LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday,
November 22,
2005
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
Bill 16–The Corporations Amendment Act
Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that Bill 16, The Corporations Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les corporations, be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, this bill modernizes The Corporations Act, bringing it
into harmony with federal legislation. As well, it clarifies directors' duties
of due diligence, removes some restrictions on company financing transactions
and harmonizes with federal requirements the proportion of a corporation's board
of directors who must be residents of
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 17–The Securities Amendment Act
Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, on a roll here, Bill 17, The Securities Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les valeurs mobilières, be now read a first time.
Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Finance, seconded by the honourable Attorney General (Mr. Mackintosh), that Bill 17, The Securities Amendment Act, be now read a first time.
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, this proposed legislation is designed to strengthen
and improve investor rights and to enhance access to capital markets across
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition and a good one:
Insulin pumps cost over $6,500.
The cost of diabetes to the Manitoba government in 2005 will be approximately $214.4 million. Each day 16 Manitobans are diagnosed with this disease compared to the national average of 11 new cases daily.
Good blood sugar control reduces or eliminates 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-altering disease to obtain good sugar control and become much healthier, complication-free individuals.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the Premier
(Mr. Doer) of
Mr. Speaker, this is signed by Doug Breckman, M. Homenick, Alan Novak and many, many others.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
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 seem 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 Atish Maniar, Veerbala Maniar, John Kowal and many, many others.
* (13:35)
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the annual reports of Victim Services and LERA, 2004.
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us from the Maples Collegiate Institute 23 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mrs. Dawn Wilson. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for The Maples (Mr. Aglugub).
MRI Scans
Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, under this Doer NDP government, wait times for diagnostic tests have skyrocketed. Manitobans do not have timely access to health care services and they are losing confidence in this NDP government's health care system. The Maples Surgical Centre has recently purchased an MRI and will soon be able to offer MRI scans to the public.
My question to the
Premier: Is he going to turn his back on patients and deny them access to these
MRI scans by changing
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I believe the
Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, under the Canada Health Act, the purchase of
diagnostic tests from private clinics is not prohibited. We on this side of the
House support the Canada Health Act. Patients should not be denied a service
that is not prohibited under the Canada Health Act and a service that is currently
available in four other provinces in
Right now, Manitobans
can, and some have to, Mr. Speaker, travel to
Mr. Doer: People do have choice here in
We are now looking at
putting more money into the Boundary Trails hospital, Mr. Speaker. I would like
to know, the member opposite, does he want all the money spent in
Mr. Murray: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is a non-answer to a very serious question.
I will ask the Premier again because every Manitoban knows that, under this NDP government, their plan simply is health care delayed is health care denied.
We on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, believe that you should be putting patients first, not about ideology, but how do we put patients first to ensure that they have timely access to health care right here in the province of Manitoba.
I would ask this Premier
again is he going to deny Manitobans access to the Maples MRI by changing
regulations in The Manitoba Health Services Insurance Act, thereby denying
Manitobans choice that is already available, Mr. Speaker, to those Manitobans
in four other provinces across
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we
chose as a government to stop paying $1.2 million in fines from the national
government and put that into reducing the waiting lists all across
Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of advice we got from–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: Two MRIs, six MRIs, three times more. We are choosing now to fund,
use taxpayers' money, not just in the city of
* (13:40)
MRI Scans
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Well, Mr. Speaker, we are representing
patients in
Mr. Speaker, it is not prohibited under the Canada Health acts nor The Manitoba Health Services Insurance Act for patients to purchase diagnostic procedures from private clinics, despite what this Minister of Health said.
Under section 217 of the provincial regulations it says and I quote. "The following services are not insured services: Diagnostic examination or treatment by means of non-radiation emitting medical imaging devices, including ultrasound, unless provided in a hospital as an inpatient or outpatient service."
Mr. Speaker, a private
clinic is not a hospital and therefore patients should be allowed to purchase
these services. Is the Minister of Health planning to change the regulations in
Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Health): First of all, Mr. Speaker, as our Premier (Mr. Doer) has responded, the MRI is not yet licensed for operation and so all of these questions are assuming a situation that is not yet the case.
Mr. Speaker, a private clinic in
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, surely this government is not waiting for a licence to come through to take a stand on this issue. There is obviously no plan for this government. It is pathetic.
Mr. Speaker, in a Canada Health act annual report 2003-2004, it states and I quote, "MRI and CT services are considered to be insured health services when they are medically necessary for the purpose of maintaining health, preventing disease or diagnosing or treating an injury, illness or disability and are provided in a hospital or a facility providing hospital care."
Mr. Speaker, clearly this act, too, states
it is not prohibited for patients to purchase MRI scans from a private clinic
in
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, a private MRI can be used for Workers Comp, for MPI, for the Armed Forces, for people under federal jurisdiction. They are all excluded as peace persons not covered under the public insurance system of our country under the Canada Health Act.
I assume that the private operators of the clinic that seems to be such a favourite over there, Mr. Speaker, have a business case for bringing forward their MRI, and I presume that business case involves Workers Comp, MPI, the RCMP, Armed Forces, private insurance companies who wish to have MRIs done on whatever for whatever reason under their private insurance. I assume they are good enough businesspeople that they have not taken a leap of faith and have no expectation that somehow other businesses will not make theirs a profitable investment.
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, we have taken a stand on this issue. I wonder what the members opposite are waiting for, a second viewpoint opinion on whether or not this is popular in the public. I tell you it is unacceptable what these guys are doing.
Mr. Speaker, currently
* (13:45)
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, let me tell the member opposite what our policy is.
Our policy is that any private operator can come into
We are better stewards of
the public dollar than that, Mr. Speaker, and of the public sector health care
system in this country that is, obviously, an enormous economic advantage to
us. We would not have the kind of industrial structure that we have in this
country without medicare, and we would not have the health status in this
country, the neonatal mortality and morbidity rates, the life expectancy rates
that are superior to the model they want us to adopt from the
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Tuxedo, with a new question.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, we believe in putting patients first and giving them choice to timely access to care in our province. We fear that the NDP will continue to put ideology before patient care by changing the regulations.
Mr. Speaker, we would oppose these
changes. Where does the government stand on this issue? Are they for or against
allowing
Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker,
what the member opposite is for is for-profit. That is what the member is for.
What the member is for is for a system such as that offered by the clinic in
Mr. Speaker, under their plan, there would
not be an MRI in
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, what we are for is patient access to care in this province. What they are for is for their own ideology at the expense of patient care in this province. Shame on them. Unfortunately, under the NDP government, wait times have skyrocketed, and Manitobans are not receiving the care that this government promised and has a responsibility to deliver. This NDP government continues to put politics before patients.
Why is this government considering denying
Manitobans the same rights that patients have in four other provinces across
Mr. Sale: Let us talk about wait times, Mr. Speaker. When we formed government, nine weeks for radiation therapy. Today 1.4 weeks. When we formed government, people were not getting cardiac surgery when they needed it. We not only meet the Canadian benchmarks, we beat the Canadian benchmarks on cardiac care. When they were in government, the MRI wait list, 25 weeks. We have reduced the waiting time for MRIs by over one-third, and this year it will come down further.
Mr. Speaker, we challenged WRHA to do 400 more hips and knees under our system with efficient, productive approaches to surgery. They are doing 700 surgeries this year.
Let us talk about wait times, Mr. Speaker. Let us talk about the reductions that have happened in, for example, stress tests for cardiac function: cut in half in the last 3 months. We have an incredibly good record, and we are going to make it better, including access to 30 000 MRI scans this year, up from 6400.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Tuxedo has the floor.
* (13:50)
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, I find it unacceptable that this Minister of Health
thinks that 16 weeks to wait for MRI procedures in this province is a good
thing. We will not be happy until that wait list is eliminated and that is what
we are looking for. We believe that outlawing private clinics from delivering
these services in
Mr. Sale: Well, I am interested, Mr. Speaker, that the member opposite now apparently is a doctor as well as a lawyer. The Canadian Medical Association and the wait-list coalition say that six to eight weeks wait for an MRI is perfectly appropriate. Apparently she wants no wait list, no taxes and no government.
Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Agriculture met with the key commodity groups, yet this minister has failed to table for this House Manitoba's position on the upcoming negotiations in Hong Kong.
Mr. Speaker, can the minister table today in this House Manitoba's position on this important issue?
Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture, Food and
Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, the WTO negotiations are a long
process and our industry has been involved in it for some time. Our industry
has been represented in these discussions from the beginning of the WTO
discussions. I did meet with the industry yesterday. We had a very good
discussion, and what the
Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, with producers having gone through frost, drought, BSE, declining grain prices, our producers cannot withstand any more setbacks. Many changes, either positive or negative, could come from the upcoming WTO negotiations which will impact our producers.
Can the minister assure our producers that this government will negotiate timely transitions for any changes, Mr. Speaker?
Ms. Wowchuk: These are
very important negotiations for our producers, and that is why we have worked
with the producers, kept them involved in the process. They have been able to
put their position on the table, but this is an issue that has to be addressed
all across
* (13:55)
Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, this minister needs to be prepared for the WTO talks. Can the Minister of Agriculture table the government's WTO proposal and the plans that she has in place to assist producers with the impact of any proposals changed?
Ms. Wowchuk: The member
opposite does not seem to recognize that
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Ms. Wowchuk: I guess the members opposite do not recognize what the concept of a team is. We are going to the WTO talks as part of the Canadian team, Mr. Speaker.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Ms. Wowchuk: Thank you,
Mr. Speaker. We work with our farm industry groups, members fully aware that we
met with them yesterday to put the
The
Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste.
Rose): The minister wants to use the analogy of a
team. I would assume that she sees herself as either the coach or the leader of
what position
Hon. Rosann Wowchuk
(Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): I can assure the member that the industry is
well aware of the positions that we have for
I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that we know full well the importance of supply management and the Canadian Wheat Board for our producers. I wonder where members opposite are when it comes to Canadian Wheat Board. Are they prepared to support that? Are they prepared to support supply management? My position is clear. I–[interjection] a better deal for better access for our producers.
Mr. Cummings: Getting information from this minister is becoming a very painful
process. She is now starting to allude to situations that she is prepared to
discuss on behalf of
Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that members opposite are aware that this is
a long process.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
* (14:00)
Ms. Wowchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There has been a framework that has been put out that has been published that the industry has been working on. The framework calls for substantial reductions in trade-distorting supports and that is supported by our industry. The framework calls for a reduction in tariffs and that is certainly one that we support our industry on. I can tell you that the framework also continues to call for reviews and clarifications of where supports can fit in under the agreement, but, certainly, the elimination of export subsidies is–
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, again, in the interest of pulling information out of this minister, she is talking about what we believe are some legitimate international issues, but she is not talking about what she is doing to defend possible implications right here at home. I give her one more chance to put some information on the record that would be of some comfort to the producers in this province who may be impacted by what she does or does not say at the national level.
