LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday,
June 13, 2006
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Removal
of Agriculture Positions
from
Minnedosa
Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for the petition:
Nine positions with the Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives Crown Lands Branch are being moved out of Minnedosa.
Removal of these positions will severely impact the local economy.
Removal of these positions will be detrimental to revitalizing this rural agriculture community.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the provincial government to consider stopping the removal of these positions from our community, and to consider utilizing current technology in order to maintain these positions in their existing location.
This petition signed by Lisa Malugz, Clark McNabb, Lynn Moffat and many, many others.
Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.
Grandparents' Access to
Grandchildren
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for the petition:
It is important to recognize and respect the special relationship that exists between grandparents and grandchildren.
Maintaining an existing, healthy relationship between a grandparent and a grandchild is in the best interest of the child. Grandparents play a critical role in the social and emotional development of their grandchildren. This relationship is vital to promote the intergenerational exchange of culture and heritage, fostering a well-rounded self-identity for the child.
In the event of divorce, death of a parent or other life-changing incident, a relationship can be severed without consent of the grandparent or grandchildren. It should be a priority of the provincial government to provide grandparents with the means to obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren.
We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows:
To urge the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Ms. Melnick) and the Premier (Mr. Doer) to consider amending legislation to improve the process by which grandparents can obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren.
Signed by Mindie Quesnel, Jen Sparrow, Joan Betteridge and many others.
Removal of Agriculture
Positions
from
Minnedosa
Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition.
These are the reasons for the petition:
Nine positions with the Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives Crown Lands Branch are being moved out of Minnedosa.
Removal of these positions will severely impact the local economy.
Removal of these positions will be detrimental to the revitalization of this rural agriculture community.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the provincial government to consider stopping the removal of these positions from our community, and to consider utilizing current technology in order to maintain these positions in their existing location.
This petition is signed by Wayne Hopkins, Tom Ritchie, Pam Collen and many, many others.
Mr. David Faurschou (
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave?
Some Honourable Members: Leave.
Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted.
Grandparents' Access to
Grandchildren
Mr. Faurschou: Mr. Speaker, the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition:
It is important to recognize and respect the special relationship that exists between grandparents and grandchildren.
Maintaining an existing, healthy relationship between a grandparent and a grandchild is in the best interest of the child. Grandparents play a critical role in the social and emotional development of their grandchildren. This relationship is vital to promote the intergenerational exchange of culture and heritage, fostering a well-rounded self-identity for the child.
In the event of divorce, death of a parent or other life-changing incident, a relationship can be severed without consent of the grandparent or grandchildren. It should be a priority of the provincial government to provide grandparents with the means to obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren.
We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows:
To urge the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Ms. Melnick) and the Premier (Mr. Doer) to consider amending legislation to improve the process by which grandparents can obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren.
Signed by Arnie Procyshyn, Jessie Procyshyn, Maureen Bennet and many, many others.
* (13:35)
OlyWest Hog Processing
Plant
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
The background for this petition is as follows:
The
Concerns arising from the hog factory include noxious odours, traffic and road impact, water supply, waste water treatment, decline in property values, cost to taxpayers and proximity to the city's clean drinking water aqueduct.
Many Manitobans believe this decision represents poor judgment on behalf of the provincial government.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To request the provincial government to immediately cancel its plans to support the construction of the OlyWest hog plant and rendering factory near any urban residential area.
Signed by Lindsay Turner, A. Ceru, and K. McIntosh.
Crocus Investment Fund
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
The background to this petition is as follows:
The government needs to uncover the whole truth as to what ultimately led to over 33,000 Crocus shareholders to lose tens of millions of dollars.
The provincial auditor's report, the Manitoba Securities Commission's investigation, the RCMP investigation and the involvement of our courts, collectively, will not answer the questions that must be answered in regard to the Crocus Fund fiasco.
Manitobans need to know why the government ignored the many warnings that could have saved the Crocus Investment Fund.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the Premier (Mr. Doer) and his NDP government to co-operate in uncovering the truth in why the government did not act on what it knew and to consider calling a public inquiry on the Crocus Fund fiasco.
That is signed, Mr. Speaker, by R. Lecomte, Gerald Lecomte, Gina Lecomte and many, many other fine Manitobans.
Ms. Marilyn Brick (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development.
Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development presents the following as its Fourth Report.
Some Honourable Members: Dispense.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense.
Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic
Development presents the following as its Fourth Report.
Meetings:
Your
committee met on the following occasions:
Thursday, June 8, 2006, at 8:30 a.m.
