing.
Mr. Speaker, every single day in the
Mr. Speaker, I do not understand. I do not understand why. Well, we understand that the Premier says we are going to build the floodway. We are delighted. We have said very much on this side. Of course, unfortunately, he is happy they are building the floodway. Why? Not necessarily because it is going to save Manitobans. No, but it is going to force non-unionized companies to pay union dues. That is why he is happy that they are building the floodway. Non-unionized companies are going to be forced to pay union dues simply because of this floodway. He should be happy to build the floodway simply because it is the right thing, not because it is forcing non-unionized companies to pay union dues.
* (14:50)
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting when you talk about the fact that they are building the floodway, and I do not know what the final number is. My understanding is it is around some $800 million. I do not know if the Premier (Mr. Doer) will agree with that number or not, but I think it is close to some $800 million to build the floodway.
Well, if you think about $800 million to build the floodway, and I am not sure if that is the final number, but every single year with the debt at $20 billion under this NDP government, every single year the interest rate to carry that is some $767 million. So, to put it into perspective, we could build a floodway every single year with the debt that this province is experiencing under this NDP government. Yes, Mr. Speaker, we would not have to borrow it; we could pay for it in cash. We could pay for it in cash. That is what we could do because of the debt load that this Premier is putting under this province.
Mr. Speaker, we know that on an ongoing
basis we in this province under the NDP are either last or close to dead last
in job creation. Now, I do not know if it is this Premier's idea to hire
everybody into the public service to say, "Look at all the jobs we have
created." But everybody knows that the measure of a strong economy, the
benchmark of a strong economy is how many private-sector jobs are being
created. Private-sector jobs in the
In six years this NDP government has taken private-sector jobs and flushed them down the toilet. Why would they do that? Why would any premier want to stand before Manitobans with the lowest private-sector job creation in the country? How could that possibly be something that a premier, regardless of what party they are, currently it is the NDP, but regardless of what party, what premier would be proud to go in front of Canadians, in front of the other fellow premiers knowing full well that they have the lowest private-sector job creation in their jurisdiction? Well, that is what it is with this Premier and this NDP government.
Mr. Speaker, on the issue of justice, well, there is no justice in Manitoba, and it is unfortunate because there are very serious issues facing our communities, very serious issues that are facing the safety of all of our communities in the province of Manitoba.
We have listened to Manitobans. We have listened to the concerns of Manitobans. We have listened to issues around justice. We have listened to issues that are involving parents, parents and their families. When it comes to safety in our communities, what we heard was loud and clear, that under this NDP government enough is enough. Mr. Speaker, enough is enough is what resonated in those community halls and resonated in those basements, all of those meetings that took place when we talked and listened to people about their concerns with respect to justice.
An Honourable Member: What did they say?
Mr. Murray: They said that enough is enough, Mr. Speaker. That is why this caucus, working with the Justice critic from Steinbach, unveiled our plan, Enough Is Enough! Standing Up for Safe Communities.
Mr. Speaker, it is an action plan, and I would ask the Premier (Mr. Doer) and I would ask the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), I do not know, maybe all of the members opposite should have a read of this document because it is a good document. It addresses serious issues and it brings serious solutions to some of the challenges that Manitobans are facing.
Mr. Speaker, we went as far as to cost out what it was or what it would cost Manitobans to put this in place. Now, I know that members opposite want to go back to pre-1999. It is always so easy and convenient, but they want to blame everything on somebody else. Blame the feds; blame the last government.
Well, after six years, after six years you would think and you would hope that somewhere along the line this NDP government would start to come up with solutions, serious solutions to affect the challenges Manitobans are facing.
Our communities are not safe. Our
communities are not safer since this NDP government has come in. I know, and
the Premier (Mr. Doer) likes to stand and crow about the MTS Centre. They did
have their millionth visitor and that is a great thing, but what does it say
when an innocent bystander is killed in crossfire in downtown
What does it say to our citizens that, yes, come down and watch a concert or a hockey game, but that there is a possibility that innocently your life may be taken? That is why Manitobans have said to us enough is enough. They want to ensure that there are more police on the streets. They want to ensure that there are more police that are involved in gang activity. They want to make sure that our schools are not vulnerable. Our children that are learning are not being lured away by the gang activity that is growing under the watch of this NDP government.
We believe that putting police officers,
whether they are retired or current, into our schools is an opportunity to
ensure that those gangs do not proliferate and go in and start taking our
youngest and our vulnerable. We listen, because Manitobans were telling us
that, when it comes to the justice system here in
We know that this
government loves to make a lot of announcements and spin press releases around
crystal meth, but the irony is that when it comes to crystal meth and trying to
get information, our Justice critic, the member from Steinbach, tried to get
information for
I know that the Premier will get up, and at some point he will make a big issue about the fact that we are voting against the Throne Speech. Well, Mr. Speaker, we are going to vote against the Throne Speech. Why? Because this government has failed to deliver the kinds of safety measures that Manitobans want. The Premier already, watch him start to spin. The last time he tried to spin the fact that somehow we voted against 45 police officers. Yes, we did because this side will never vote to particularly underfund our police officers. We will never do that. That is where we are on this issue.
We simply are asking the Premier and all of his caucus colleagues to work with us on our strategy to try to make our community safer. We need more police on the streets. We need more police on the streets. We need more communities that have a strategy to work together so that when those communities know there are issues, they know where to bring them, and that people can bring serious solutions to these challenges. That is what Manitobans expect of their government. This is not a partisan issue. This is an issue about safety in our communities.
* (15:00)
I will tell again and ask the Premier, the minute he wants to sit down and work through some of the suggestions that we have brought forward in our document, Enough Is Enough! Standing Up for Safer Communities. We will be happy to do so because this issue transcends politics, at least we believe it does. We believe, on this side, this is not a partisan issue. We believe this is simply an issue of trying to make our communities safer, and there are some very, very good issues that we need to have to make this issue one that all Manitobans understand, that all members of the Legislature are working forward to ensuring that we get something done.
So, Mr. Speaker, I thought it was
interesting that we on this side of the House, some two weeks ago, brought
forward our strategy to deal with making our communities safer. It was a very
good strategy. It is a strategy that makes sense, sensible solutions to
challenges. Following that, of course, we know that the City of
Mr. Speaker, is it because, as people are
saying, that this NDP has a revolving door of justice? Is it that this
government basically has adopted a hug-a-thug approach? Is that why this
government has not been able to come up with a proper gang strategy? Well, I
submit to you, and the Premier (Mr. Doer) may be surprised at this, but that is
another reason that we will have difficulty supporting a Throne Speech that
does nothing to deal with the gang issue here in the
Mr. Speaker, we all know that, under this
NDP government, under this Premier, the Hells Angels have moved in and set up
shop. The Bandidos have moved into the
Mr. Speaker, I would have thought that this Premier and this Justice Minister would do everything they can to try to control the gang activity in the province of Manitoba, but we do not hear anything about it. Sure, they make an announcement, and we know that there are lots of balloons and parades and cakes and cookies that are given out at these announcements, but this is a very serious issue, a very serious issue that deserves serious solutions. The NDP government has failed Manitobans to make our communities safer.