Ms. Wowchuk: I can assure the member that he does not have to worry about the
industry getting information from me. I have had discussions with the industry.
The industry is concerned about the level of subsidy in the
The industry is concerned
that
Availability
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg released its barometer on poverty yesterday, and it shows 600 more kids in care than last year. The report also indicated there are not enough foster families to care for these children.
What is this minister
doing to ensure that there are enough foster families to provide quality care
for these children in
Hon. Christine Melnick
(Minister of Family Services and Housing): One of the first things we did, Mr. Speaker,
was restore funding to the Manitoba Foster Family Network that members had cut
in its entirety during '93-94. We believe in the foster parents of
Mrs. Taillieu: Well, Mr. Speaker, the motto of this government is spend more, get less. Each foster family is underfunded by at least $3,000. The number of kids in care has constantly risen from 5440 in 2000-2001 to over 6000 this year. Children are bounced around from family to family until they reach 18, and then they are left to fend for themselves.
What support will this
failing NDP government provide to children in care and to foster families to
alleviate this constant movement and instability of the children in its care?
What is the minister doing to provide stability in the lives of these children
in
Ms. Melnick: The first thing we did was take the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry
recommendations off the shelf, blew the dust off and started to implement that.
We are the only jurisdiction in the world that has legislation around the
devolution of child welfare that includes culturally appropriate care, that
includes kinship care, and this we have done in the best interests of all the
children of
Resources
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, there are not enough culturally appropriate foster homes in this province. We hear constantly of the shortage of workers within Child and Family Services. We hear constant concerns over the failing system and fears that harm will befall some of these children.
Mr. Speaker, CFS staff are doing their best under conditions of low morale and chaotic transitions to this new system. What is this minister doing to ensure adequate resources to the CFS staff to carry out their duties and provide supports for families and children in crisis?
Hon. Christine Melnick (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Now, Mr. Speaker, we know that this is all a veil of the non-support of the devolution of child welfare, and shame on that member. We are working with Winnipeg Child and Family Services and the newly created authorities so that we have culturally appropriate care, culturally appropriate workers, and we are focussing on the care of the children throughout Manitoba, including the North which members opposite have never been to, and how dare she speak negatively about the foster parents in this province particularly around culturally appropriate care. She should not speak on subjects that she does not understand.
Government Management
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
A good case, Mr. Speaker, can be made that the NDP's clutch-and-grab approach to Manitoba Hydro is the reason the utility is now asking for a 5 percent rate hike. I ask the government when will the government end the practice of grabbing money from Manitoba Hydro for political purposes, for political staff and for political slush funds.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct all of the inaccuracies in the member's question. First off, Manitoba Hydro is not getting a 5 percent rate increase. In fact, the PUB has rejected an increase, and the matter of rates will be discussed in the fall.
Secondly, the member wants us to go to the market price for natural gas, which is up more than 40 percent. We think low-income individuals who are being supported by the federal Liberal government and by our government in joint programs ought to be sheltered from the cost of dramatic, skyrocketing natural gas prices, Mr. Speaker. So, in addition to having the lowest electricity rates in North America, we are also, for the next couple of years, going to level out the rate increases for natural gas as a result of the hedging account and the account balance, as I explained over five hours yesterday to members opposite in committee.
Pricing Reviews
Hon.
Jon Gerrard (
My question is to the Minister of Energy (Mr. Chomiak). You know, we agree with him that the rate increases in winter may be problematic for one, but we do not agree with the continually changing landscape. Will the Minister of Energy support the Liberal proposal to move the four times a year that there would be a review of natural gas prices to May 1, July 1, September 1 and October 15 so that, in the future, there would not be winter rate increases in natural gas?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, I would refer the member to the PUB decision where, in 2001, they said that the PUB would adjust the gas rates on the basis of the market change every quarter. The proposal the member opposite is proposing would mean that we had a 40 percent rate increase on November 1 as opposed to having the two increases that are slated.
The bottom line is there is a rate freeze in hydro, as indicated by the member from Energy. Mr. Speaker, there is a rate freeze in hydro and under our bill there will be a rate freeze on February 1 for gas users who have already paid an increase in the rates that was applied by the PUB in November. You have a choice, rate freeze or rate increase. You have chosen rate increase.
* (14:10)
Rate-Shock Protection
Mr.
Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker, I agree with former NDP Premier Ed Schreyer, who said that this is not in the long-term best interest of Manitoba Hydro and the consumers. That is what his former idol is saying. What we want is to provide targeted assistance through general revenues. We care more for our seniors than this government does. Why will you not provide targeted assistance directly through general revenues? That is the answer. Stop distorting economic realities.
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, Mr. Speaker, the bill is written in short-term years because it has to deal with a short-term smoothing out of gas prices. The first objective is to have the hedging practices that were put in place a year ago not necessitate any amount of money from export sales coming in to have this rate freeze.
Mr. Speaker, I would point
out that the rates in hydro, both in terms of electricity, are a lot lower than
they are in other provinces. For example, in
Government Initiatives
Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, in light of the recently announced letter of understanding involving the federal government, the town of Grand Rapids, the Grand Rapids First Nation and the provincial government, can the minister please inform the House as to the details on this very positive pilot project?
Hon. Christine Melnick
(Minister of Family Services and Housing): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the
House that yesterday we signed an historic agreement with the community of
This is a new housing model for Aboriginal people. We are doing away with the bickerfest and coming forward with a co-operative model that will be driven by the community. The federal government will do their part on reserve, we will do our part off reserve.
I would like to thank the leadership of
Grand Rapids First Nation, Chief Ovide Mercredi, Mayor Buck of
Tax Competitiveness
Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, competitiveness is the single
most important issue facing
Chamber of Commerce
President Dave Angus revealed that taxes need to be lowered and some eliminated
and that
Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Well, Mr. Speaker, an independent 2004 KPMG study showed Winnipeg ranked second in western Canada, ahead of Calgary, on business cost competitiveness, something never accomplished when members opposite were in government. In my next answer to his next scripted question, I will explain to him how we got there.
Mr. Hawranik: I suppose that explains, Mr.
Speaker, why we are last in economic growth. We are below the national average
in the last five years in this country. The third annual business leaders indexing,
they indicated that business leaders have lost confidence. This bodes poorly
for this province and the economy and our job growth. The business leaders gave
this NDP a failing grade for their economic development efforts, and they said
that the province's business climate is not competitive with the rest of
I ask the Minister of Finance why has he
failed to make
Mr. Selinger: Just to put it in perspective, Mr. Speaker, the Conference Board of
Canada indicated that
Now how do we get there? We reduced business taxes for small business by 50 percent since '99. You did nothing while you were in office. We doubled the band of income covered under the small business rate from $200,000 to $400,000, a 100 percent increase. We reduced corporate taxes for the first time since the Second World War. That includes the 11 years you were in office. We have moved on taxes in ways you never imagined when you were in power.
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
Mr. Speaker: Members'
Statements. The honourable Member for
Mr. Ralph Eichler (
Mr. Speaker: Does nobody have a members' statement? The honourable Member for Pembina.
Children's
Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I rise to tell all honourable members about the event that will be taking place next year in the great constituency of Pembina.
Mr. Ray Wieler,
the president of an organization called Children's
Mr. Wheeler is hoping that enough people will sponsor a combine to cover the costs so that all of the proceeds from the event can go directly to the kids. Soon he will also be looking for about 200 volunteers. The winter wheat to be harvested has already been seeded and is up, thanks to donations.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask all members of this House to join me in lending this effort their support and wishing Mr. Wheeler and the organization the best of luck in the most worthy endeavour. Thank you.
Chytalnia Prosvita
Mr.
Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I
rise to recognize the celebration this past October 29 of the 100th anniversary
of Chytalnia Prosvita in
Chytalnia
Prosvita was originally formed in the 19th century in
To that end, in
1918, the Chytalnia Ridna Shkola was established to help transmit this cultural
heritage. With low enrolment fees and strong support from the Ukrainian
community at large, a consistent student body of around 80 students was
maintained at its original location where the school thrived for over 50 years.
In the 1970s it moved to
Another important service provided for many years by the reading association was a large lending library that was composed of many notable and rare books. At a time when libraries were not as common as they are now, the Chytalnia Prosvita library provided an important service to members of the Ukrainian community.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all members of
this House join me in congratulating Chytalnia Prosvita on their 100th
anniversary celebration, commending all those involved for their efforts. Their
work in the promotion of the Ukrainian language, culture and history has made a
lasting impact on the Ukrainian community and the entire
* (14:20)
Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): I wish to use my opportunity to make a statement to hopefully speak on the record on behalf of some very vulnerable young people who are constituents of mine and happen to be students attending, or not attending, Turtle River School Division.
I know the Minister of Education (Mr. Bjornson) is probably equally as uncomfortable as I would be finding ourselves between two feuding parties in a labour dispute. I want to clearly put it on the record in the Chamber that we have some very vulnerable young people who need aides because of their health condition in the classroom, and they are unable to attend school because those aides currently are not available because of a labour shortage, or a labour stoppage, not a labour shortage.
It has also come to my attention today, and that is the other reason why I wish to rise, that there are students who, in fact, may not be able to find their way to school through appropriate transportation during this labour stoppage. That to me says that we as leaders in this province need to be aware of the situation, first of all, and seriously consider what actions can be taken on behalf of these students, not to take sides in the labour dispute, but to take sides with these students so that they can get their education and they can move forward.
I know that there are dozens, if not hundreds, of parents out there who are very concerned about these students, as well as being concerned about the larger student population. I think it bears some significant attention within this Chamber and that is my reason for rising today. I hope the Minister of Education will carefully think about the words that I have put on the record, and perhaps he and I will be able to discuss a route to deal with it in the near future.
Magnus Eliason
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
pay tribute to Magnus Eliason, a friend and business partner of mine, a
long-time
In his 1975 book Political Warriors, Lloyd Stinson,
former leader of the CCF for 10 years and MLA for Osborne, described Magnus as
follows, and I quote, "He was a reliable committee man, but his real forte
was public speaking and the debating forum of the council chamber was where he
excelled. His rich, resonant voice could be heard better than any other member
of council and being a teacher of public speaking, Magnus knew how to prepare
and deliver a speech. He did not ramble or digress from the subject. He always
spoke with force and precision. Handicapped by very poor eyesight, Magnus made
up for this deficiency by his native intelligence and phenomenal memory. Magnus
Eliason came to City Council as a man of broad experience, having been in
business in
On City Council, Magnus was a conciliator. He could work with people of all political stripes to solve problems and move forward. He was well liked by both former Premier Gary Filmon and former Mayor Bill Norrie, both of whom served on City Council with Magnus.