Thursday, June 8, 2006, at 12 p.m.
Monday, June 12, 2006, at 9 a.m.
All meetings were held in Room 255 of the
Matters under Consideration:
Bill 25 – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act
(Payday Loans)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du consommateur (prêts de
dépannage)
Bill 29 –
The Degree Granting Act/Loi sur l'attribution de grades
Bill 32 – The Real Property Amendment Act/Loi
modifiant la Loi sur les biens reels
Bill 33 – The Northern Affairs Act/Loi sur les
affaires du Nord
Bill 34 –
The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les
divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes
répréhensibles)
Bill 41
– The Pharmaceutical Act/Loi sur les pharmacies
Committee Membership:
Committee membership for the meeting on June 8, 2006,
at 8:30 a.m.:
Ms. Brick (Chairperson)
Mr. Caldwell
Mr. Derkach
Mr. Goertzen
Mr. Hawranik
Hon. Mr. Lathlin
Mr. Martindale
(Vice-Chairperson)
Hon. Ms. McGifford
Mr. Reimer
Hon. Mr. Rondeau
Hon. Mr. Selinger
Committee membership for the meeting on June 8, 2006,
at 12 p.m.:
Ms. Brick (Chairperson)
Mr. Derkach
Mr. Dewar
Mr. Goertzen
Mr. Hawranik
Ms. Irvin-Ross
Hon. Mr. Lathlin
Mr. Martindale
(Vice-Chairperson)
Hon. Ms. McGifford
Mr. Reimer
Hon. Mr. Selinger
Committee membership for the meeting on June 12, 2006,
at 9 a.m.:
Ms. Brick (Chairperson)
Mr. Cummings
Mr. Goertzen
Mr. Hawranik
Ms. Korzeniowski
Hon. Mr. Lathlin
Mr. Martindale
(Vice-Chairperson)
Hon. Ms. McGifford
Hon. Mr. Sale
Mr. Schuler
Hon. Mr. Selinger
Substitutions received during committee proceedings
for the meeting on June 12, 2006, at 9 a.m.:
Mr. Dewar for Ms. Korzeniowski
Mr. Jennissen for Hon. Mr.
Lathlin
Mr. Altemeyer for Hon. Mr.
Selinger
Mr. Aglugub for Hon. Ms.
McGifford
Public
Presentations:
Your
committee heard five presentations on Bill 25 – The Consumer Protection
Amendment Act (Payday Loans)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du
consommateur (prêts de dépannage), from the following individuals and
organizations:
Michael Thompson, President and CEO, Canadian Payday Loan
Association
Gloria
Catharine Johannson,
Private Citizen
Mary Lou Bourgeois, Private
Citizen
David Love, Private Citizen
Your
committee heard one presentation on Bill 29
– The Degree Granting Act/Loi sur l'attribution de grades, from the
following individual:
Catharine
Johannson, Private Citizen
Your committee heard two presentations on Bill 32 –
The Real Property Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les biens réels, from
the following organizations:
Louis Harper,
Carl Braun,
Your
committee heard one presentation on Bill 34
– The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les
divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes
répréhensibles), from the following individuals and organizations:
Martin Boroditsky, Private Citizen
Your
committee heard four presentations on Bill 41 – The Pharmaceutical Act/Loi sur
les pharmacies, from the following individuals and organizations:
Penny Murray,
Scott
Troy
Dr. Sheryl Zelenitsky,
Private Citizen
Written Submissions:
Your committee received one written submission on Bill
34 – The Public Interest Disclosure
(Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les divulgations faites dans l'intérêt
public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes répréhensibles), from the following
individual:
Paul Thomas, Private Citizen
Bills Considered and Reported:
Bill 25 – The Consumer Protection
Amendment Act (Payday Loans)/Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du
consommateur (prêts de dépannage)
Your
committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment:
THAT the proposed
subsection 164(13), as set out in Clause 3 of the Bill, be replaced with
the following:
Application of Public
Utilities Board Act
164(13) Part I of The Public Utilities Board Act applies, with necessary changes,
to the making of an order under this section as if the powers and duties of the
board under this section were assigned to the board under that Part, except for
the following provisions:
(a) section 33 (power of board on complaints);
(b) section 34 (power to appoint counsel) as it
relates to the fees and expenses of the person appointed;
(c) subsection 51(2) (time for service of order);
(d) section 52 (enforcement of order);
(e) section 56 (order as to costs) as it relates to
the costs of an intervener;
(f) section 57 (fees).