Mr. Speaker, in our document Enough Is Enough!, we asked for five
more police officers in
Mr. Speaker, I would have hoped that we
might have heard something from this Premier in the Throne Speech about
electronic monitoring, about putting bracelets on those people who are harmful
to our communities, so we can monitor where they are. Well, what is
interesting, apparently, is that they have problems with the batteries, we have
been told by the Justice Minister. Somehow the batteries do not seem to line up
or there is a problem. Well, they seem to work quite well on the elk here in
Well, Mr. Speaker, again, is it because this government is soft on crime? Is it because this government does not have a plan to deal with those criminals who would go out and start to attack our innocent victims in our society? Or is it simply because they have no vision and no understanding that unless you set a benchmark, and it is what I said earlier, at the beginning, it is about whether you set the bar high or whether you set the bar low, and this government, when it comes to being tough on crime, has set the bar low.
That is unfortunate for
Well, Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House believe that if you are going to get tough on crime, you have to not only talk about it, but you need some action. That is why, again, we put out Enough Is Enough!. That is why we put out a document, and we costed it out, and we put programs in place that will make our communities safer.
Mr. Speaker, in the Throne Speech we had hoped that we would have seen a plan, not heard the rhetoric, about more timely access to quality health care. We had hoped that what we would have heard was a plan of how they were going to deliver that. Of course, we all know that it was this Premier (Mr. Doer) that said to Manitobans–well, then, funny, it is interesting, he did not say anything in the Throne Speech: Since 1999 when I said I was going to end hallway medicine in six months with $15 million, that has failed. That has been a big blowup. That has not worked. We tried it but it did not work. So, as we were going through it, we came up with a solution, though. You know, instead of leading into the hallways, let us just take down some of those walls so that they then become corridors.
Hallway medicine, I did not realize that it was this Premier's vision to get rid of hallway medicine simply by taking out the walls. I sort of thought he might try to give patients more timely access to care. I would have thought that would have been part of his plan, to try to see how he could help Manitobans who are suffering, because, surely, Mr. Speaker, I do not think hollow rhetoric, I do not think this Premier would have said, "Maybe I am wrong," but I do not think this Premier would have simply told Manitobans that he was going to eliminate hallway medicine in six months with $15 million unless he had a plan. But, as I say, maybe I am wrong. Maybe he went before Manitobans and tried to say something, sort of hocus-pocus, trying to convince Manitobans without a plan.
I am not sure, but I do know that what we were hoping to see in this Throne Speech was a real plan to eliminate waiting lists. Now, again, I want to make reference to what I said at the beginning, because with this NDP government, if you lower expectations and say, "I know that the waiting list is three years. Oh, I know it is long, somehow blame it on 1999, abracadabra, 1999, long, long, waiting list, three years, but we are going to work really hard to see if we can reduce that waiting list from three years, well, maybe to two years and six months so we can say that we have reduced waiting lists by six months in the province of Manitoba." Well, Mr. Speaker, that is simply setting the bar too low.
There are places in the world where there is no waiting list, zero. You want to go somewhere and get an operation, you come in tomorrow at one o'clock if that is convenient for you. Mr. Speaker, this NDP government would not have the ability to figure that one out. They do not know how to say, "You know, our goal is to eliminate waiting lists completely." That would be setting the bar high, having a vision and looking at innovation.
* (15:10)
I know that the Premier (Mr. Doer) loves, again, to get into the political spin and the political rhetoric and talks about American style this, American style that, American style over here, American style that. You would think that he was watching, I do not know, that TV show, "Love American Style," or whatever it was. Maybe that was one of his favourites.
But, I tell you, there is a model of health care that, we on this side support, and it is a model that has been presented by a Liberal senator, a Liberal, Senator Michael Kirby. I think Senator Michael Kirby has come forward with some very innovative ideas to challenge the status quo that we see that is being supported by this NDP government. All I would ask is that this NDP government would get their ideological heads out of the sand and look at some innovation.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House have no difficulty at all talking about working with the private sector if it means, under a publicly funded system, that there is more timely access to care for patients. Why would this government, this NDP ideological government, just say, "No, not going to even consider that?" They are much more interested in having children languish on waiting lists, suffering, so that this Premier can just simply stand up and talk about a one-trick pony. That frames the debate. That frames the debate right there. This Premier, knowing that there is opportunity outside to help Manitobans, to reduce waiting lists, to reduce suffering, to create a quality of life that Manitobans deserve simply by working with the private sector in a publicly funded system, this Premier wants to talk about a one-trick pony.
So, Mr. Speaker, that is what Manitobans should understand about this debate: ideology on one side, head in the sand, and on this side of the House, innovation, opportunities with the mandate, with the No. 1 goal always as how, under the publicly funded system, can we provide better, more timely access to quality health care in Manitoba. That, simply, is what should be right. But, unfortunately, under this NDP government all they care about is ideology, ideology this, ideology that, and people suffer, and the bar remains low in terms of what we can get at. That is the hallmark of this NDP government: how mediocre can we be. That is where they want to be. Let us be mediocre because at some point they just look at the fact that being mediocre is kind of in the middle of the pack. That is kind of where they want to be.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I challenge them. There
are other opportunities out there. I know that this Premier latched onto the
Romanow report like Velcro. When the Romanow report came out, boom, that was
it. Why? Because it said more money, more money for health care. That is where
we want to go. We want to support this report, but there are other reports out
there like the Kirby-Keon report. We do not want that because we have looked
through this, we have flipped, and we do not see where it just says more money.
There is a challenge to the system. There is a challenge to say be innovative
because, again, should not the debate be framed around the question how do we
provide more timely access to quality health care, how do we make sure that those
people that are suffering, their quality of life, get better access? If that
frames the debate, then I defy this Premier to stand in his place and say that
what Mr. Kirby, Senator Kirby, and what we are talking about, being innovative,
will not produce those sorts of results. That is a major difference between
that NDP government's vision and our vision for the
Mr. Speaker, I was amazed when I read the
Throne Speech to see that the NDP used a couple of headings: better care, sooner
and closer-to-home treatment. I do not know if that was sort of the comedy
section of the Throne Speech or the light and levity part. But that is a very
serious issue, and the fact of life is that under this NDP government there is
no such thing as closer-to-home medicine. It is quite the opposite. Closer to
home for those people who are in Brandon simply means, well, jump into this
ambulance, we are going to send you down the highway to Winnipeg so you can get
the kind of treatment that the NDP government has failed to deliver for people
in west Manitoba. Ashern, Deloraine, Boissevain, Gimli, all of these
communities that are supposed to have care closer to home. Their ERs are
getting closed. I do not know. Maybe their solution to closer-to-home medicine
is simply to get more ambulances throughout the province to take them from
their homes into
We know that this Premier (Mr. Doer) promised Manitobans, that in 1999 he said that if you elect me, I will eliminate hallway medicine in six months with $15 million. Hallway medicine, Mr. Speaker. Well, unfortunately for Manitobans and their quality of life, hallway medicine has now become highway medicine. Highway medicine is the hallmark of this Premier because people are forced to go by ambulance from their community into Winnipeg to get the kind of treatment they should get in their communities, and you would think from a point of dignity that that in itself would be hard to swallow.