I met Magnus in 1971. He had recently bought Stinson Insurance Agency from former CCF Leader Lloyd Stinson. Eliason Insurance Agency was a family affair with Kay Eliason, Magnus's wife of 30 years, and brother Frank and niece, Margaret Sigurdson, all working in the office. I became a customer, and then, in 1978, I bought the insurance agency from Magnus. Magnus was an excellent businessperson. He gave great service to his customers. He often stayed open late at night to help someone out. He paid the same special attention to his constituents as their city councillor.
Throughout his life,
Magnus was a hardworking man. No grass grew under his feet. He was active in
the Manitoba League of Persons with Disabilities. He worked tirelessly on
behalf of the Icelandic community and in 2003, received the Order of the
Falcon,
Mr. Speaker, my sincere condolences go out to his brother, Frank, his niece, Margaret Sigurdson, and her family, his niece Wanda and Yinka Opanubi and their family, his long-time friend Stephen Hjalmarsson and Magnus's special friend Betty Laing and all members of his extended family. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Grandparents' Rights
Mrs. Leanne Rowat
(Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to an issue
that was presented earlier today. Today, I was pleased to see grandparents from
throughout
I would like to thank the
members and friends of the Grand Society and the
I was disappointed members opposite adjourned debate without having the courtesy to voice any opinion on this legislation. I would like to challenge members opposite to engage in an active and open debate concerning Bill 201, The Child and Family Services Amendment Act. We have not heard an alternative from this government, no amendments, nothing, Mr. Speaker.
The grandparents that were here today and
all grandparents across
We have to trust in the discretion of the courts to judge what is in the best interest of the child. We are only asking that the significant relationship between grandparents and grandchildren are given fair consideration. Grandparents seeking access to their grandchildren deserve that right.
Mr. Ralph Eichler (
THAT the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk), on behalf of all Manitobans and the agricultural community, will participate in the discussions with the federal government and provincial agricultural ministers this week to determine a negotiating position to the upcoming World Trade Organization talks.
Members of the Legislature need to provide advice to the Minister of Agriculture prior to the meeting with her provincial and federal counterparts leading up to the important WTO round of negotiations.
Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable Member for Lakeside, I believe I should remind all members that under Rule 36(2), the mover of a motion on a Matter of Urgent Public Importance and one member from the other parties in the House is allowed not more than 10 minutes to explain the urgency of debating the matter immediately.
As stated in Beauchesne Citation 390, urgency in this context means the urgency of immediate debate, not of the subject matter of the motion. In their remarks, members should focus exclusively on whether or not there is urgency of debate and whether or not the ordinary opportunities for debate will enable the House to consider the matter early enough to ensure that the public interest will not suffer.
Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to seek leave of the House to set aside the regular business of the Assembly to deal with a matter that is of urgent public importance. There are two conditions that must be satisfied for this matter to proceed. The first requirement was to file a motion with the Speaker's office at least 90 minutes prior to the Routine Proceedings. I believe that requirement has been satisfied.
The second condition is the matter of an
urgent nature. Given that the Minister of Agriculture engaged in consultations
with
Additionally, due to the plight of our
farmers with drought for the past year, flooding from the recent growing
season, BSE, frost, declining grain prices,
Mr. Speaker, we want to ensure that the
minister is fully informed and prepared to discuss the concerns of
* (14:30)
Furthermore, there is no other opportunity to debate this matter during the session. The WTO negotiations have not been raised in debate on legislation that is set before this House nor have there been statements, votes or motions put forward on this topic otherwise. As such, proceeding with a MUPI today is the best forum to debate this vital issue.
To conclude, Mr. Speaker, the WTO talks are an urgent matter. Debating this critical issue today is timely because of the minister's travel and meeting plans with her counterparts on the WTO and the WTO itself. Debating this issue is in the best interests of Manitobans. The public is concerned about the impacts of global trade agreements, and, specifically, agricultural producers who provide the backbone of our province's economy have concerns about the impacts of the WTO on farming operations.
Mr. Speaker, I argue in favour of proceeding with this MUPI today.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the responsibility, of course, is on the mover, the presenter of the MUPI to demonstrate and present some evidence that the public interest would be harmed if the matter was not taken into consideration on this particular day. We know that the WTO discussions have been ongoing actually for years, and, indeed, the first time we understand that the opposition raised this issue was yesterday. So I think it belies their ability to put evidence forward in any event when they suggest that it has to be dealt with on this particular day.
Mr. Speaker, members opposite know that there is development underway to bring a substantive resolution into this Chamber after full and careful consultations with industry groups, making sure that we do not just have some general discussion in this House but that we have an end product by way of a resolution backed by the Legislative Assembly, hopefully, by unanimous consent. Members opposite will be engaged in the development of that resolution. That resolution is expected to be introduced certainly in this period of time that we are meeting before Christmas.
So I leave it to you, Mr. Speaker, but I just did not hear any evidence that it was necessary in the public interest that on this particular day there be that kind of matter dealt with.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? [Agreed]
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate
being able to address this particular motion as brought forward by my colleague
from
Mr. Speaker, the issue, in itself I believe does merit the Chamber setting aside a couple of hours today in order to allow for members of this Chamber to express their thoughts on what is a very critical round of discussions that are upcoming and leading ultimately over to Asia with the World Trade Organization.
Over the last year, year and a half, we have seen so many outside factors hit our agricultural community, whether it was BSE and the impact that it had on the cattle industry or whether it was the amount of rain that we received in some areas of the province. In other areas, Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of a drought type of conditions. There are issues regarding drainage, and, you know, when the World Trade Organization meets there are going to be a lot of discussions about subsidies. We have markets like our dairy market where the whole supply management issue I believe the government is going to have to address, and hearing what the government has to say and their approach dealing with that is of critical importance to our Chamber.
Additionally, we have to be very concerned in terms of the open market for our grains, Mr. Speaker. Governments with huge treasuries that go far beyond what we have, have huge capabilities to provide tremendous subsidies that ultimately have a negative impact on our producers. In particular, I am thinking of those that produce wheat or Canola. Those other countries have been very successful at distorting the marketplace, and it because of their size and the amount of money that they are bringing into it. I truly do think that having a discussion in this area would be beneficial.
I look to the Government House Leader (Mr. Mackintosh). When we have MUPIs that are introduced, and we have seen now a number of them since the last provincial election, what I have noticed is when the government believes that there is merit to having the discussion and the legislative agenda will allow for it, they will allow for leave and ease the Speaker to allow the Speaker to make a ruling that would allow for that debate to occur.
What I would suggest is that if the government sees the merit in terms of the agricultural community, and I look to the Minister of Agriculture, the Deputy Premier (Ms. Wowchuk) of our province, and ask her to acknowledge the need and respect the contributions that all members might be able to have towards this debate. If there was no legislative agenda, or if the government feels that they have the time to be able to hear the debate, I would really recommend that they allow for it through you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I thank you for the opportunity to speak.
Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable members for their advice to the Chair on
whether the motion proposed by the honourable Member for
I do not doubt that this matter is one that is of serious concern to some members in this House. I have listened very carefully to the arguments put forward. However, I was not persuaded that the ordinary business of the House should be set aside to deal with this issue today. Although, undoubtedly, this is a very serious issue that the member has brought forward, I do not believe that the public interest will be harmed if the business of the House is not set aside to debate the motion today.
Additionally, I would like to note that there are other avenues for members to raise this issue including questions in Question Period and raising the item–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. –including questions in Question Period and raising the item under Grievances.
Therefore, with the greatest of respect, I must rule that this matter does not meet the criteria set by our rules and precedents, and I rule the motion out of order as a Matter of Urgent Public Importance.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Emerson on a grievance?
Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker–
Mr. Speaker: On a grievance? On a grievance.
Mr. Penner: The ruling of the Speaker and also the attitude of the minister and the House Leader on the government side is something that really concerns us. The reason we are concerned is because this Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) is going to leave tomorrow for consultations with the other provincial ministers on this very matter.
So there is no opportunity for us, Mr.
Speaker, to ask this government any questions on this very matter before a very
significant meeting is going to happen in
* (14:40)
I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that this government
has no idea what they are dealing with. This House leader knows not what he
speaks of. He raises the issue of having dealt with this matter for the last
number of years, and that is true. They started with a go-around and continued
till today they are in
I find it absolutely astounding that this minister would not want to hear from all members of the Legislature today before she attends that meeting what the views are of her colleagues on her side of the House, what her opposition colleagues in this Legislature would like to bring to the debate.
You know, we have agriculture that has
been not only attacked by weather over the last two years, it has been attacked
by tariffication. It has been attacked by huge subsidies, and the
I find it absolutely amazing that this minister today could not answer when asked very directly in this House what position she was taking to the ministerial meeting going on. She could not answer the question. You know why, Mr. Speaker? You know why she could not answer? Because she, only yesterday, had her first meeting with the commodity groups. I understand that the poultry producers were there. The dairy producers were there. I believe the pork producers were there. The cattle producers and the Keystone Ag Producers were at this meeting and the general farm organization. Now what advice did she get from them? Whatever advice they gave her, she simply has not been able to articulate before this Legislature what that meant to her and what kind of importance she places on that before she stood in the House today and said she did not agree that there was any urgency to the debate.
Well, Mr. Speaker, when was it more urgent than it is today? We have farmers that were told at the Agricore elevator in Letellier that they would have to pay 2 cents a bushel to get rid of their barley. They would have to pay. We have not seen that since the Dirty Thirties, and this minister says, "No urgency. No big deal." We have had, over the last two years, a cattle industry that has been attacked from all sides, including BSE. Yet she says, "No big deal. There is no urgency."
We now have a trade negotiation, which is
happening currently in
What reflection of support does that
indicate to the agricultural community of this province? Basically, they were
told today, "You are on your own, that if this ship sinks out in the
middle of the waters of nowhere, you are on your own." We are not even
going to send the 20, oh, the 20 agronomists that supposedly were on
Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to say this to you. If our Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) has not prepared herself for the discussion that is going to take place with the ministers of Agriculture of this country, she will make our agricultural producers look silly, and she will portray them as paupers in a basket standing before the Grinch. That is how this Premier has portrayed our agriculture industry. He believes that the people of this province are naive enough to believe what he has told them.
I say to you, Mr.