Bill 29 – The Degree Granting Act/Loi sur
l'attribution de grades
Your committee agreed to report this bill without
amendment.
Bill 32
– The Real Property Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la Loi sur les biens réels
Your
committee agreed to report this bill without amendment.
Bill 33 – The Northern Affairs Act/Loi sur les
affaires du Nord
Your committee agreed to report this
bill, with the following amendment:
THAT
Clauses 181(1) and (2) of the Bill be replaced with the following:
Land acquired becomes Crown land
181(1) Land in northern Manitoba held by the
government, including land acquired by the minister under section 180, is Crown
land within the meaning of The Crown
Lands Act and is vested in the Crown.
Dispositions: consultation and ministerial approval
181(2) Crown land in northern
Manitoba may be disposed of as provided for in The Crown Lands Act, if
(a) in the case of a disposition of Crown land located
in, or within eight kilometres of, a community, the minister has consulted the
council of the community and approved the disposition; or
(b) in any other case, the minister has approved the
disposition.
Bill 34 –
The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les
divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes
répréhensibles)
Your committee agreed to report this
bill, with the following amendment:
THAT Clause 30(3) be replaced with the following:
Ombudsman
may investigate
30(3) Upon
receiving information under this section, the ombudsman may investigate
wrongdoing. In that event, Part 3
applies, other than subsection 21(3) (protection from reprisal).
Bill 41 – The Pharmaceutical Act/Loi sur les
pharmacies
Your committee agreed to report this
bill, with the following amendment:
THAT the definition
"practitioner" in the English version of Clause 1(1) of the Bill be
amended by striking out "and" at the end of clause (a) and
substituting "or".
Ms. Brick: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the following reports: The Civil Service Superannuation Board 2005 Annual Report; the Crown Corporations Council Annual Report of 2005 and a Report to the Legislature Pursuant to section 63(4) of The Financial Administration Act Relating to Supplementary Loan and Guarantee Authority for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006.
Introduction of Guests
Mr.
Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to
draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have
with us from John Brebeuf School 57 Grades 5 and 6 students under the direction
of Ms. Jennifer Waroway. This school is located in the constituency of the
honourable Member for
Also in the public gallery we have from the University of Manitoba Language Training Centre 33 English as a Second Language students under the direction of Ms. Loreena Thiessen. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for St. Norbert (Ms. Brick).
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.
* (13:40)
Government Response
Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): At the same time as we see this government embarking on a program that will involve record spending of taxpayers' dollars on propaganda, we have new information on the government breaking new records for clamping down on real information requested by Manitobans.
Yesterday, the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism (Mr. Robinson) released the Annual Report of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act containing the statistics on how this government has responded to requests for information from the public. Manitobans desperately trying to cut through the empty rhetoric from this government have increased their requests to almost record levels, 1,316. The response from this government has been to provide less information, Mr. Speaker. In fact, the number of FIPPA requests granted or partly granted is down 11 percent from 2004, and the number of denials is up 5 percent.
Why is the Premier refusing to give Manitobans real information? Why is the Premier embarking on multi-million dollar propaganda campaigns at the same time as he is clamping down on access to real information for Manitobans?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.
Speaker, one of our first acts in government was to extend the freedom of
information to health authorities, the educational authorities, the issue of
municipalities including the City of
Mr. Speaker, I still have FIPPA requests dealing with people in the hallways and waiting lists for cardiac patients and waiting lists for cancer patients. When the member opposite was the chief of staff for the former Premier, all the requests went to him and the answer was no, no, no. We are much more open in our government.
Mr. McFadyen: Once again, today the Premier's answers are absolutely dead wrong. He does not have his facts straight. He does not know what he is talking about when he makes reference to things that happened in the past. It is fine, Mr. Speaker, for the Premier to talk about extending the application of the legislation to other governments.
What we are talking about today is the application of this legislation to his government. The stats related to the response of his government for requests for information is that more requests are being turned down today than at any time in recent history. That is the record of his government, never mind what he is doing to expand the legislation to other governments. It is no wonder, given the record of this government, that Manitobans were in the dark about issues such as floodway spending.
In 2005, 15 out of 44 requests, 34 percent of requests for information sent to the Department of Water Stewardship, which is overseeing the floodway fiasco, had to be appealed to the Ombudsman.
Mr. Speaker, when is the government going to be accountable to Manitobans? When is it going to stop its taxpayer-funded ad campaigns? When are they going to provide real information to Manitobans so that we know, so Manitobans can know that when they give their hard-earned tax dollars to this government they are not being misused and misspent?