But wait, Mr. Speaker, there is more. There is more. If you have to travel by ambulance from your community under this so-called closer-to-home strategy that this NDP government has put on, if you have to travel by ambulance from your community to Winnipeg to get treatment because the NDP has failed to deliver it in your community, if you have to travel by ambulance from your community to Winnipeg to get the kind of treatment you deserve in your community, well, surprise. You have to pay for it. You get a bill. You get a bill in the mail saying you have to pay for the ambulance transfer from this facility to the other.
So that is the kind of vision that we see under this NDP government. Closer-to-home medicine simply means longer drives in an ambulance and, by the way, you have to pay for it. Well, again, if you set the bar low, expectations low, Mr. Speaker, yes, this Premier can stand up and say that we met those low expectations, but it does nothing to help the quality of life for Manitobans, particularly in our rural areas, who are being punished by this NDP government.
Mr. Speaker, I know that the fact of life
is that all of this stems from the fact that this NDP government does not
understand rural Manitobans. They have simply turned their backs on rural
Well, Mr. Speaker, again, low expectations perhaps are met, but why is it that this NDP government refuses to try to create the kind of quality of life that Manitobans deserve? Why is it that this NDP government refuses to ensure that those people that choose to live in those rural communities, those people that are producers of great food for Manitobans, those people that understand that the quality of life in rural Manitoba is a good quality of life, is being stripped away simply because they are forcing those people to travel distances to experience health care?
* (15:20)
Mr. Speaker, that is not what I call
vision for the
Now, I know again, Mr. Speaker, and I can see it once again that when it comes time to vote on the Throne Speech, the Premier (Mr. Doer) is going to start tooting the horn and saying "Wait a minute, the Tories are going to vote against the 10 percent reduction off farmland. Holy smokes, the Tories are against that." Well, yes, we are, because if this Premier was committed to doing the right thing, he would eliminate it completely, not 10 percent, he would eliminate it completely. That would be the right thing to do. That would be the right thing to do. That is exactly what this Premier should be doing, but he cannot. He comes back to that nibbling around the edges, that mouse in the cheese, nibbling around the edges.
Mr. Speaker, it was very clear that this Premier has failed Manitobans when it comes to education tax. He has failed Manitobans when it comes to education taxes. I can tell you–
An Honourable Member: This minister has lowered taxes 60 percent; you did nothing.
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, there he goes. There he goes, all of a sudden it is back over the past six years. What we keep hearing is the fact that this Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) apparently has done so much to lower taxes, they have done so much to lower taxes, but this Premier does not seem to understand that there is no way that, simply by lowering taxes–
Some Honourable Members: What did you do?
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Murray: Every other single province is lowering taxes faster than this NDP government. Now, the reason this NDP government cannot make our province competitive and lower taxes is because they are spending, spending, spending. The more money you keep spending, the more taxes you need. This government's response is simply to say "If we can get more taxes, then we can spend more." Mr. Speaker, that is unfortunate for hardworking Manitobans, but it is what we see from this government.
Mr. Speaker, there is no question that Manitobans need to have an education system that, if this government, this NDP government was prepared to set the bar high, they would simply say, "We want to ensure that every child in Manitoba has an opportunity to learn and have the same education whether it is in Thompson or whether it is in Teulon." That is where we would like to be. But, no, we hear none of that from this NDP government.
Mr. Speaker, we believe that our children and our parents and the teachers should have the opportunity to know that their children are going into a school system where they are safe. They want to feel safe in that constituency, safe in school. That is nothing wrong and that is what it should be, raising the bar, raising the standard, making sure that every child, every parent, every teacher feels safe in their schools.
Mr. Speaker, we, on this side of the House, simply asked about a zero tolerance when it came to bullying. So, instead of talking about why it is important to have no bullying in our schools for our children and our teachers, all we heard from that side as they leaned on the horn was, "Oh, they are going to call in the police. Zero tolerance means calling in the police. Well, we are not going to call in the police on everything."
Mr. Speaker, that is not the issue. Why is it, when we are talking about a very serious issue to deal with students, to deal with the safety, to ensure that there is an opportunity to have a safe learning environment for all of those people involved, that the political rhetoric has to get ratcheted up from the other side, torqued up to talk about the fact that we are going to call in the police? Nobody on this side was talking about calling the police. We simply were saying that because of the ineptness of this NDP government we had to ensure that there was something that would make sure that there was a program in place to have safety for our children in our schools.
Mr. Speaker, safety also translates to
those teachers to make sure that they themselves feel comfortable teaching
because when teachers have the kind of environment that they deserve to have,
they will ensure that our children are learning at the best rate possible. That
is the kind of confidence that I have in our teachers in the
Mr. Speaker, on advanced education, well,
again, what is interesting is that we hear from some of the student union
leaders that the backdoor fees that are being forced on universities are higher
than any increase that the previous government ever put on in terms of tuition.
So, once again, it is all this quiet, quiet political rhetoric about a tuition
freeze, but then watch the backdoor fees get ramped up, ramped up on those
students unsuspectingly, because those students do not have any cost certainty.
They go forward wanting to learn in a post-secondary institution. There is no
cost certainty. All they know is that there is a supposed tuition freeze, but,
holy
There is no long-term funding put in for our post-secondary institutions. There is no plan to ensure that all of our post-secondary institutions are funded properly. Oh no, no that is not going to happen because there is more political rhetoric in talking about a tuition freeze rather than understanding how we should properly be funding our universities, because all of us, I believe all of us, regardless of party, want to ensure that our young boys and girls, our young men and women, that they get the best education, K to 12, and whether they decide to go to one of our outstanding technical colleges or they want to go to university, the fact of life is they should be given the best post-secondary education.
We should again, Mr. Speaker, and I ask
the Premier to think outside the box, I know it is uncomfortable, but he should
try to raise the bar for those post-secondary institutions rather than lowing
it, rather than keeping those low expectations, because we all know what we
have heard from this NDP government. They talk about the fact that enrolment is
up in the
So, Mr. Speaker, I think that we need a
strategy in the
* (15:30)
Mr. Speaker, again, the bar being lower from this Premier is let us talk about the fact that tuitions of enrolment are up, but let us not talk about for a minute the fact that our Manitoba students that are being trained here in Manitoba, educated, are going out to Alberta and Ontario to find jobs–[interjection]
Well, Mr. Speaker, I knew that at some
point they were going to wake up. I knew that at some point they were going to
wake up. I knew at some point they would get their heads out of the sand. But
that is a serious issue. It is a serious issue when Manitobans, taxpayers, are
paying for the education of
Well, Mr. Speaker, I just think, again, if this Premier (Mr. Doer) were to try to raise the bar, try to make things a little bit better, try to improve on some of those issues, try to think outside the box, try to challenge his Minister of Advanced Education (Ms. McGifford), try to challenge his other ministers, then we would find that those men and women, when they graduate, they would graduate into jobs here in Manitoba, good paying jobs here in Manitoba and, dare I say it, good paying private-sector jobs in Manitoba.