Speaker, it is time that this NDP government of
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for
Mr. David Faurschou (
Mr. Speaker, I am always reluctant to rise on a grievance because I believe that, as we only have one opportunity per session, it is done with the greatest of consideration as to which topic one does raise and put on the record, a reflection of not only what one holds dear personally but what one has represented in the Legislature and has been duly elected to represent.
On the issue of
agriculture, we heard today in the House a very, very disappointing response to
vitally important questions posed by the honourable Member for Ste. Rose (Mr.
Cummings) and the honourable Member for
* (14:50)
Following that up, it is just less than a
month away that she will be leaving with the delegation from
Our agricultural industry in
It is because we as producers are becoming
more efficient in the work that we do on the farm as are those persons that are
engaged in industries that take our agricultural product raw in nature and
refine that to a useable, saleable, consumable product. We are very proud to
say that here in
Study indicates that in the
Mr. Speaker, as I say, I hesitated to rise
because we only have one opportunity to raise issues that we feel vitally
important that are not being addressed but one fundamental comment that the
minister made today was that she was part of a team. While we all recognize,
having been involved in team performance, that you must carry your own weight,
you have to be there and not the weakest link. You want to be there and be a
part of the team contributing to the team work that will represent
I feel that our minister and our
department under this NDP government is not prepared to fulfil that obligation
as a team member heading to
I just returned from
Mr. Speaker, I think it is deplorable that
on such a vitally important issue that the minister's response today was so
woefully inadequate to the questions asked. It dismays me greatly, not only as
a representative of
I will also take my opportunity to express my disappointment on a couple of other issues that I have not yet seen addressed here by this government. I attended Manitoba's organization of those parties engaged in the infrastructure area, last week's annual general meeting, and it was stated that now the deficit that we are all facing as Manitobans in the area of infrastructure has risen above $7.4 billion; $7.4 billion. It bears repeating because this is a deficit the same as that recorded by the financial statements that are presented to the House by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger). It is nowhere to be found in those documents, but it is real. It is a deficit that we must come to grips with.
This government has just,
I am at a loss for words, but the government was celebrating the signing of the
gas tax infrastructure agreement with the federal government that will provide
a mere $167 million over five years. I do not know if anyone would be
celebrating over table scraps, as I will reference that amount of money. We
send to
I want to also state at this time, because this infrastructure deficit is real, I would like to see the Department of Finance record the deficit in depreciation of Manitoba-owned assets, Manitoba-owned infrastructure so that the government can give a true picture to Manitobans as to what we are leaving as a legacy to our grandchildren and children of this province–
Mr. Speaker: Order. Resume Orders of the Day.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): With regard to Private Members' Resolutions, I would like to announce that the diabetes resolution will be considered next Tuesday.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce that in addition to the meetings already scheduled for the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development to consider the architects and engineers bill, the committee will also meet Wednesday, November 23, at 9 a.m., Thursday at 6 p.m. [interjection] Yes, Wednesday morning and then Thursday night at 6.
The Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs will meet on Monday, November 28, at noon, to deal with the issue of the reappointment of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner.
* (15:00)
Mr. Speaker: It has been announced that next Tuesday, the PMR will be on diabetes and also announced that, in addition to meetings already scheduled for the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development to consider Bill 7, The Architects and Engineers Scope of Practice Dispute Settlement Act (Various Acts Amended), the committee will also meet on Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 9 a.m., and on Thursday, November 24, 2005, at 6 p.m.
It is also announced that the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs will meet on Monday, November 28, 2005, at noon to deal with the issue of reappointment of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner.
Mr. Mackintosh: Would you please call bills in the order they appear on the Order Paper.
Bill 5–The
Dental Hygienists Act
Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on second reading, Bill 5, The Dental Hygienists Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck). What is the will of the House?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: No, it has been denied to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina.
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to put a few words on the record with respect to Bill 5, The Dental Hygienists Act. Dental hygienists promote oral health through education, assessment and treatment of teeth. The practice of dental hygiene includes administering oral anesthetic, applying dental sealants, performing orthodontic and restorative procedures.
This bill creates a
college of dental hygienists for the
Mr. Speaker, we agree with the intent of this bill, but I cannot possibly let the issue go by without mentioning the crisis that Manitobans are facing with the current state of pediatric dental surgery in our province. On December 1, 2004, the Minister of Health issued a press release promising an additional 600 pediatric dental surgeries would be completed at Misericordia Health Centre by the end of 2005. Nearly one year ago today this Premier (Mr. Doer) and the Minister of Health made a promise to children waiting in pain that an additional 600 pediatric dental surgeries would be completed in the province by the end of this year. Last week the Minister of Health admitted that those targets may not be met.
The number of children waiting for a
pediatric dental surgery in
Maples Surgical Centre, a private clinic
located in
This Province and this Premier, of health,
have failed Manitobans who are waiting in pain. They have broken the promises
made a year ago to those waiting in pain, those children waiting in pain for
pediatric dental surgery. Why should Manitobans believe them now? Last week,
the
Mr. Speaker, with respect to Bill 5, The
Dental Hygienists Act, again, we agree with the intent of the bill. The bill
was requested by the dental hygienists in
Again, we wish the dental hygienists well.
They are a significant organization within our province that do a lot for
Manitobans. I can recall the first time that I took my daughter, about a year
ago, to the dentist, how incredibly friendly the dental hygienists were to her
and, indeed, were very helpful to me in how to take care of my children's
teeth, something that is extremely important in
So, Mr. Speaker, I believe at this point we are prepared to move this Bill 5, The Dental Hygienists Act, on to committee. Thank you very much.
Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 5, The Dental Hygienists Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 6–The
Dental Association Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: Bill 6, The Dental Association Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck).
What is the will of the House?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: No. It has been denied to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina.
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased again to put a few words on the record with respect to Bill 6, The Dental Association Amendment Act. This bill is essentially a clean-up bill. Currently, dental assistants and dental hygienists are required to be registered with the Dental Association. The dental hygienists have requested a bill making them self-governing with the creation of a college, and I just spoke previously about that bill, Bill 5, The Dental Hygienists Act. Dental assistants have decided that it is okay for the Dental Association to continue to be their regulatory body, but there is a need to make this authority more formalized. This bill allows the dental assistants to be regulated by the Dental Association and to be subject to complaints and disciplinary procedure under the Dental Association mandate.
* (15:10)
This bill also updates some of the language of the bill, which was drafted in the 1970s and is now clearly out of date, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, again with respect to this Bill 6, we agree with the intent of the bill. As we understand, once again, when I went for my briefing with one of the minister's staff from the Department of Health, I asked, because it is very important to me to understand who is consulted when they bring forward these bills, so I asked who had been consulted. They said the consultation had occurred with the Dental Association and the dental assistants. We hope that the government continues to consult with those organizations and other organizations that will be affected by various changes in this Bill 6, as well as all other bills that are brought before this House.
So, at this time, Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to move this Bill 6 on to committee. Thank you very much.
Mr. Speaker: Any other speakers? Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 6, The Dental Association Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 11–The Winter Heating Cost Control Act
Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on second reading on Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach).
What is the will of the House, for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Russell? [Agreed]
Mr. Conrad Santos (Wellington): It would be a pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to put a few words on Bill 11, The Winter Heating Costs Control Act.
It is the purpose of this proposed legislation to protect the consumers, the people in Manitoba, from the elements when they need some heating in their homes by prohibiting further increases in natural gas prices for consumers of Centra Gas during the 2005 and 2006 winter heating season.
The winter heating season is the period of time where there is a gap, a lack of time, from the time that the Centra Gas, as a buyer, will purchase the supply of natural gas heating. There is a time lag to the ensuing time where Centra Gas sets the gas rate to be charged to the customer in order to recover the cost price paid to its western Canadian supplier of natural gas.
Mr. Harry Schellenberg, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
Centra Gas Manitoba Incorporated is a wholly owned subsidiary of Manitoba Hydro. In the transactions in the marketplace, which are taking place in the international market, there is an exchange of values when Centra Gas will be buying supplies in wholesale, so to speak, from western Canadian suppliers of natural gas. The money will flow from Centra Gas Manitoba Incorporated, as buyer, to the western Canadian supplier of gas, as wholesaler; in return, there will be gas energy flowing from Centra Gas to the pipelines to Centra Gas Incorporated. Included in that arrangement, the gas rates are set up and distribution, as to riders, in that arrangement.
Lately, because these are public utilities
and it involves the welfare and general well-being of Manitobans, both Centra
Gas Manitoba Incorporated and Manitoba Hydro are in the form of Crown
corporations, which is a public utility institution, autonomous, at arm's
length from the majority government in the province, but because they are invested
with an element of public interest, they cannot just freely participate in the
exchanges of value in the marketplace. There has to be some form of government
regulation and intervention. So the Public Utilities Board is the independent
arm of general public interest in order to have some say on how far these gas
rates can go up. If these gas rates are left to the wild forces of the
marketplace without any kind of regulation, the increases that Manitoba Hydro
had been saying will be about a 44 percent increase, which is too high for the
ordinary
The Public Utilities Board had approved a
6.3 increase for residential customers of gas from November 1, and this is
lower than any other province, such as, for example, lower than
We could see, then, that because this is a public utility corporation it is an entity that is concerned with the general welfare of the citizen. It cannot freely participate in the so-called free market forces because then it will be too difficult for ordinary Manitobans to be able to pay their heating costs during these harsh winter seasons.
We are here dealing with energy which is non-renewable and, therefore, it is limited in supply. It is a scarce resource, and, being scarce, it is so volatile in the price rates, depending on the demands during those periods and seasons of time. We know that our hydro, on the other hand, the hydro energy, the electricity as compared to the gas energy, is a renewable form of resources. The electricity there, the electric power, comes from the force of the waterfalls, and it renews itself automatically during the cycles of the season.
* (15:20)
It is written in Ecclesiastes that all the
rivers flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full, never filled up and the
water flows to the place beyond where they return again to the place where they
came from. If we trace this flow of water out of the lakes, mist will form. It
will be absorbed by the atmosphere and becomes cloud. The cloud will fall as
rain or as snow depending on whether it is summer or winter. If it falls during
wintertime, the snow accumulates in the surface of the ground. It builds up
mounds and mounds of snow and ice in the rivers, and then when spring comes
around, all this water melts and it flows into little rivulets. It is going to
the river, for example, the Red River, and the
So it is a circle. It is a cycle, but in
the process, when the forces of the river, the currents, are harnessed by those
turbines, the force of the water in its natural state is converted into
electric power. Electricity is useful for the convenience and comfort of the
citizens, for the productive power of our industry, for everything such as
that, as contrasted to the fossil fuel of gases or oil which are exhaustible in
the sense that they are not renewable. Once they are exhausted, then they are
gone, but
When Centra Gas, because the cost is so high, will have to incur some kind of losses, then Manitoba Hydro will try to smooth out these changes in the price rates of different time periods. So they establish a fund, a stabilization fund, to protect the customers from these increases, and there will be account balancing, the balance of accounts between the holding company which is Manitoba Hydro and the wholly owned subsidiary Centra Gas.