Mr. Doer: Okay, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite was the chief of staff on June 28, 1999. He was the chief of staff of Premier Filmon. We know that all the matters went to him as chief of staff. He had full control of the information.
This is the request in opposition: Please be advised that access to specific information concerning the number of people on surgical waiting lists cannot be granted as this information does not exist in the Department of Health. Well, I can tell you, it exists. In fact, the member opposite gets about 80 percent of her questions from information we give under FIPPA, under our government.
Mr. McFadyen: The fact is, Mr. Speaker, if the Premier wants to talk about history, maybe he will recall that it was his government that passed the legislation. It sat on the books, it was not proclaimed. It was not proclaimed under the Pawley/Doer administration, and it took our government, it took a Progressive Conservative government to proclaim it. It was our government that brought this legislation into force, and it is his government that has clamped down on requests for information.
The stats do not lie. We have record numbers of denials under his government. So he can talk all he likes about history. When you consider the record of his government, Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder that Manitobans are frustrated. It is no wonder that Manitobans are trying to learn more about the Crocus scandal, the 33,000 Manitobans who lost more than $60 million who cannot get information about how their hard-earned retirement dollars were lost under this Premier's watch. They cannot get information because 27 percent of the requests that went to his Department of Industry, Economic Development and tourism had to be appealed because the department refused to provide the information. The number of appeals is up. The amount of information is down. The amount of propaganda is up.
Why will the Premier not come clean? Why will he not give Manitobans access to good information about what is going on under his watch?
* (13:45)
Mr. Doer: Of course, there are issues dealing with commercial relationships under Crocus and members opposite will know that we gave the Auditor General the power to follow the money. Maybe we would have had the losses that took place under the former government: Isobord, Westsun, Winnport of some $40 million. Maybe we would have had much greater access if we had legislation that we had put in place in 2001.
I would point out further to the great record of the member opposite, when he talked about their great record, the number of people on surgical waiting lists cannot be granted. The second point was access to specific information concerning the number of people on diagnostic waiting lists was denied under the Freedom of Information Act. We have made all of that information available to the members opposite. In fact, it forms the majority of their questions.
We have been evaluated by the Canadian
Association of Journalists as second best in
We have never had a situation, I can
remember four occasions where the Conservatives were overruled by the Ombudsman
and a citizen had to go to the court, including information where the VLT
revenues came from each individual community. No surgical information, no
diagnostic information, that is what he did when he was in charge of the
Premier's Office. We are open, not perfect, but we are open for the people of
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Ad Campaign
Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on a new question. We are aware, as are Manitobans, of the phoney hallway medicine numbers that they put out. They can call themselves an open, accountable government with their phoney numbers all they like, but Manitobans know better.
Again, on the theme of spin over substance, on June 5 in this House I asked the Premier about his plan to spend millions of dollars in taxpayers' money on a branding strategy. He indicated in response to that question that the private sector did not want government to run this branding strategy, that it was a private sector run branding image campaign.
This week, after this million dollar re-election campaign is launched, I want to point out that there is a conference that has been organized by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association. Central to their discussion next week, Mr. Speaker, is a discussion of the Premier's image project. Who did the association ask to speak to them about the Premier's image project? Was it a private sector company? Was it a business leader? No, it was not. It was none other than Donne Flanagan, the Premier's spin doctor, whose background as chief spinner for the NDP is well known. So the conference next week features Donne Flanagan, the Premier's chief spinner, to walk the delegates from A to Z through the Premier's image campaign which is about to be launched tomorrow.
So my question to the Premier is: Why did the Premier indicate to the House last week that this was a private sector led initiative when we now know better? We now know that his chief spinner is running the show. Why has he not been up front with Manitobans? Why does he not come clean about the fact that this is a taxpayer-driven, politically-driven image campaign for the Premier of Manitoba?
* (13:50)
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Point No. 1, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite again proves his own inconsistency. He talks about the issue of hallway medicine numbers. The numbers were established when he was chief of staff for former Premier Filmon. We have it documented that the methodology for counting patients in the hallways, even though we could not find out how many there were because they would not release it, the methodology was established in January 1999, again, when he was running former Premier Filmon's office. I would like him to put the record straight and tell Manitobans that is when the system was set up.
Mr. McFadyen: Well, Mr. Speaker, the methodology was changed and the Premier, if he was not happy with it, has had seven years to change the methodology. If he was not happy with it, he has had seven years to do something about it. He has done nothing. He has done nothing but spin. He has done nothing but mislead Manitobans about what is going on in the hallways of our province.