Now, I know that is a word, Mr. Speaker, and I see all the members opposite racing to the dictionary. They are all running to the dictionary to see "private sector," What is that? What exactly is that private-sector job? We all know public sector because, boy, we have hired most of them, but private sector, we are not sure what that is. So I am not sure whether the Premier is going to talk to those so-called water bugs, the business community, to get a sense of where the actual private-sector jobs can be created, but I think it would be a good thing.
An Honourable Member: What is your position on balanced budget legislation?
Mr. Murray: Well, Mr. Speaker, I know how easy it is for the Premier to revert to the good old days in opposition. Oh, he loves that. He loves that ability to ask those questions, because we know when we ask questions of this Premier we do not get any answers. We do not get any answers whatsoever.
I thought it was very interesting in the
Throne Speech that basically we heard nothing about transportation and
infrastructure. Now, I believe and I understand, and I am sure the Premier will
tell me if I am not correct on this, but I think that
Now, maybe the spin doctors are out there
creating something to ensure that there is some kind of mention about this
issue. But we know the fact that this NDP government's track record on
transportation and highways in
I know, Mr. Speaker, that members on the
other side are wondering why it is that I am speaking at length about this
Throne Speech. Well, I am speaking at length about it because it is a failure
of vision for the
Well, Mr. Speaker, yes, they might say
farm it in
Mr. Speaker, everybody knows that there
was a BSE crisis in the
Well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear
from the other side. How is Rancher's Choice doing? Is it still sitting in dust
collecting rust? Is that what we hear with Rancher's Choice? We on this side of
the House, I can tell you, would have had slaughter capacity. We would have had
a plant built and it would have been up and running today. That much I can tell
you. We would have had the plant running today. Had that side over there
listened to our program, there would have been slaughter capacity, a plant
built today, in the
Mr. Speaker, members opposite on the
government side continually rely when it comes to our ag producers on the CAIS
program and crop insurance. Why is it that, when a program like the CAIS
program clearly does not work, this NDP government will not sit and listen to
the producers who are being affected? Why would they not listen to those
producers and say, "Look, we have designed a program, the program, again,
was to help producers who are suffering, if it is not working, then we will sit
with you and make sure it does work"? There is no point in having a
program simply so they can stand up and crow about it and the fact of life is
that it does nothing to ag producers in
Mr. Speaker, we know full well that this
summer there was excess moisture in parts of
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Murray: I heard some
"ohs" from the other side. Maybe they did not know that. Well, again,
rather than sitting around as we saw with this NDP government, we went out and
listened to producers who came up again with a program, a six-point program,
and one of the things that we heard loud and clear, that people wanted, was the
JERI program, the Jobs Economic Recovery Initiative, something that worked
because that is what people in rural Manitoba understand. If a program worked
and was successful, then why reinvent the wheel? Why sit back and say,
"Well, we are going to rejig this because apparently that was a program
that worked for the Tories and we are the NDP and we want to make sure we do
something different, that we do not care if it does not work–that is not the
issue, whether it works or not is irrelevant–we just want to make sure that it
is not the same program that those Tories put in"? Well, people in rural
Mr. Speaker, the fact of
life is that this Throne Speech had the opportunity to create a vision for
* (15:40)
Well, Mr. Speaker, I think it is most unfortunate that that is the best, because Manitobans deserve better. They deserve a vision that allows us to search for the stars, to reach high, to set a goal, not one that is so low that if you fall down you fall over it. No, we deserve better.
For that reason, I would move, seconded by the Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson),
THAT the
Motion be amended by adding at the end of the sentence the following words:
But this House regrets
(a) the government's failure to acknowledge the escalating debt of our province, now in excess of $20 billion, and its failure to commit to a comprehensive debt reduction strategy; and
(b) the government's failure to stem its insatiable spending habit; and
(c) the government's failure to present a
plan to address the fact that
(d) the government's failure to commit to the complete elimination of all education tax off of residential property and farmland; and
(e) the government's failure to address the fact that since 1999 gangs have flourished in Manitoba, including the establishment of Hells Angels, Bandidos, Mad Cowz and African Mafia; and
(f) the government's failure to address the escalating levels of gang activity, violent crime and property crime, including the fact that Manitoba has been the scene of numerous biker related murders and attempted murders and the murder of an innocent bystander; and
(g) the government's failure to implement the additional complement of police officers as promised in the 2005-2006 budget; and
(h) the government's failure to commit to not closing or converting rural hospitals; and
(i) the government's failure to address the doctor shortages, emergency room closures and downgraded health care services throughout rural Manitoba; and
(j) the government's failure to commit to
addressing the doctor shortage in
(k) the government's failure to provide any
meaningful and effective strategy to address growing wait lists throughout
(l) the government's failure to consider, within a publicly funded, single-payer health care system, the development of public-private partnerships for the delivery of health care services; and
(m) the government's failure to have an effective plan in place to deal with the threat of a pandemic flu outbreak; and
(n) the government's failure to initiate a review of health care regionalization; and
(o) the government's failure to provide any strategy and support to Manitobans who are forced to travel by ambulance to access health care services not available in their communities and who are assessed enormous bills for these transfers; and
(p) the government's failure to develop a
plan to address the crumbling infrastructure within the City of
(q) the government's failure to support the desperate plight of agriculture producers, given the flood conditions and the inability to grow a crop during this current growing season; and
(r) the government's failure to move ahead in the development of slaughter capacity after two and a half years of the BSE crisis; and
(s) the government's failure to call an independent public inquiry into the Crocus Fund scandal, and
(t) the government's failure to address the Seven Oaks School Division scandal and its failure to admit to its mishandling of the Morris MacDonald School Division Adult Learning Program; and
(u) the government's failure to resolve the retired teacher's COLA issue; and
(v) the government's failure to develop a
long-term economic strategy to address stagnant job growth and make
(w) the government's failure to develop a long-term strategy addressing the out-migration of our best and brightest; and
(x) the government's failure to commit to strengthening the role and function of the Public Accounts Committee; and
(y) the government's failure to implement a strategy for predictable, long term and sustainable funding for post-secondary education; and
(z) the
government's failure to provide a strategy for the protection of clean water
throughout the
AND HAS THEREBY lost the trust and
confidence of the people of
Mr. Speaker: The amendment is in order.
It has been moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, seconded by the member for Tuxedo–dispense?
THAT the Motion be amended by adding at the end of the
sentence, the following words:
But this House regrets
(a) the government's failure to acknowledge the escalating debt of our province–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.
Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Stewardship): Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to stand today and once again address the Throne Speech. It is with great excitement I stand here today because I have the opportunity to talk about what is really going on in this province, following, as I did, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray), by the way, and I promise I am not going to reference certain internal matters that are ongoing within the Conservative Party, as much as I would like to. I respect that.
But I realize that the members opposite have figured out a brilliant way of distracting attention from their conventions because if I remember correctly, Mr. Speaker, last year the big issue of contention in the Conservative caucus, the No. 1 driving issue that they brought forth for discussion as part of the public agenda here in Manitoba was the need for more private health care.
Have they ever found a way this year to make sure that their ideological agenda does not get too much coverage, so I give them some credit.