The purpose of the fund is to provide
support for the programs and services that are being provided, as well as to
encourage efficiency and conservation of electricity and natural gas energy in
The wind is another element in the natural state of nature. Like water, the wind is there, but it can also be harnessed by technology to produce energy. It is written there, in the Good Book, the wind bloweth towards the south and then turn around and returneth towards the north, then it turn around and around continually in its own circle.
As the wind circles around, the turbines
in St.
We know that we cannot
live without heating in this kind of harsh geographic region. In
We have these safety
needs from danger and the danger is not only coming from our neighbours. The
danger also comes from the natural elements, the whole style, elements in the
environment. The harsh winter in
Therefore, it is the function of government to protect its citizens from the hostile elements of the environment, and when most of the people in our province can no longer afford the high escalating cost of natural gas, then it is the duty, moral duty and obligation of government to do something about it. This government is doing something about the potentiality of a harsh winter and a very expensive heating cost of natural gas in this province.
Therefore, like paying your mortgage, you know when you buy the natural gas at a very expensive rate, very high steep rate, what the government is attempting to do is to spread out all those high costs, spread them out in a longer period of time so that it will not be too difficult for the clients to pay their bills. Similarly, when you have a mortgage, you want to pay only small instalments. What you do is you extend the time period of these payments, and then it will not be too difficult for you if you have a limited income to carry the cost of the mortgage. That is the same thing, the same principle here with respect to the cost of gas.
* (15:30)
Now, that is not the only other element. There are other alternative sources of energy. The sun is itself an enormous unending source of energy if we know and we had the technology to do it. So solar power comes from the sun and it is written, the sun also rises and the sun goeth down and it hastens back to the place where it arose and it rises again.
So all of these are circular forces of nature, all of them are forces of energy. It is only because we have been harnessing them when we develop the appropriate technology to make use of all these elements, all these forces, for the convenience of our species as people, as human beings, on this planet Earth.
The Earth itself, at the core of the Earth, if you dig, dig, dig down there, in the core of the Earth there is hard stuff there, but once you penetrate the hard rocks, there will be like a volcano, there will be heat down there in the centre of the Earth. The deeper you go to the centre of the Earth, the hotter the temperature will be. There is now a technology called a geothermal pump that can extract all this heat from the bowels of the Earth in order to supply the necessary energy for buildings, residential, commercial or other purposes.
The geothermal energy in
The Member for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau), I believe, and the Minister of–[interjection] No, this one.
An Honourable Member: Industry.
Mr. Santos: Industry and Economic Development–
An Honourable Member: And Mines.
Mr. Santos: And Mines. Oh, there is Mines. When his house was burned by accident, he got the insurance money, but the use of that money was made in a very intelligent way. In the new building that would be built there, he thought about geothermal energy. I have not seen that house. Many people have been invited in that house, but I have not been there. I understand that this is a model, an example where, in the long run, you will save money and decrease your heating costs if you go to a geothermal form of energy generation and source of heating in the home.
Of course, it is best when you have a
newly built home. You cannot do that in the old homes, especially in the North
End or in the
One more advantage of avoiding the fossil fuel sources of energy like oil and gas is that there is no by-product in the geothermal heating that pollutes the environment. There is no other by-product there like carbon dioxide. But, if you burn oil as you will notice when all the cars are running in the streets, they make this kind of dark exhaust, and if you smell those things, you accumulate them in your lungs. When you do, either you get pneumonia or other forms of sickness or it shortens your life.
It is the same thing like smoking. Even if you are a non-smoker, if you always inhale all that exhaust in the streets, your lungs will be dark.
An Honourable Member: What about marijuana?
Mr. Santos: What about marijuana? Well, they say in a small amount, a very, very small amount–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Santos: I read about
it. I am not experimenting on it. I am not trying it like
If it authorized, it should be legal to grow it down there in the mines, but to grow it in your homes in a residential area will be illegal, and it should be, and people are being caught if they violate the rules.
It is possible if the
rates stay high for natural gas, there are many consumers that have to use this
natural gas, but they have no money to pay for it. It is very probable and it
is almost inevitable that bills will pile up, but Centra Gas cannot collect.
How can you squeeze water from a stone? [interjection]
Only one can do that, not us. [interjection]
Yes, there was a stone there when the people in
Water is the symbol of life. It is the symbol of life. You can live for a longer period of time if you lack only the solid food, as long as you have some form of water, but once water is denied in your system, only a couple of days you will go and die. Why? Because our body is composed of mostly water. Almost 90 percent or over of our body is water. To prove it, when somebody dies and they go to the incinerator and the ashes are there, you can pick up the ashes and put it in a little container. All the rest is water.
* (15:40)
Some people, because their loved ones loved them so much, carry this little container in their home wherever they go, because that is the icon that serves as a symbol of the person whom they love.
So what the government is doing here is a very commendable action. It is really the duty of government to act as stewards of the general welfare and interests of all the people, especially if it is basic, such as the need for survival. Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): It is my pleasure to put on
the record my comments on Bill 11. As usual, I will not follow the same
philosophical bent of my good friend and my neighbour, the Member for
Now, I know that, for the members of the
opposition, they do not find their way into that area very often, despite my
offer for lunch, which none of the members have taken me up on. Minto starts
almost directly north of this Chamber. It runs from
For the people of Minto, there really are
not the same opportunities to embrace alternative energy as there are for many
other people in the
As well, of course, the people of Minto are industrious, but none of them are running around and putting up windmills on their roofs because, again, it is not something you do in the middle of the city of Winnipeg, but, certainly, they support the incredible developments of wind energy elsewhere in the province, of course, in rural Manitoba which is benefiting so much from this new source of energy. So, again, the people of Minto are excited about a government which supports wind, but it is not going to help them with their problem this winter.
There are some other developments which are occurring in hydro-electricity, and I understand even this week there is some interest in new kinds of turbines that can go into waterways. Instead of building a traditional dam, I understand there is some development of turbines which actually go into the river and can provide local generation of hydro-electricity. Now, Omand's Creek is a lovely waterway, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I have spent a lot of time down there with my family, with my constituents. I do not think we are going to be building any hydro capacity in Omand's Creek, which is the only flowing waterway in Minto.
An Honourable Member: It would be a challenge.
Mr. Swan: The Member for
Having said that, the people of Minto are, certainly, excited about a government which is supporting Manitoba Hydro in some incredible developments in hydro-electricity and continuing to build on this renewable energy source. Now, the good people of Minto are all very interested in solar energy as a possibility. If you have got a 25-foot lot, that does not leave a lot of room for a south-facing roof, so, until the cost of photocells decreases greatly, I do not expect there are going to be very many people in Minto that are going to be running out to use photocells to provide some of their heating.
So the people of Minto, the great majority of them, are pretty much reliant on natural gas for their heating, and, of course, they are also Hydro subscribers and rely on hydro-electricity. People in Minto have conventional furnaces in many cases. They have old windows. They have old doors. They have old insulation in their walls. Many people have uninsulated basements, and I can speak about all those things from personal experience with my own home built in 1912. So there are certainly some opportunities for people in Minto to reduce the amount of energy they consume, but the number of alternative sources they can use at this time, given the circumstances, is quite limited.
Before I talk about this government's bill and the position that we are taking on this side of the House, I want to spend a few minutes talking about what I have heard from the other members of this House, the opposition parties on this bill. It is difficult to understand where my friends in the Progressive Conservative Party stand on this issue, and it appears that they are opposed to our publicly owned hydro-electric utility supporting Manitobans in taking steps to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels. They appear–
An Honourable Member: That is today.
Mr. Swan: The Member for
Interlake (Mr. Nevakshonoff) says, "That is today." This could change
tomorrow, or it could change the day after that. But let it be said that the
Progressive Conservative Party has stood up in this House and has opposed the
good things which Manitoba Hydro is doing to make
And what of the Liberal
Party of
I think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, a reality check
is in order. It is unclear what the opposition members think is going to happen
if the natural gas prices are controlled, as we are suggesting would happen
with Bill 11. Do they really think that the people of
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
The simple fact is that
given the spike in energy prices, it is not reasonable to expect people in
Minto or
Now, in my own constituency office, Mr. Speaker, I cannot keep those Manitoba Hydro brochures in stock. Hydro provides free brochures on different ways that people can improve the energy efficiency of their homes and their apartment buildings and I cannot keep them in stock. People come in and they are interested to see what Hydro has to say.
In the past winter, I held two Power Smart meetings in Minto, and I was very pleased they were attended by approximately 200 people. There were two tremendous presenters from Manitoba Hydro, Ed Nichiporick and Martin Eyolfson, who gave straightforward, factual, understandable advice to people in Minto about how they could conserve energy within their homes.
The 200 people who came to those meetings were not tire kickers. They were not people just looking for an evening out. These were Minto residents very serious about energy conservation, who wanted to learn about high-efficiency furnaces, who wanted to learn about weather stripping, about windows, about doors, about insulating their basements and insulating their roofs. Each of those meetings went on for some two hours. Certainly, Mr. Speaker, I got the sense that here were 200 Minto residents who were prepared to go out there, put some money into the improvement of their homes, who were certainly interested in saving energy.
* (15:50)
Certainly, people are excited that Power Smart offers low-cost loans to people who do not have the money in their pockets to go and make those investments. Certainly, through the help of Manitoba Hydro, people can borrow money to make those improvements, pay it back on their Hydro bill at a very reasonable rate of interest. As well, our friends in the federal government do throw in money. There is a grant which is available for people who go and have an assessment done of their home's energy efficiency and then take steps to improve it. Those grants do not cover the entire cost of the improvements or the repairs, but they certainly help.