My question to the Premier is, again, back on the topic of the image campaign, the multi-million dollar image campaign being launched tomorrow. The brochure for the association that Mr. Flanagan is speaking to next week says, and I quote: That Mr. Flanagan will take us through the image project from beginning to end.
I repeat my question: When will the Premier come clean? When will he admit that this is nothing more than a taxpayer-funded re-election campaign?
Mr. Doer: Well, thank you very much. We finally have confirmation that the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba, with the direction of the former chief of staff, changed the methodology on counting patients in the hallway in January 1999. Thank you for admitting that because that is what we have been saying all along to Manitobans.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I do not believe
that David Angus, Ash Modha, Mariette Mulaire and Bob Silver would do anything
except support the ideas that have been coming forward from the business
community for years that we need to do a better job of promoting
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr.
Doer: The four individuals are absolutely leading
the design, the work, the efforts, the consultations. There is staff back-up,
obviously, for their role. When they make decisions, you need somebody to carry
them through but the decisions are being made by the private sector, the four
individuals. Some of those individuals, I daresay, will not be part of any
re-election campaign for any political party. They just care about
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, it is noted that the Premier, in response to questions, has refused to indicate how much money going into this campaign is coming from taxpayers and ratepayers who have no choice in the matter and how much is coming from the private sector. It is more than interesting that the Premier will not disclose that number.
It is well and good to have that involvement, and we do not have any issue with the individuals who are involved. They are fantastic Manitobans, we respect them. We respect what they are doing for our province, but the fact is that the money, the co-ordination and the drive behind this initiative is coming out of this government, and the fact is that Manitoba taxpayers are on the hook for the campaign aimed at paving the way for an election campaign in Manitoba.
Mr. Speaker, we know we have concerns, and those concerns have been amplified time and again when we see political staff put in charge of public advertising campaigns. We see a member of the Premier's political staff moved into the bureaucracy to co-ordinate government advertising. We know that the Gomery report indicated the dangers of mixing politics with government advertising.
Why has the Premier not heeded the warnings of Justice Gomery? Why has he put political staff into the bureaucracy and put them in charge of public advertising?
* (13:55)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, all our advertising goes through Cindy Stevens. We have not, for example, given the tourism ad campaign to one Barb Biggar. We have been very, very careful on, in fact, even having the tourism advertising completely removed from government, which even goes farther than Justice Gomery.
Of course, members opposite cherry pick. When Justice Gomery says that a minister should not interfere with the board of director's right to deal with the CEO on Workers Compensation, they reject Gomery's recommendation, so he just cherry picks the recommendations.
I think he is insulting the four or five members of the private sector. In my view, Mr. Speaker, these individuals are leaders. They are leaders in the business community. They have been leaders, they are used to leading and they are leading this debate. Yes, they have people to support the implementation of their decisions. They are going to be making recommendations to the public tomorrow, I understand. I certainly do not have all of the details and nor should I. They have also been working with members of the private sector to what they are going to provide in terms of support for their ideas.
I think you insult leaders in our community by saying that somebody who is following through on some of their ideas is leading them. They are the leaders and they are giving advice to all Manitobans. I want to thank them for the hundreds of hours that they are volunteering because they believe in this province.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Construction
Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): On a new question, Mr. Speaker. We certainly recognize the great contributions those Manitobans make. I wonder why the Premier will not just come clean, clear things up and disclose publicly who is paying for the campaign. How much money is going in from taxpayers, how much from ratepayers to Crown corporations, and how much is coming in from other sources? Until such time as he clears that up, we have every right to be concerned about the involvement of his political staff in this campaign of spin over substance.
On the topic of spin over substance, Mr.
Speaker, we see reported in the Brandon
Sun that the provincial government has now announced that it does not
expect preliminary work on the
Some weeks ago the Premier spoke to the
Brandon Chamber of Commerce, this was in May, that the bridge would be widened
once it was approved by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Oh, yes, the
Premier put on quite a show in
Mr. Speaker, we now learn that they have not even submitted the designs and the environmental assessments to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. In the Premier's trademark shift-the-blame game, he is already blaming the federal government for not responding to a request that his government has not even submitted to them.
So why is the Premier blaming the federal government for his government's own incompetence?