Mr. Speaker, I am also tempted to comment
on the fact that they thought they should bring in an amendment to the Throne
Speech that went from A to Z. I think it was sort of the A to
I am also struck by the degree to which we have a real contrast in this province. First of all, by the way, Mr. Speaker, let us note that the Leader of the Opposition went–I was not keeping track of it–for too long. [interjection] Some members on our side are saying that the Leader of the Opposition went for too long. I think some members on the opposite side are saying the same thing.
I promised not to talk about that, but,
you know, what is interesting is the complete absence of reference, seeing the
province in its entirety. I am going to go through Hansard, and I want to see
if there is any reference to northern
But, you know, Mr.
Speaker, did you hear any reference to Aboriginal people? Did you hear any reference
to whole regions of this province? Because I realize that members opposite have
got a great way–we know they do not care about northern
Now, I know they do represent some
interests, and it really struck me today, the degree to which members opposite
really represent the millionaire perspective, and I want to say we represent
the million people perspective because that is how many people there are in the
I look at how narrow that
perspective really is on the part of members opposite. If you were to hear the
Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray)–just imagine if aliens kind of landed in
the Legislature. At times I think they would probably find this place–even
aliens would find it rather puzzling. But, Mr. Speaker, they would have heard
an hour-plus of a speech from the Leader of the Opposition, and I want to just
add a bit of a reality check just in case aliens came down and landed in the
Manitoba Legislature in 2005 and heard this speech and had not seen anything
else in
If they cannot come up to northern
* (15:50)
I want to start with northern Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, because I am proud of the fact that we have unprecedented construction in the city of Thompson, in the heart of the constituency of Thompson, a personal care home being built by the New Democratic Party, something that we have seen as an aspiration of our community for many years.
We have major work being done on our
highway right through Thompson, one of the largest projects. We have both
public and private construction taking place. An aircraft maintenance hangar
being built next to our school. We have new businesses springing up. I have not
seen the kind of growth we have seen in the Thompson economy since the early
1970s. As Thompson enters its 50th anniversary, I am proud to say that we as a
government are working with the City of
I could take members opposite on this virtual tour of Thompson, but I do not want to just stop in Thompson. I want to look at what is happening elsewhere, because I also am fortunate enough to represent eight communities, and I am proud that, within a matter of months, the ATEC Centre in Nelson House Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation will be open, providing training to tens and hundreds of residents of that community as they look ahead to the possible participation in Wuskwatim.
Mr. Speaker, I could take the members
opposite to visit the communities of Pikwitonei and they could see the new
airport terminals. I could take them to the community of Wabowden to see the
new health centre. I could take them to community after community after
community throughout northern
Let us take a bit of a
trip further north, Mr. Speaker. We can go to
Mr. Speaker, I could go
to
Mr. Speaker, the ferries are still running into York Landing and, I will tell you, they are running twice a day, they are running six days a week. When the members opposite were in power, if you wanted to get into York Landing, forget about getting in and out on a weekend. It ran three times a week. We have extended it.
I could take you throughout northern
We see, Mr. Speaker, that developments in
the
So, when I look around
northern
But, you know, Mr.
Speaker, that is the virtual tour of northern
But I want to put on the
record, because, you know, they did talk about transportation. Well, let us
compare the record, Mr. Speaker. When the Conservatives were in office, how
concerned were they for rural
Mr. Speaker, it is not just in terms of
transportation. I would like to take the members on a tour of the
Now let us talk about one of the obvious
things about this year, the lack of a summer for some of us, Mr. Speaker. The
bottom line is we had excess rainfall, 100 percent, 200 percent, 300 percent
and 400 percent. Where was the NDP government? We were out there working with
the municipalities. Ralls Island in Kelsey, we built a 13-kilometre dike in a
week to protect the people in that community. We are still calling for federal
action, and I want to say publicly today they should come forward to cost-share
to protect the people of
How about Lake Winnipeg
where, Mr. Speaker, in August, by working with the municipalities, we committed
to $8 million of protection for the residents in the many R.M.s around
I could talk about
Amphibex, and I really want to put on the record that the Member for Selkirk
(Mr. Dewar) and the Member for Gimli have been very active in putting forward
the fact that we need ice breaking in the spring, Mr. Speaker. It is going to
be a few more months, and again we will be into the ice jams that are a feature
of
Now, Mr. Speaker, we put
in place already $25 million of provincial investment in flood protection,
working with about $15 million certainly from our municipalities, $6 million in
terms of First Nations, and I can tell you we have a Disaster Financial
Assistance program. The claims that are going to come in will probably rival
1997, not in amount but certainly in terms of number. So we are there, working
with communities, working with people in rural
One of the things I am particularly proud
of, because, you know, I get almost a bit of a kick out of listening to
Conservatives talk about health care. They were in government for 11 years, and
what happened in rural
It took an NDP government to rebuild the
* (16:00)
But, you know, Mr. Speaker, once again, I forget how far down the list agriculture was. They should be ashamed of their record when it came to agriculture, because we have dealt with every single crisis, and it has been an NDP government that has provided more assistance to the agricultural community year after year after year. Compare the nineties. Compare '99 to 2005. It is the NDP who stood there with producers.
You know, they do not like to talk about
this, again, but even property taxes. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if this is
unparliamentary, but what a joke, Conservatives talking about property taxes
and farmers and property owners generally. In the 1990s, you know, we have this
great thing in
I want to kind of bring this virtual tour
to the city of
You know, I want to take you on some of the
streets in the city of Winnipeg that were boarded up, where housing prices were
at non-existent levels and to see the renewal that is taking place in our
neighbourhoods and our communities, because, you know what, you can get up and
lecture all you want about any of the issues facing us, social or economic, any
of the justice issues, but until you have thriving communities you will never
get a cure to any of the social and economic and justice issues that you put
forth. The North End of Winnipeg, moving into the core area, we are seeing
neighbourhood renewal, and I am, again, proud that, here in the city of
You know, Mr. Speaker, as we drive in now,
we take a bit of a detour maybe through the North End and we arrive on
All these boarded-up buildings, all these
buildings which were in decline, you now see condos coming up. You see new
businesses. You see people enjoying the fact that the downtown of
Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to end there. I am going to take a little bit of a detour out toward the east end of the city because you also see something else happening. Now, for the newest of members opposite, the floodway expansion is under construction thanks to the NDP, and I wonder at what point in time members opposite are going to wake up to the fact that, you know, at the announcement we had Herb Gray, very appropriate with his involvement in the IJC, because they drafted the report. We certainly had representatives for all levels of government. I was particularly proud when I saw Premier Duff Roblin–I want to call him that because I think we, as an honour, should continue that–and our current Premier (Mr. Doer), the Premier of this province. You know, it reminded me of the fact that the Premier of the 1960s had the foresight to build the floodway against a lot of opposition, and we saw again today, all they could talk about was the same tired old rhetoric. Not one word about the fact we are going to protect 460 000 Manitobans against 1-in-700-year floods. That is what government is all about.
But, Mr. Speaker, I daresay, as we are
coming back in toward the Manitoba Legislature, let us take a drive through
some of the suburbs as well, because, you know, I want you to drive through,
let us take a drive through Fort Garry, let us take a drive through St.