Of course, very recently Manitoba Hydro,
through its Power Smart program, indicated a further rebate of up to
100 percent of the cost of insulation materials, not only for
electric-heated homes, but also natural gas-heated homes, which will allow an
additional 120 000 homeowners to get $500 rebates to upgrade their
insulation levels to reduce their consumption of energy, whether it is natural
gas or hydro. Now, certainly, the Power Smart program is something people in
Minto are very excited about. Power Smart is a leader not only in
Manitoba Hydro and this government have
had the foresight to expand the residential efficiency programs through Power
Smart and Manitobans, including those in Minto, have responded
enthusiastically. It bears noting, Mr. Speaker, that
Certainly, this is all good, because every cubic foot of gas that we do not have buy from Alberta means less money flowing out of our province, and every watt of hydro that we can save through Power Smart here in Manitoba is another watt of electricity that we can sell to our friends in Minnesota, in North Dakota, in South Dakota, Nebraska and now, of course, the good people of Ontario, as we saw the day the Throne Speech came down.
Now, certainly, one of the other exciting
things for the people of Minto is that Bill 11 is going to provide some
specific assistance for Manitoba Hydro to work with community groups to ensure
that low-income homes and neighbourhoods are better able to reduce their heat
loss and have greater access to alternatives. Certainly, that fits very well in
Minto, which is one of the beneficiaries of this government's incredibly
successful Neighbourhoods Alive! program. Neighbourhoods Alive! came in shortly
after this government was elected in 1999. In the Minto constituency, it
includes what we would call the Spence neighbourhood from Sherbrook, from
When I look at The Winter Heating Cost
Control Act, Bill 11, I look at the preamble to see some of the facts and some
of the assumptions on which this bill is based and, frankly, it is very
difficult to argue with what is contained in the preamble. The first thing was
that Centra Gas
The third WHEREAS in the preamble states that "price fluctuations occur between the date Centra Gas purchases natural gas and the date it sets the rate to recover its costs from its customers." Well, of course, that is true. There has been a spike unlike anything that we have seen in history with the natural gas prices. Again, I do not think there is any disagreement on that fact.
The fourth part of the preamble says that "Centra Gas has the ability to account for those price fluctuations through the use of various deferral and gas balancing accounts." Indeed, Mr. Speaker, that is what Centra Gas has done with a great deal of success, which has protected Manitoba consumers as far as can reasonably be expected, although, of course, with the spike in gas prices, unless other steps are taken, that will become a problem by the end of the winter.
The next item in the preamble is that "the
I hear the Liberal member from Inkster,
upset about this, because, clearly, he would follow his leader, the member from
River Heights's lead, and he would say, "Fine, let us leave it to the
market," and I am going to be very happy in the next election to be
knocking on some doors in Inkster and telling them how their member of the
Legislature would support a 44-percent increase in their natural gas bills.
Then, when that happens, of course, when we do have a New Democrat member from
Now, the next item, of course, is that the Public Utilities Board has ordered Centra Gas to take steps to enhance space heat retention and heating efficiency for reasons related to customer costs, the environment and gas system viability. So the Public Utilities Board is certainly aware of the successes of Power Smart, but has given a clear direction to this government to do more, to take Power Smart and to make sure that it is available for everyone in the province of Manitoba and encourage people to save energy, whether it is hydro, whether it is gas and, certainly, encourage people to consider alternate forms of energy.
Finally, of course, the
Public Utilities Board has encouraged Manitoba Hydro to explore the possibility
of using its electricity export revenues to fund programs that encourage
consumers to reduce their levels and patterns of energy consumption. So we are
taking a small percentage of our sales of electricity to our friends to the
south of us, to the east of us, perhaps, one day, to the west of us, and use
that to save energy in
When I look at the preamble to this bill, it seems pretty clear to me. Certainly, the purposes of the act are also very clear. Section 2 of this act says: "The purposes of this Act are (a) to protect consumers from the impact of rising heating costs during the winter season;"–something which my opposition friends do not seem to understand–"and (b) to provide support for programs and services (i) for electricity and natural gas energy efficiency, enhance space heat retention and heating efficiency; and (ii) for developing alternatives to natural gas, in order to ensure that sufficient and sustainable energy resources are available in the future."
I do not think, Mr. Speaker, that any opposition member can truly claim there is any problem with the purposes of this act. Their point, of course, is "Well, we like what you are doing, but we do not like the way you are doing it," which has been the Liberal position on many, many great things that we have done. Well, I suppose we will hear from the Progressive Conservative members when it is time for them to cast their vote, with Manitobans or against Manitobans, on that issue.
Certainly, for the people of Minto, they are very, very interested in all the great things that are happening in terms of energy in this province. They are excited about Manitoba Hydro. They are pleased that we continue to have a strong publicly owned utility that is there for all Manitobans, not just a privileged few. They are happy to have a government which supports their efforts to increase the efficiency of their homes, to increase the efficiency of the insulation, the R value on their windows and their doors, their insulation. They have the confidence that this government is, certainly, looking out for them and, at the end of the day, everyone knows that natural gas prices can be expected to continue to rise, hopefully, nothing like the spike we have seen this year.
People know that pursuing
further alternatives is necessary but, Mr. Speaker, the people of Minto, as I
said at the beginning of this speech, certainly have a limited number of
options available to them. They do not begrudge other Manitobans. They do not
begrudge Manitobans in rural
* (16:00)
No, I hear the Member for
Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings) who now–I do not know if he is upset with the fact
that
The point, Mr. Speaker, is that people in Minto support all different sources of energy in the province. They support people in Ste. Rose who may choose to put in geothermal heating. People in Minto and the other inner-city constituencies do not throw up their hands and say, "Well, what is in it for me," because what is in it for all of us as Manitobans is less reliance on fossil fuels, more development of alternative sources of energy which truly does benefit all of us.
Again, we do not begrudge
the fact that the wind turbines are going up in rural
So, Mr. Speaker, I think I have put forward the importance of this bill to people who I am lucky to represent in this Legislature. Certainly, they will be watching to see how the opposition parties deal with this bill. They will be expecting the opposition parties to deal with the reality, deal with their reality, and vote in favour of Bill 11 which is going to, first of all, cushion the rate shock which would otherwise occur and also encourage Manitobans to move forward and deal with the energy sources of the future.
So, Mr. Speaker, with those comments, I will conclude this dissertation, if you will, on the effects of Bill 11 on the people of Minto. Thank you very much.
Mr. Speaker: Any other speakers?
When this matter is again before the House, it will remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach).
House Business
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on House business. I would like to revise an announcement, flesh out an announcement made earlier today regarding the Social and Economic Development Committee and its consideration of Bill 7.
In addition to the meetings called for today at 3 and 6 p.m., the committee will also meet, as I said earlier, tomorrow, Wednesday, but from 9 until noon, from 3 until 5 and then again at six o'clock, and, if necessary, the committee will also meet on Thursday, November 24, at six o'clock.
Mr. Speaker: To revise an announcement made earlier today regarding the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development and its consideration of Bill 7, The Architects and Engineers Scope of Practice Dispute Settlement Act (Various Acts Amended), in addition to the meetings called for today at 3 p.m. and 6 p.m., the committee will also meet on Wednesday, November 23, 2005, from 9 a.m. until noon, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. and at 6 p.m. If necessary, the committee will also meet on Thursday, November 24, 2005, at 6 p.m.
We will move on with Orders of the Day.
Bill 12–The Highways and
Transportation Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: We will now call Bill 12, The Highways and Transportation Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck).
What is the will of the House? Is it the will of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina?
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Stand?
Agreed? [Agreed]
Any speakers? Okay, we will move on.
Bill 15–The Emergency
Measures Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: We will move on to Bill 15, The Emergency Measures Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Pembina.
What is the will of the House? Is it the
will of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable
Member for Pembina? Agreed? [Agreed]
Any speakers? Okay, it will remain standing.
Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Stewardship): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux), that Bill 13, The Conservation Districts Amendment Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, I thought it would be appropriate to put a few comments on the record in moving this bill for second reading, because any time I get a chance to talk about conservation districts in this province, the conservation district movement, it is a great opportunity to put on the record the degree to which Manitoba is a leader in terms of conservation districts across North America.
Mr. Speaker, I want to
state that I have had that verified at the last conservation districts
convention in
Mr. Speaker, there is long history of conservation districts, a number of decades, but I think I am particularly pleased to put on the record that not only do we have a proud history that, under the leadership of, certainly, this government, and the very progressive municipal governments throughout this province that are very much the backbone of the conservation districts, we have now gone from nine to 17 conservation districts across the province of Manitoba in six years. We have nearly doubled it. In fact, the majority of rural Manitoba now has a conservation district base. In fact, I was very pleased to announce our most recent conservation district right in the heart of the Interlake, in Arborg, Manitoba, again, in a region of the province that now is becoming very much a part, through the East Interlake Conservation District, part of that tremendous model in terms of how we deal with the many challenges we are faced with.
I want to put on the record that, at that meeting, I gave particular credit to the Member for the Interlake (Mr. Nevakshonoff), who has been an outspoken supporter of conservation districts. Anybody who has ever read The Interlake Spectator, you will see, quite frankly, the letters to the editor column for a while were pretty well owned by the MLA for the Interlake, who had the courage to fight for what he believed in terms of conservation districts and work with his local communities and work with some tremendous leadership, to the point now, Mr. Speaker, that the Interlake, that very important part of the province, is part of our CD growth across the province.
I cannot underestimate the significance of this because, to go from nine to 17, that is nearly doubling the number of conservation districts since 1999. It is not all because of the efforts of this government. Certainly, there is a lot of community effort that has gone into this, Mr. Speaker. But, you know, I think we also have to indicate very clearly that this was, in fact, early on, one of the hallmarks of our government, and that is in terms of having a broad comprehensive approach to watershed-based planning and to the many other activities of conservation districts, because I always stress that it is more than just the water base that is important, there are many other activities.
I also want to note, by the way, that we have brought the responsibilities for conservation districts into the Department of Water Stewardship. I want to put on the record that, because of the origin being based with, in this particular case, the municipal leadership, for many years it resided with the IGA department and its forerunner, I want to state it created some confusion, Mr. Speaker. I always used to say, as Minister of Conservation, that it confused people, quite significantly, when I would have to explain that I was not responsible for conservation districts. Indeed, when parts of the Conservation Department came over to Water Stewardship along with parts of other departments, I think it was a very wise move that under, in fact, the first Canadian Department of Water Stewardship in this particular case, we included conservation districts.
* (16:10)
Now, Mr. Speaker, Bill 13 may seem like a minor amendment, but I think it is part of that bigger growth of conservation districts, particularly the degree to which we are now seeing more and more citizen involvement working with the many dedicated municipal leaders and the excellent staff that is out there in terms of our conservation districts. Indeed, the amendment establishes the ability of the Conservation District Commission to have a public interest representative.
What I want to put on the
record is that, as we roll out the next step of
I mean, when you think about it, Mr. Speaker, while conservation districts do not naturally coincide in every case with a single watershed, many of them in fact involve a number of watersheds. The reality is, the bottom line is that we already have watershed-based planning at the conservation district level in many areas of the province.