* (14:00)
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): We
have been working on the design of the bridge since the request came in from
the mayor. That work will be done in the next week or so. It deals with two
facets; one is the engineering work required and secondly, it deals with flood
protection for the city of
We will be putting out a request for contracts within four weeks, Mr. Speaker. If the requests from contracts can be issued simultaneous to the report, we think the reports we are doing for the bridge will be helpful to the federal government. We hope the environmental assessment process is timely. I would point out–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: –the federal government has the option of having a sign-off based on our work which we have done. We think that shortens the time process. I do not want to prejudge what the federal government is going to do.
Actually, we have the money in the budget.
We have the design work that has gone on all over the last 12 months. We have
second design work going on of flood protection in the city of
The only caution I would make is all of us have to be careful because we cannot presume what the federal government will do, but we hope the work that has gone on in the last year will be helpful to the federal government.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker,
the Premier has certainly changed his tune on this issue. Back in May, he was
blaming the federal government, trying to create the impression to the people
of
The spokesman for the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Mr. Chudobiak, said that he does not expect the environmental process to take very long because the bridge, and I quote: Would have a small impact on fish habitat. It is a bridge, not a culvert. This is from the federal department.
So given that it is not the federal
government who is to blame for the foot dragging on this issue, given that it
is his government, why is he spinning the people of
Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, I hope he is right. This will be a very good thing because we will be able to proceed a lot faster–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: Well, the Paul Edwards theory of we have the election locked up permeates through the whole arrogant caucus, I would point out. We will wait for the people to decide that, Mr. Speaker. I would advise the members opposite to do the same thing.
We said that the design work would be
completed. It is completed on time and it includes two components; one, the
engineering work for the bridge which is ready within 10 days to go, and
secondly, the banks on the
So if the member opposite asked both questions to the FO and got the same answer on both questions, he only seemed to answer one question about the bridge not being a culvert. I am glad he has both answers and that is good. We have the money in the budget. We are ready to go. We have two reports that will be released in the next 10 days.
I would point out, I need
no lectures from members opposite about building things in
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, the Premier says that the people of
We see under his government whistle-blowers being fired while incompetent ministers are being protected. We see other governments being blamed while his government dithers. We see spin is up while real information is down. Everything that should be down is up. Everything that should be up is down. When is the Premier going to stop spinning and when is he going to start leading?
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the only thing going down is the member opposite because, as his arrogance goes up, the support will go down for all members across the way. They have already sized up the curtains in the Premier's Office, but you know what? There are a lot of Manitobans who will have a say on that, and I know how wide they are.
Well, Mr. Speaker, the Member
for Brandon West (Mr. Smith), the minister responsible, increased his majority
in 2003. He increased his majority over the former mayor in 2003 because,
unlike the Tories who said no to the new hospital in
Mr. Speaker, we said also
yesterday that the roof was leaking, the money was gone, the operating costs
were gone, the Keystone Centre was being treated as a second-class facility
under the Tory government. The minister of Brandon West and Brandon East said
yes to a new facility within there. We have also said yes to a new ACC campus
on the Brandon Mental Health Centre. We have said that the enrolment in
Mr. Speaker: Order. The clock is ticking. We are trying to get as many questions and answers in as we can.
* (14:10)
Meeting Request
Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): This NDP government is ignoring all protests against their plan for
a $2-per-head tax on
I ask the Minister of Agriculture: Does she believe the First Minister should not meet with MCPA on this important issue?
Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, this is an important issue and one that we have discussed many times with the industry. I can tell the member that indeed a meeting has been set with the Premier and the Manitoba Cattle Producers.
But, Mr. Speaker, we are proceeding with
the implementation of the $2-levy because we think it is very important that we
take every step that we can to increase slaughter capacity in this province so
that we are not caught in the same situation again should the border close. I
believe in economic development in this province. The member opposite believes
in economic development in
Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, this minister goes on about the meetings. I am asking her when the meeting is going to be; in the next day, in the next week, in the next month? That is the real question.
Ms. Wowchuk: As I indicated to the member opposite, the Manitoba Cattle Producers have asked for a meeting with the Premier, and I can tell the member opposite that the meeting has been set. It will happen very shortly.
But, in the meantime, Mr. Speaker, we are going to proceed. We are putting in place the levy so that, indeed, we can have investments in slaughter capacity in this province and we can have economic activity in this province. It is very unique to have a levy and to have the Province match that levy as well. That shows our commitment that we want slaughter capacity increased in this province. I wish the member opposite would get on board and say that it is a good idea.
Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, clearly this minister does not have a date set or she would have said when it is going to be. Tell this House today when the meeting is going to be. Quit that rhetoric.
Ms. Wowchuk: Well, the member opposite would like to worry about specific dates and when those meetings are going to be held. Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member opposite that the date of the meeting has been communicated to the Manitoba Cattle Producers and the meeting will happen as will other meetings.