Norbert, let us take a drive through Seine River. You know, it was not that
long ago I remember Tories used to take those seats for granted. How about
An Honourable Member: Brandon West.
Mr. Ashton: Brandon West, indeed.
You know, Mr. Speaker, I want you to drive
along and check out the real estate listings, okay? You know, go visit some of
the people that maybe just sold their house, you know those for sale signs,
because what you will find, what are property values in the city of
Well, Mr. Speaker, I am going to bring you
back to the Manitoba Legislature, by the way, and you could probably sort of
see the Golden Boy shining on the top of the roof, still standing there, still
shining, again, something that we had something to do with. They should pull up
to the parking lot. I think you have to understand one thing as you walk in and
maybe come up in the gallery in this virtual tour, if this was an hour ago, you
would be wondering which planet the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) is
from. When you really look at it, we have challenges ahead of us in this
province, but the reality is that most Manitobans are saying pretty well what
we are saying. We are not perfect in this province, but we have construction
again, we have re-investment in key public services, health care and education
and transportation and infrastructure. You know what they are saying? They are
saying that they do not want the kind of ideological quick fixes the members
opposite like to come up with. They do not want the millionaire's party; they
want the party of the million-plus people of
So I want to say this to members opposite. They can come up with their A-Z list of amendments. They can continue, as I am sure they will in Throne Speech, to give their negative comments. My suggestion, Mr. Speaker, is if the virtual tour has not worked, maybe they would like to come and join us on this side and we will take them around to see the reality of what is happening in Manitoba because I see hope, I see optimism, and I see a shared vision with Manitobans and it is very simply put, that we are a province that will only prosper when all million-plus of our citizens are truly part of this great province.
I can tell you, without a doubt, that we believe, as a government, that our collective vision is achieving that and, indeed, that is why there is so much hope and optimism in this province. Let the members opposite bring forward their vision of pessimism, but as our Premier (Mr. Doer) has pointed out, ours is a government of optimism, and this is a province that is on the move.
* (16:10)
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to take this opportunity to debate the Speech from the Throne on behalf of the constituents of Lac du Bonnet.
Mr. Speaker, this is the seventh Throne
Speech introduced by this government, and the fourth one that I have heard. But
of all four, I can tell you, that I have heard, I can tell you they have almost
been recycled and recycled and recycled all over again. All we have heard is
recycled promises and feel-good rhetoric. All we have heard from members
opposite, in fact, I should ask the member from Carman to bring one of those
wind generators in this Chamber when members opposite are talking. We certainly
could have some use of what they were saying. We could generate some electricity
for all Manitobans. There is empty rhetoric. There are broken promises. There
is unprecedented debt. This is the legacy of this NDP government. This Throne
Speech, as pointed out by the leader of our party, he has indicated that
"since 1999" was used on 17 occasions during the Throne Speech. They
indicate what they thought happened since 1999. Let me remind them what did
happen since '99. We have had the Hells Angels move into
The only thing that we hear from members
opposite is denial, denial, denial but what they ought to do is have a reality
check because the Hells Angels moved in under the watch of this Justice
Minister. We have River City Choppers move in just down the street from his
constituency office, a retail store operated by the Hells Angels. We have had
the Bandidos move into
I heard members opposite indicate a little
while earlier that we are the building capital of
In fact, if we are talking about being the
capital of
We are the debt capital of
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, I did a comparison of debt, total debt in the province of Manitoba before 1999, the five and a half years before 1999, and the previous PC administration, even though it went through the flood of the century in 1997, during that period of time we actually paid down the total debt of the province of Manitoba by some $6 million. Conversely, five and a half years after 1999, this NDP government has added almost $3.5 billion to our total debt in this province.
We are also the tax capital of
But that is what we are noted for in
This is a tired government, Mr. Speaker.
It has no vision, no new ideas for this province, and the Throne Speech for
2005 certainly bears this out. I will not vote for the Throne Speech. We will
not vote for this Throne Speech on this side of the House. We will vote for our
amendment, but we will not vote for the Throne Speech. There has been no
strategy to deal with the growing debt problem in the
We will not vote for a Throne Speech that under-resources our police, Mr. Speaker. We heard today, in fact, that the Justice Minister has indicated that they put more resources into police, and more police are on the streets. But what we heard today is that Darrell Madill, the head of "D" Division, absolutely disagrees with him.
He would like to see more police on the
street, Mr. Speaker. It is not just about talk. It is about action and this
minister has not sat down with the head of "D" Division in
We will not vote for a Throne Speech that
does not address the gang, the drug and the violence problems of our province.
We will not vote for a Throne Speech that offers no hope and opportunity to
Manitobans who are waiting for jobs. We will not vote for a Throne Speech that
offers no hope to Manitobans who are waiting in pain or does not address the
crisis in rural health care in
We will not vote for a Throne Speech that will not offer support for Manitobans with large ambulance transfer bills. We will not vote for this Throne Speech because it shows that this NDP government has absolutely no ideas how to deal with the agricultural crisis in this province. Over two years have passed since the BSE crisis, and a shovel has yet to be put into the ground to turn sod in order to try to increase the slaughter capacity of this province. There is obviously no strategy on behalf of this NDP government and no plan.
Mr. Speaker, I look at some of the
preamble to the Throne Speech, and it indicates in one of those paragraphs that
The Institute of
Chartered Accountants of Manitoba introduced
The members opposite have crowed and
crowed about their half billion dollars of hydro sales to
This Throne Speech is devoid of new ideas. It is a tired government, particularly with respect to the justice announcements as we talked about before. They could have taken our justice plan Enough Is Enough!, but they chose not to, and the reason they chose not to is because it was not their idea. They did the same thing, exactly the same thing when we came out with our plan with respect to legal aid reform. They ridiculed it and then at the end, when Ron Perozzo came out with his report, it was exactly the same thing as we had recommended and they adopted it as their own without giving us any credit.
So that is what this government is all about. They do not have new ideas with respect to justice or the economy. All they do is they try to distance themselves from a real plan in terms of the economy that we will be presenting to this Legislature and to all Manitobans and to the real plan that we have for real sensible solutions to the justice issues that are facing our province.
There are no new ideas to
help farmers. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that another 10 percent reduction in
the school tax on farm land just does not cut it, absolutely not. Our farmers
in the Lac du Bonnet constituency, as in the rest of
* (16:20)
The Throne Speech is all about old
announcements. In particular, the tax reductions that were announced, in spite
of those tax reductions, if you implemented every one of them, which some take
effect on January 1, 2006, some take effect in 2007, if you implemented every
one of those so-called tax reductions today, Mr. Speaker, and did a comparison
among the 10 provinces in Canada, we still are the highest taxed in Canada.
That is how far we are behind in terms of tax reductions in this country. Other
provinces have taken the lead. They have tried to become tax competitive. We
are still the highest taxed province in
With respect to health care, Mr. Speaker, we still have hallway medicine. This was announced in the 1999 election, the Premier announced that in fact he would eliminate hallway medicine in six months for $15 million. Absolute nonsense. He ran on that promise and he did not fulfil his promise. He failed to deliver. Manitobans, I know, are listening, and they see what is happening with respect to the promises of this government that time and time and time again they do not fulfil their promises.