I want to stress that
each CD is very unique. I have said this publicly, that I do not believe in a
one-size-fits-all approach. What is good for southeast
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity at the last conservation districts convention to start a bit of a tradition that will be no stranger to anybody that has attended AMM meetings. I set up a bear pit as minister responsible to have some open discussion because I do value the feedback from the conservation districts. I made it very clear that our vision as a government and our vision collectively as a province is very much based on the basic element of watershed-based planning that starts from the understanding that you have to have a comprehensive approach, but you also have to have local people as part of that planning process. That is what conservation districts are particularly good at.
Mr. Speaker, conservation districts ensure that there is the local input, there is that local sense, there is that democratic input. When I mention that this bill brings in a public interest's ability to have an appointment at the commission level, I think it is something we can look at with conservation districts as well in terms of broadening their representation because, quite frankly, there is no shortage of people who are interested in getting involved with any of our conservation districts.
As I look around the
Manitoba Legislature, I realize that there are members of this Legislature who
have had some significant exposure in the past to conservation districts.
Certainly, the Member for
I want to stress the success of conservation districts comes very much from the local participation, and we are seeing a lot of very innovative ideas coming out through local people coming up with local solutions to the kind of challenges that we are all faced with. Whether it be the excellent work that is being done in terms of repair and protection, whether it be some of the excellent work that has been done in co-operation with our farming communities, whether it be in terms of the recognition, that there has to be a broader focus, that we have to look beyond point sources and look at the overall watershed, we are seeing conservation districts leading the way. I can tell you there is no shortage of creative ideas coming.
Mr. Speaker, the key element as we move into watershed-based planning is the fact, to my mind, that conservation districts will be the key building blocks. Now, in areas of the province that do not have conservation districts, there will be watershed-based planning. That is part of The Water Protection Act that was passed in this House.
But I believe that the conservation district movements can and will continue to grow because they will provide very much that basic framework; in fact, it is referenced in the act. But, more importantly, they are doing watershed-based planning already. It varies across the province the degree to which that planning has been put in place, recognizing, of course, that we have had CDs that have a longer history than others. I mean, we have, as I indicated earlier, gone from nine to 17 since 1999. Those additional CDs, the new CDs, are very much growing and developing, Mr. Speaker, but, you know, the bottom line here is the CD movement has a particular opportunity here to provide, I think, the kind of guidance and the kind of public credibility that is necessary for our watershed-based planning.
Believe me, Mr. Speaker, anybody that is aware of what happens with conservation districts will tell you, there is no shortage of people that would like to be involved in conservation districts. In fact, any minister responsible for appointing the provincial appointee often has to look at all sorts of potential names that are put forward, solicited or unsolicited. I think it is important to note that I see some significant opportunity here to improve the terms of that.
Now, the vision, I think, of the next five
or 10 years is going to be very much one of watershed-based planning. I
referenced that and I really want to spend a couple of minutes in reflecting on
that, Mr. Speaker. Let us be very clear. Unless we deal with the entire
watershed, and in many cases watersheds that cross into
I do want to put on the record that I have said very clearly it is not going to be one sector or one region of this province. It is certainly not going to be urban versus rural. It is not going to be solved by finger pointing. The bottom line is it is going to be solved by us all working together.
There are some encouraging signs. I want
to put on the record when it comes to
Probably the most significant area we have
moved on, Mr. Speaker, is in terms of the city of
When you look at the challenges with
nutrification, the algae blooms we have seen in the last number of years, we
have to make progress, and we have started already with the city of
Mr. Speaker, in 2002, we started that
process, and it has now taken an NDP government to get licensing in place and
proper waste water treatment for the city of
You know, Mr. Speaker, I want to note that on the Assiniboine River, if you look at the level of waste water treatment in both Alberta and Saskatchewan, they have been ahead of us. It has now taken this process, the CEC process, spearheaded by the Member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) when he was the Conservation Minister at the time–I was Conservation Minister when the report was received–for the licensing of the waste water facilities in the city of Winnipeg, something that should have been done in the 1990s.
* (16:20)
Mr. Speaker, we have moved elsewhere, too. I find it rather interesting as we look at discussions today with the potential plant here in Winnipeg that, when the previous government had the opportunity to make some very important decisions with the Maple Leaf plant in Brandon, they followed a process that did not involve full public participation and did not result in the kind of treatment that, certainly, should have been considered at the time.
I want to put on the record that if and
when there is a second shift, because the Clean Environment Commission's
hearings, put in place by this government, there will be, and this is not an
oxymoron, improved waste water quality at the Maple Leaf plant, because this
government has understood the fact that you cannot have development without
having protection of the environment in both the city of Winnipeg and in terms of
Maple Leaf and, quite frankly, any activity that has to take place. But the
previous government had a habit of not only short-circuiting the licensing
process, but, in the case of the city of
The City of
I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that as we look at other developments, as Minister of Water Stewardship, I will stress again the need for us to be vigilant in each and every case because there are going to be more hearings in terms of developments that will take place and more challenges, such as the water quality management zones. But, you know, I want to note there that the members opposite, after passing the water quality management zones, have now been again getting into the blame game, the finger pointing, and I want to put on the record again there is no one sector that is going to be the solution. There is no one sector that is the problem. We are all part of the problem.
You know I say this every time I get a chance, Mr. Speaker, I sort of use this at public meetings and I do not know if I can use this in the Legislature but, you know, I will use it anyway. [interjection] Thank you very much to members opposite but, you know, the reality is, and if there is anybody in the Legislature that has not taken a shower over the last six months or flushed a toilet, they are not part of the problem. They are probably also sitting off in a corner by themselves way away from other members, but, you know, the reality is as soon as you flush a toilet you are part of the challenge that we are faced with, and if you take a shower, in terms of the water consumption that takes place, about a hundred litres.
So you know you flush a toilet and you are
part of that proverbial problem. So I say to members opposite–[interjection] I am part of the problem
of flushing the toilet and taking showers. I can assure the Member for
I am getting distracted by the Member for
Our domestic consumption is about 200 litres
per person. Our total consumption in
That is why I think it is important as we look at the work that the conservation districts are doing to recognize how non-partisan they are, how they bring together people from all different political persuasions, because people understand the need to protect our water, the need to work to protect our environment, and that should be the approach that I would suggest should be put forward in terms of our water challenges.
Now, I was somewhat encouraged on The
Water Protection Act, for example, when it was passed unanimously. It took a while,
but it passed unanimously. You know why I think the Liberals both voted the
same way on that? I know it is difficult at times, Mr. Speaker. I remember when
they were a three-person caucus. It was useful. They had somebody to break the
ties, especially on the MTS sale. I will not get into MTS, but one in favour,
one Liberal against and one abstaining or sitting on the fence. The Member for
I do think, Mr. Speaker, there is a good reason. Certainly, over the years, I have received support from many, I was going to say Liberals, but they are kind of former Liberals because they have voted NDP so many times I think they have long forgotten that deep, dark secret of being a Liberal, but it is because there are many people across the province who, I think, at times, will sit there and say, whether they are NDP or not, they will actually give this government and previous governments credit for being on the right track.
I will tell you, I hear this in terms of water all the time. I hear a lot of people saying, "We do not agree with you on everything; we do not agree with you on this area or what you are doing in this area," but they do agree with the fact that we have indicated very clearly it is a priority by establishing the department, moving ahead with additional resources, drinking water officers for example, 16 new inspectors in terms of manure and mortalities regulations.
We have done that, Mr.
Speaker, but it is not just a question of resources. I think it is because we
put forward what I see collectively is the vision of the people of Manitoba in
terms of water, which is that we have got to leave it in better shape than we
found it. If we do not, we are going to have more and more
I want to stress again that partnership is the key. We cannot do it alone. Certainly, as a provincial government, not only can we not do it alone, even if we had the best resource allocation that you can ever imagine, we do not necessarily have the credibility at the grass roots level and the perspective that goes with people that live in the area who are part of, say, a municipal council or part of the many organizations that participate in conservation districts.
These are people that bring tremendous experience. I want to stress, by the way, that one of the areas I want to see some real development with in conservation districts in the future is taking some of the best practice. There are some really exciting things happening with our conservation districts in this province. I am not even going to single out one particular conservation district. I want to stress the fact that we are seeing unique things happening all across the province.
I also want to note, by
the way, the degree to which we are looking internationally too, and I want to
really commend the work that has been taking place. We have been supportive of
it, both financially and, certainly, in terms of our encouragement, and that
is in the
Now that is going to be
the future, by the way. That is going to be how we are going to achieve those
targets set by the IJC in terms of nutrient reduction. There are a lot of exciting
things happening in other jurisdictions. The state of
We have, I think, all sorts of prospects
with
In fact, I note that the
* (16:30)
I want
to say very clearly that I want to see a very significant role for First
Nations because, in many areas of the province, and, certainly, in the
Interlake this is very much the case. The Member for the Interlake (Mr.
Nevakshonoff) has been very vocal in terms of this. Many Aboriginal
communities, many First Nations communities are not necessarily within the
jurisdiction of the Province, are right there part of the watershed. They are
faced with the same challenges. We are working with those communities. I want
to put on the record in particular the work we have been doing with the
I want to put it on the record if I can,
Mr. Speaker, that I think we have a challenge. We saw just recently in
Kashechewan where you saw a lot of attention on water-based issues in
As we go into the First Nations focus and the Aboriginal focus of the First Ministers' Conference, I am hoping that there will be some real leadership shown nationally on water-based issues because we will have tremendous difficulties continuing in First Nations communities unless we get a national commitment.
I throw that down as a challenge to the federal government because they have to be part of the solution as well. They are a part of the jurisdictional element of it, both in terms of First Nations, but also in terms of the overlap of federal environmental regulations, fisheries and oceans.
So I throw that challenge. Whether it be
in terms of
Now, Mr. Speaker, I really wanted, as I conclude my remarks, to stress a couple of things. First of all, when I talk about vision, yes, it is the vision of our government. Part of it is to extend the conservation districts; we have been doing that. But I think it is the vision of most Manitobans. I say most Manitobans because members opposite at times, I think, are somewhat confused when it comes to water issues. You know, they are not sure. They certainly shy away from any discussion of their record in the 1990s and for good reason.
I referenced today in my comments the fact that they did not have much really to talk about. I find it amazing that even when we finally got them on board on The Water Protection Act, it did not take long before they are firing off press releases saying that the sky was falling and because of drafts of regulations that were put out, this was going to do all this and that and the other thing.