I want to tell the member opposite that we
are also moving forward with implementing the levy. We want to see applications
from many groups of people who are interested in increasing slaughter capacity
in this province. I wish the member opposite would get on board and recognize
how important it is that we increase slaughter capacity in this province.
Rather than speaking out against it, what he is really doing is supporting the
economic growth of
Public Inquiry
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, 31 children have died as a result of homicide since 2001, and the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick) has refused to answer questions, refused to answer letters and, indeed, is very secretive about her department. In fact, Family Services has the highest number of Freedom of Information requests in 2005 of any department; 177 requests. This is exactly why we need a public inquiry so the secrecy of this minister is exposed.
Why will the Minister of Family Services not ask the Premier to call a public inquiry into the delivery of child welfare in this province? What is she hiding?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to note that the members opposite called for a public inquiry dealing with the tragic circumstances of Phoenix Sinclair. We said we will have the two independent reports plus the case management review of the case.
We also stated that the Chief Medical Examiner would have a responsibility under the law to examine the circumstances. There are, of course, two alleged persons charged with murder in that tragic case. But, Mr. Speaker, I also stated at that time that we would be willing, and it would certainly make it very clear to have a public inquiry on that case. I have said that before.
Mrs. Taillieu: The Premier has recognized that there is a crisis in this province regarding children in care, 31 children have died either in care or released from care. Last week the Premier said they were not homicides. Obviously, he has not thought a lot about this, but today he is talking about calling a public inquiry.
Why do we not just do that now, Mr. Speaker? Why waste any time? Will he call it now, today?
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we did not want to talk about overall numbers during the tragedy of Phoenix Sinclair because I think any child who dies in care or has been in care in the last year is a tragedy.
We have the numbers from the last 10 years and the numbers of any child any year are not comforting to any member of this House, including us. So we have not got into the "numbers" comparison. We have been very careful about that, but this did not start with the change in government in 1988, nor did it start in terms of 1999. In fact, the overall numbers are down, but any one child who dies in care or in direct, or having had services is not good for any of us. So, therefore, none of us can succeed until there is no child who dies in care.
Review
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, in 2003 the NDP government introduced The Criminal Property Forfeiture Act. As is so often the case with this government, they made a grand announcement and said that it would make it a lot harder for gangs to shelter their funds and proceeds of crime in seemingly legitimate enterprises. Yet, we found out on Friday, last Friday, that there has been no application that the minister is aware of under this particular act. He said it was going to bring increased safety and yet there is no application.
Can he indicate whether or not this legislation is under review, because it is ineffective, Mr. Speaker.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce, and this reflects what I said when the legislation was introduced. I hope that there are no applications. I hope no one profits from their criminal notoriety and I hope it stays that way. One of the purposes of the legislation was to send a message that we do not want those who cause so much harm and suffering to others to actually profit then from that wrongdoing.
So I hope it stays that way. I hope the number of applications remains a big fat zero. That is the hope.
Mr. Goertzen: Well, in fact, what the minister said in Estimates is that he was disappointed. He was having his chief adviser on gangs review the legislation because he was disappointed by the application and he was hoping to bring forward changes. That is quite different than what the minister says today here in the House.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask him again. Is it being reviewed because it is ineffective legislation? They announced lots of spin. They announced lots of things that they say are going to be tough. He said it would help reduce crime. Today he says he hopes it is never going to be used. Which one is it?
Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, there is some misunderstanding about what is being reviewed by the special counsel on organized crime, and that is the organized crime legislation. The notoriety legislation is not directed only at criminal organizations.
I remind members opposite, Mr. Speaker,
that that piece of legislation was introduced in
Review Process
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
I ask the Premier: Will he promise to ensure that this letter reaches the external review of Child and Family Services? Will he instruct his Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick) to table this letter in the Legislature today?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, I will make sure, first of all, it is not our letter but I will inquire with the group that wrote it on the availability of it. That would be a courtesy. Secondly, we certainly, if they are willing, it certainly should be provided to the external reviews that are taking place.
The caseload numbers have gone down. But, Mr. Speaker, we know from people who say they are under pressure and we acknowledge that the caseload numbers have gone down when you look through the inquests of the past, but the social workers would say the caseloads are still too tough.
Part of what the external review committee is going to do is look at those numbers and those factors. Certainly I have no difficulty with them having all information, including that letter.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, when caseload workers have 35 or 40 or more than 40 high-risk children to be following, this is not good enough. I hear repeatedly that honest, hardworking, responsible Child and Family Services workers are being threatened by the minister of child and family services and the people working for her that if they speak out, they risk losing their jobs.