I give you another example, Mr. Speaker, in terms of old announcements. In terms of my area, the Pinawa CancerCare program is one of them. We heard that in the budget. We heard that in the last Throne Speech, and they still have not turned sod, although I am pleased to hear that the renovations for the Pinawa hospital and the CancerCare program that is going on there will be tendered this year. But all it is, is another announcement, announcement, announcement without any action. I want to ensure that this does happen.
New ambulances, well, we need them. The
care in rural communities is obviously lacking. We have a lack of physicians in
Mr. Harry Schellenberg, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
There is no long-term economic plan. I would like to be able to speak a little bit about Finance, the Industry and Economic Development and Mines, which is my responsibility, of course, as critic in this area. There is no long-term economic plan by this Premier and by this government, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In fact, I go out and tell people that there is no economic plan by this Premier and by this government. In fact, their only economic plan that I know of is really written on the back of a napkin. That is their economic plan. They have got nothing in writing. They have got no vision. They do not know what they are doing in terms of the economy. I do not think there is anybody over there, very few of them over there, that do have business experience so they do not really realize what it takes to turn around the economy and this province.
There is no tax reduction plan. There
should be a tax reduction plan. There is no plan to make
With respect to the personal income tax
situation, clearly we are the highest taxed in
In addition to that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I
know there is talk of increasing the minimum wage and we heard even from some
quarters that people want the minimum wage to increase to $10 an hour. Well,
our position is quite clear. Our position is let us allow people who earn a
minimal amount of money, let us allow people to keep their own money. Let us
not tax them to death. Of course, it is in the best interests of this Premier
and this government to increase the minimum wage to $10 an hour because then it
means more tax revenue for this government. That is what it means, on the backs
of businesses that sometimes cannot afford those kind of increases. Let us give
them more of their tax money. Let us let them keep more of their tax money by
increasing the personal exemption. We have among the lowest personal exemptions
in
We are one of only four provinces in
In terms of the taxation for corporations,
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I can tell you that large corporations, and large
corporations are defined as those corporations who earn more than $400,000
annually, with profits of more than $400,000 annually,
When you look at all of that and you look
at the effect on businesses that it has within our province, it is no small
wonder that this is a province that is being described as a province that is
not friendly for business in this country. When you look at all of that, we
find in reality that
We do not have a debt reduction plan, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Actually, debt was not even mentioned in the Speech from the Throne. The only plan that I heard is to follow balanced-budget legislation, that $99 million a year that we have to pay down toward our operating debt, but that is legislated and that legislation came from this side of the House prior to 1999. We are thankful for that.
We have a debt, a total debt in this
* (16:30)
Not only that, Mr. Deputy
Speaker, but $767 million in debt servicing costs every year; $767 million
a year, and we are not talking about simply the tax-supported debt. We are
talking about the total debt of the
I would hope that the Finance Minister has listened to Governor Dodge of the Bank of Canada when he told us very clearly in the National Post a few days ago that it is time for governments in Canada–and he was speaking directly to the Finance Minister, and I hope that he was listening–whether it is provincial, municipal, or whether it is federal, to pay down the debt.
We are in great economic times through no
fault, of course, of this government, but through the world economy in terms of
the dynamics in the world economy and the dynamics across
Where is that going to come from, Mr. Deputy Speaker? It certainly has to come from somewhere. Someone has to pay it. I guess the answer probably of the Finance Minister of this Province is add it to the debt, just keep adding the interest to the debt. But someone has to pay for it, and in order to pay for it, if we have to pay for it, if he listened to Governor Dodge, he is going to be forced to increase taxes in Manitoba and we will be even less tax competitive than we are today.
The NDP press releases have all indicated that they have paid down the debt in accordance with the balanced budget legislation. But all we are talking about in terms of paying down the debt is the operating debt, and that is the small debt of the Province. We have to look at the debt as larger than just the operating debt. The operating debt is the small part of the debt of the Province; it is not the large part. But I guess, if you want to focus on anything positive, the only thing they can grasp onto is the operating debt because it is required that that operating debt be paid down in accordance with balanced budget legislation, legislation that we introduced.
We have to look at all of the debt because when you go into a bank or a credit union and you ask for a loan and they ask you for your credit information, ask you what you owe, they do not just ask you for what you owe on your motor vehicle, they do not just ask you for what you owe on your mortgage, they do not just ask you for what you owe on your line of credit, they do not just ask you for what you owe on a furniture loan, they ask you for your total debt load so they can assess your ability to repay. That is where this government is going wrong. All they are doing is quoting the debt that is required to be paid down pursuant to balanced budget legislation and no other debt.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
We had $525 million of new revenue come into this Province courtesy of the federal government this year, $525 million in new revenue, and in reality all we need is about $250 million to $275 million to run government operations. That is all we have had in history, over the last 10 years, is under $300 million of new revenue come in year after year after year.
This government had unprecedented revenue courtesy of the federal government, Mr. Speaker, and those unprecedented revenues totalled $525 million. There is no excuse for not reducing taxes to make us competitive. You have to reduce taxes to make us competitive with other provinces, otherwise we lose businesses, we lose opportunities and we lose our young people.
That $525 million could have easily, easily applied to eliminate school taxes on residential property and farmland today and forever. It would have actually eliminated those two taxes immediately and forever because what it did, that 525 million new dollars that came into the province, is it increased the base of revenues, so it would be there forever courtesy of the federal government. What it requires to eliminate education taxes on residential property and farmland is $270 million a year. That is the cost to the province. It is not $600 million. It is not $700 million, as I have heard members opposite talk about before. It is $270 million. That $270 million could have come from that extra $525 million of new revenue coming into the province this year, and because of that we could have eliminated school taxes completely off residential property and farmland and still paid for inflationary increases and increases in programs that government provides to us.
Mr. Speaker, the debt, as I mentioned before, is out of control. It is climbing at the rate of $1.5 million a day. It is currently at a level of almost $3.4 billion at this point. I made a comparison before 1999 versus after 1999. The total debt of the province actually decreased under PC administration by $6 million. The numbers are there. They are not my numbers. They came directly out of the budget papers and out of the financial statements that this government has introduced year by year by year.
There is no job creation
plan, absolutely none. We have private-sector jobs that should be driving the
economy of this province and, yet, they are not. All we have are public-sector
jobs being created by this government. We need the private-sector jobs to
provide the taxes to support the salaries, of course, of public-sector jobs.
Not that public-sector jobs are not good jobs, Mr. Speaker. We are not arguing
that. But when you look at the numbers of jobs created since 1999, 36 000
jobs in this province were created since 1999, and 75 percent of them, a full
75 percent, 25 700 public-sector jobs were created. Only 25 percent
of them were private-sector jobs, 10 300. In fact, when you look at the
private-sector numbers, in 2004 the number of private-sector jobs in
I point to the October 27
edition of the National Post, and in
terms of real GDP, they talk about GDP increasing in
* (16:40)
Mr. Conrad Santos (
Our society is always in a situation of conflict. There are many conflicts: husband and wife, rich and poor, urban-rural. Wherever you look at, it is situation of conflict, rivalry and competition. But, before we can deal with any situation, if we are in a position of decision-making authority to deal with the situation, we have to analyze the particular situation at hand.