I have a lot of respect for people who have been responding and raising concerns about water quality management zones and various aspects of The Water Protection Act. But you know what, I trust the Manitobans. Manitobans can take the proposals. They can put forward their ideas, and we have proven will listen. We put in the act that we would have to have consultation on regulations.
Members opposite will criticize us sometimes. If we move too quickly, they will say we did not consult. If we do not consult, we move too quickly. You cannot win with members opposite. I would say, quite frankly, I am going to be interested to see how this vote on this bill. I am assuming they are going to vote for it. But I hope that it has more commitment than The Water Protection Act, because I really think they sat down, I think they really wanted to vote against, quite frankly. I read their speeches. I sat in here month after month after month. They wanted to vote against one of the most progressive pieces of legislation in the history of the management of watership-based issues, The Water Protection Act, a leader across the country.
There was no progressive in the PC. It was all this conservative, actually I think it was pretty reactionary stuff. They just could not bring themselves–I remember the Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), his quotes are seared in my mind. He talked about the Gestapo at one time. He talked about civil servants doing their job in terms of this, Mr. Speaker. These regulations that were just Soviet-style central planning. You know, he actually voted for it in the end by the way. I am not sure which Member for Emerson was speaking.
But they are still out there. They come in this Legislature. When they stand before the broader public interests and the broader public, they hastily put on their water jackets. They put on a tie quickly, and now they are going to talk the talk, but they do not walk the walk when it comes to water. It has taken an NDP government to bring in the water strategy, The Water Protection Act, and an NDP government that has gone from 9 to 17 conservation districts. We have almost doubled it, and I tell you what, I am sure we will definitely double it by the end of this term in government.
So, again, when you think about water issues in this province, it is the NDP vision, and I say it is our vision as a province. No thanks to members opposite. I will be interested to see what they have to say on conservation districts because I suspect they are going to get up and say, "Well, we just did not get around to it, you know. Like we were going to do something. We, we, you know." Whatever. I mean they have been doing that for the last six years in opposition. They always think of themselves as a government in exile, right, you know, it is like the White Russians off in London, you know, I can picture them sort of sipping on the champagne.
They recently went through some internal
difficulties as a party, and I love the quote today from the Minister of
Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) talking about members opposite not knowing about the
team approach. The look on the Leader of the Opposition's (Mr. Murray) face was
priceless. I wish that could be recorded in Hansard. But, you know, Mr.
Speaker, they have spent the last six years, they have been sort of me-tooing
on water. Sometimes they try and hammer us for not doing enough. Manitobans
know better. They cut the well testing. They cut drainage. They did nothing in
terms of the city of
So you know what? Tories can talk all they
want about rural
I just want to see what they are going to say on this bill. If it is the Member for Portage (Mr. Faurschou), he is probably the only member across the way that I would say had some real understanding of conservation districts at the grassroots level, and I do appreciate that, but I am waiting for him to get up and say, I am suspecting he is going to get up in probably a one-minute speech saying, "The NDP government has done a great job on conservation districts. This is a great bill. We are going to vote for it." I get the feeling they are going to keep this going for another six months, like they did on The Water Protection Act. They will grudgingly get up and vote for it, Mr. Speaker, and then they will criticize it after that, just like they have done with The Water Protection Act. I am beginning to kind of know the end. It is like a regular script over on the other side, Mr. Speaker, because they do not like to show their true colours.
The fact is they do not
have much of a record on water issues in the 1990s, Mr. Speaker. Either they
will do the right thing right now, and I do not know if the Member for Portage
feels this enthusiasm to get up and say it right now, I am sure if the member
from Portage was to say what he really wanted to say, not what some researcher
in the dark rooms of the Conservative caucus has typed up for him, which
probably is going to criticize the NDP government trying to wreck off the
conservation districts, I bet you the member of Portage is going to get up and
say, "Hallelujah. We have got movement on the conservation districts, and
it is thanks to the NDP," because, quite frankly, any reasonable and
objective Manitoban, that is exactly what they would be saying. I know the
Member for
* (16:40)
But, you know, seriously,
this is a good bill. This is a good movement, and I use that phrase because
conservation districts are a movement or a model for
We have got much accomplished, more to do, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.
Mr. David Faurschou (
On repeals, we were trying to figure out
what the minister is actually talking about on his commission, because it was
not just a few short months ago that he abolished The Water Commission Act here
in the
However, what the minister is bringing to the table today is another commission whose duties have water as a primary concern under The Conservation Districts Act, and, again, it is leaving it to the minister's prerogative as to who might or might not have the expertise or, shall we say, the enthusiasm for water or passion perhaps in my case for this topic. In any event, this act is placed before us to create and provide for the appointment of persons to the commission which will be responsible for the regulation, implementation of The Conservation Districts Act.
The members and the composition of the act I see now have been changed. It was formerly seven members. Now we are going to nine, and it is something that I have always looked to this minister as wanting to bring more persons on board, which is not a bad idea, but we see from this NDP government a bloating of boards and commissions through their last six years, and who knows how many hundreds upon hundreds of persons are now channelled into boards and commissions under the New Democratic Party's term in office.
But let us get right down to brass tacks. The minister opened the door pretty wide on a whole host of water issues that I feel compelled to address. The minister is, well, somewhat complimentary of the members on this side of the House and their initiative to create the conservation districts in the province of Manitoba with the mandate effectively to co-ordinate drainage issues where many municipalities were finding more than they could handle as independent municipalities, and brought together a co-ordinating body that would look to the drainage issues that were related to one specific watercourse, which was a very, very good plan. I want to compliment the former Filmon administration there for their participation and support.
That is where I want to
get to the point of support. Yes, we have seen an increase in the number of
conservation districts in the
During the public hearings in regard to the Water Protection Act, it was clear from the representation from members that have served on conservation district boards that this government has increased the number of districts but has woefully inadequately provided resources and funding for their operation. When the question was asked of the representative of the Whitemud Watershed Conservation District as to the level of support for the planning of the district and the water drainage projects that needed to be constructed, the Province virtually paid for the entire study. From the study was derived a working plan and, again, that was paid for virtually in its entirety by the Province.
Then, admittedly, persons that are located within the conservation district, and the taxes being paid to the municipalities, then the Province looked to the participating rural municipalities and towns that they would be the beneficiaries of improved drainage, that it was to their part a responsibility for the construction and capital cost. But then, again, it was not entirely borne by the local authorities. The Province was there in most cases at 50 percent and, in some cases, up to 75 percent of the actual capital cost for a particular project. I know that in the enthusiasm from the various departments, whether it be Rural Development or Natural Resources or Agriculture, the government was always there to help out the conservation districts. That, sadly, is not the case today. If you go to any conservation district committee meeting, you will hear the refrain that they are underfunded and have no money for any of the projects that they feel need to be carried through on.
* (16:50)
This past year there are areas within the Whitemud Conservation District that received in excess of 30 inches of rainfall in the growing season. Mr. Speaker, that is far and beyond any normal rainfall, and, I understand, by Environment Canada records, the second wettest growing season recorded by Environment Canada.
So, obviously, we were challenged as
producers and as municipalities and the Emergency Management Organization was
challenged as well. At one point in time, I understood, just around the
constituency of
Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize that although the minister heralds the accomplishments of the New Democratic Party as it pertains to the conservation districts in the province of Manitoba and almost doubling their number, the government has almost abandoned the conservation districts when it comes to funding because where the pie was split nine ways back in 1999, it is now split 17 ways because the budget, in my own calculations, has not even kept up with inflation. So they are really dealing with dollars that cannot even be compared to 1999 funding.
I think the minister should be challenged to represent his–I recognize that he is an individual that takes a great deal of pride in his responsibilities as Water Stewardship Minister. I know that he will carry forward with the enthusiasm and gusto, as he displayed in the House today as he participated in second reading of Bill 13, The Conservation Districts Amendment Act. I hope that he carries that into Executive Council and even further and beyond the Executive Council right into the Minister of Finance's (Mr. Selinger) office to encourage and, yes, convince the Finance Minister that the conservation districts need added resources because the work that they are responsible for is vitally needed.
Now, I know The Conservation Districts Amendment Act is before us, but the minister did make comment on other acts that I will say are still yet unresolved. In my own mind, The Water Protection Act, as I mentioned at the outset, I was not convinced that we needed to dispense with the commission and repeal that act because I felt that the water commission was an excellent body with the resources to carry out their responsibilities. Now the commission, as the act addresses here, again, without resource may be ineffective and not able to carry out the responsibilities that the minister has so well described and virtues extolled today in his address to this Assembly.
I want to ask the minister, although he
cannot reply, but I hope that, at the time of his address when we do get to
public hearings on this bill, he is able to recognize that conservation
districts, while initially charged with the responsibility for improving
drainage, we have to be concerned also with drought. The Whitemud Conservation
District has worked recently in co-operation with a number of irrigators to use
the drainage ditches that have been constructed for spring run-off in and
during the summer growing period to actually provide flow of water to ponds for
irrigation purposes. Although this was discussed at length as not really, truly
being within the mandate of the conservation districts, it was recognized as
important to stakeholders and so I want to credit the Whitemud Watershed
Conservation District for once again showing its leadership and providing for
the recharge of Rat Creek and, ultimately, off-stream storage for irrigation
purposes, so that is greatly appreciated by persons growing potatoes and the
need for irrigation, as prescribed in their contract with McCain's and Simplot
processing plants located in
Now, Mr. Speaker, having said that, I want
to emphasize that this government is spending over a million dollars a year in
the Department of Conservation strictly to monitor and to provide to other
departments of government guidance in the area of climate change. Climate change
is recognized by this government as an important issue, an important issue.
Over the weekend, the
Mr. Speaker, it was recommended that the
Red River Floodway needed to be enhanced, to have a greater capacity. But what
the failing of this government was that they did not incorporate this into the
engineering study that was commissioned, as to whether or not the dam at Ste.
Agathe and/or the redevelopment of the Red River Floodway were the only two
options that the government allowed to be studied. Is that something that is
very wise? I mean, I have asked that question of an elementary class. An
elementary class came back and said, "Why would you limit yourself to just
a very small area. Does not rain fall in other areas? Are there not other river
systems, creeks, dry ravines that contribute to the
Yet this government, with all its
expertise and, certainly, over on the opposite benches there are school
teachers, well-educated people, why, then, would they limit themselves to look
only at the Red River Floodway and/or the Ste. Agathe dam? Why would they not
consider a dam to hold back waters, potentially, on the Boyne or on the
Mr. Speaker: Order. I just want to remind all honourable members about using exhibits when they are making their speeches. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member will have 10 minutes.
The hour being 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Wednesday).