The questions are these: Are the parties in conflict pursuing goals that are simply incompatible? Are the parties in conflict aware of all the strategies that are allowed by the game that they play, the legitimate rules, such that there are certain rules depending on the games you play? There are kinds of games of entertainment like sports, games of chance like gambling, games of skill like boxing or some other sport, or bridge, or whatever, Monopoly, Scrabble, games of skills. What is the commonality in all these types of games so that we can build up a theory to understand the situation in everyday life?
We need some way of understanding the conflict situation. There are some elements that are common to all these kinds of games. There are rules, first. Second, there are strategies in every kind of game. Third, there are payoffs, whatever the kind of game is.
Now, if the game is such that there are
only two parties or two groups of people in rivalry with one another pursuing
incompatible goals that excludes any kind of bargaining between them such that
when one wins the other loses so that one's gain is the other person's loss, we
characterize the game as a zero-sum type of game. It is a zero-sum type of
situation. Example: boxing, either Muhammad Ali wins or the opponent wins.
Example: two-party system in the
So there are strategies to follow. What do we mean by strategies? Strategies are all the options open to the players or participants in the game of conflict. All these are strategies. In a zero-sum kind of game there are only two possible strategies. Therefore, if there are two players and each one has two strategies, you can imagine a matrix of two columns and two rows, a square matrix. In each of these cells, four of them, would be the possible outcomes. Either the first player wins, that means the other will lose. That will be one outcome.
In the matter of strategies, in this prisoner's dilemma, the situation is this: Two people are arrested in flagrante delicto, in actual commission of a crime, trying to steal a motor vehicle. So they get arrested by the police. Then, in the investigation, it appears that they were suspects in a multimillion-dollar bank robbery where somebody got killed. So they were told they were also suspects in that other more serious crime. The strategy of the prosecution is to separate the two. The rules are they do not communicate with one another. There is insufficient evidence to charge them of the more serious crime, but they certainly will be convicted of the minor crime of theft of a motor vehicle. The penalty there is from one year minimum to two years maximum in the lower crime. But in the higher crime, more serious crime, the penalty is a minimum of three years and a maximum of ten years.
The prosecution says to each of them, "All right, you guys, either you confess or you deny the allegation and accusation about the bank robbery." Each of them has to decide on his own. What to do? There are only four possible outcomes, or possible payoffs. Prisoner 1 confessed; prisoner 2 also confessed. That will be the first cell and there will be an outcome. They know exactly what will happen. They were told if both of them confessed, they will be charged with the more serious crime, but will get the minimum sentence because they will make it easier for the police to solve the crime. The other outcome is one confesses, the other denies. I should also repeat that. The first one confessed; the second one denies. So it is a reflection of the two matrixes. The last one will be both of them deny, in which case the prosecution will have no grounds, no evidence, and they will only be charged with the minor crime. Both of them will get the maximum penalty, which is two years.
* (16:50)
Now, what would you do if you were one of the prisoners? Would you confess or would you not? That is a dilemma. That is why it is called the prisoner's dilemma.
Now let us go to the other type of game. It is called non-zero sum game or it is called the variable outcome game or it is called the multiple motives game. No matter what the name, the strategies are different. The thing that you will apply there will be a different kind of strategy because there is no application of the winner-loser kind of solution. You do not minimize your losses and maximize your gain in that kind of game because there are other alternatives other than win or lose situations. Therefore, it is possible to have co-operation between the two contestants, and in the co-operation, they can, of course, bargain, and if they bargain, they can arrive at a different outcome, not a win-lose where winner takes all.
They will say, "Okay, this will be a win-win situation if we decide to meet at the middle like in bargaining. Both of us will win." But if you will not, then bargaining will collapse. Everything will disappear and both of us will lose all this value. That is the difference between the two kinds of game.
Let me illustrate the second one. Supposing you are a taxi driver. You are a taxi driver and you are driving and somebody just pulls a gun on you, a passenger. Then he says, "Okay, give me all your money." What do you say? [interjection] No, this is different. You can bargain. What you do is you step on the accelerator, drive as fast as you can and head for a hydro pole, and tell him, okay, guy, throw the gun out or we both die. Throw the gun out the window or we both die. This is a strategy, and if it succeeds, both of them live. The driver is safe. He gets his money. The perpetrator of the crime is of course–[interjection]
This is a political
obligation. This happened during the missile crisis in
They said we will do this kind of game like the one I illustrated with the taxi driver. We go there, confront them, encircle Cuba with all our submarines and all the missile-headed torpedoes and tell them, tell the Russians, tell Fidel Castro, take away all the missiles or this will be a black hole here and there will be a third world war. We have 10 000 missiles that you do not know about all around the world, if you do not do what we say. That is like the driver saying to the other guy, throw your gun out or we will die. This kind of game is called the chicken's game. It is the chicken who gives way who loses here. That is the chicken's kind of game. It is like the prisoner's dilemma and it is a dilemma, whatever you do.
This also is present,
currently now present, in this present situation. There is
So the U.S., with all the installations there, with all their power, with all their might, are very cautious about antagonizing this reckless loony, perhaps, or behaving like one, because of the safety of every one of us in the world. That is how important this game theory is. That is why we have to understand it very carefully and understand it well. .
. The trouble with this is that we live in a world of some visible reality that we see and an unseen world of intentions. We do not know what is in the minds of people, or in their hearts, except what is manifested by what they do. In addition to that, whenever we talk and speak, we speak in language that is ambiguous. There are words that have double meanings, words that you cannot understand, that you cannot define, and then you are confused. So there is misperception. If there is misperception, there is no communication, there is no resolution. That is the reality of it.
So we do not know whether the reconstruction of reality from what we do or what we say is correct or not. Every individual, according to Jeremiah–this is a prophet; so what he says, we have to listen to. He said, "The heart is the most deceitful of above all things, deceitful, and desperately wicked. Who can know it?"
"I the Lord search the heart–"
An Honourable Member: You are talking my language there, Conrad.
Mr. Santos: Yes.
"–and give to every
man according to his ways, and according to the fruits of his doings." So,
if any man gains wealth or riches without right, he will be like a partridge
that sits on eggs that never hatch, and the wealth shall leave him. In the end,
he shall be like a fool.
See, all these things about Crocus, about investments, about all these things, it is confusing. Then listen to God. Why are we difficult to understand as human beings? Because we smile when our hearts are aching. Music, there is some like that: "Smile, though your heart is aching."
People can smile at you, they hug you, but in their heart they say, "I want to get rid of you."
So, even in
You know that you are in trouble. So it is timing. What to do?
All these things are important. We all play games in life, and we have to understand the game. Even leaders play games.
An Honourable Member: Leadership games.
Mr. Santos: No, not
leadership games, but they borrow from one another, also. They borrow from one
another, borrowing.
An Honourable Member: Money.
Mr. Santos: No, not money, ideas. So I am trying to give ideas that they said we are lacking. That is just a modest suggestion. Thank you very much.
Mr. Speaker: Order. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable
member will have nine minutes remaining
The hour being 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Tuesday).