I ask the Premier: Will he amend that immediately to assure the honest, responsible Child and Family Services workers that they should be coming forward publicly with their concerns so that the dramatic, drastic and appalling risks to children are being thrown to light and available to people to understand so they can be corrected?
* (14:20)
Mr. Doer: The caseload numbers, we have increased 113 positions or 26 percent. We had more money in the budget that was held up for a number of months in the Estimates by bell ringing, Mr. Speaker, by the member opposite.
The whistle-blower legislation would, as I
understand, cover all these agency concerns. But, Mr. Speaker, you know, the
social workers association, the
Is it the right number? I just want to say
to the public that the external agencies say to us that we have to put more
money in. I can assure you this government on this side is committed to kids and
will find a way to resource it for the benefit of our children in
Proclamation
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
My question to the Premier is: Will the Premier give a guarantee in writing that if we agree to pass the whistle-blower legislation today that he will proclaim it into law by the end of July? Is he prepared to give that guarantee to this Legislature?
If not, I do not know if we will have the opportunity to really pass this legislation. Surely to goodness, the Premier is prepared to give that guarantee by the end of July that the whistle-blower legislation would, in fact, be proclaimed by him and this government.
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, no individual in this House or no individual outside of this House should think that they have the opportunity to blackmail the government into making decisions. Today it might be this issue; tomorrow it might be where he sits; the next day it will be how many questions they get; then it will be on points of privilege; it will be on matters that did not even get resolved in the last election campaign. Governments have to govern for the people, and we are not going to negotiate with a guy that puts his word in invisible ink as he did in 2003.
Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.
Highway 16
Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): You know, Mr. Speaker, once in awhile and very seldomly, one experiences something that is almost unbelievable. I had that opportunity just this past weekend. Before I explain the experience, I want to tell the House that the highway I travel at least twice a week, Highway No. 16, is falling apart before our eyes and is becoming unsafe and deplorable in many areas.
But, Mr. Speaker, last weekend, as I watched traffic avoid potholes and weave around Highway 16, and I was travelling along this highway, I happened to see in one of the potholes in Highway 16 a duck enjoying itself in the pothole.
Highways in
Mr. Speaker, when the Premier (Mr. Doer)
spoke of that crane, that extinct bird that we had in this city of
Mr. Speaker, as I say, once in awhile we come across something that is unbelievable–
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mining in
Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, mining is an important industry in northern
However, no mine lasts forever. Mine closures can be devastating to communities. Therefore, it is important that various levels of government and the private sector work in concert to ensure minimal disruption to families and to communities when mines shut down. As in the past, our government is committed to helping those communities now and in the future.
Right now mining is thriving in
Since 1999, the MEAP has
fostered $74.9 million in reported exploration expenditures with $12.2 million
in assistance. It is estimated that for every $1 million paid through MEAP,
$6.2 million is generated in exploration expenditures, a return that has
increased 67 percent since 1999. Over the last 10 years, exploration expenditures
in
We celebrate the importance of mining in
an annual Mining Week. This year during Mining Week, various creative mining
and mineral-related activities were available for children at The Forks in
The city of
Charleswood Rotary Club
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I rise today to congratulate the Charleswood Rotary Club on the occasion of their winning the Mayor's Volunteer Service Award in the environment category.
In January 1995, the Winnipeg-Charleswood
Rotary Club undertook the Assiniboine Forest Project to help restore tall grass
habitat to the southern area of
Each summer the club conducts work parties to help extend the trail system, and under the watchful guidance of the city's naturalists, replant native species to areas cleared before the park was established. The club has organized more than $250,000 in donations and grants for the forest over the last 10 years, culminating in the very successful boardwalk project.
Last fall the Charleswood Rotary had a
Bridging the Gap project where they provided inner city youth with the opportunity
to visit the
Once again, we offer congratulations to
the Charleswood Rotary Club for helping preserve this natural forest in the
Charleswood area. We acknowledge the hard work and commitment of this service
club to the citizens of Charleswood,
* (14:30)
50th
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, June 2006 marks the 50th anniversary of
Born in
As the plane hurtled toward the earth, Mynarski sacrificed his opportunity to escape to come to the aid of a fellow airman trapped in the twisted fuselage. After a desperate effort, he was unable to free his comrade-in-arms. Fire burning about his body and through his parachute, Mynarski stood to attention and saluted his friend one last time before jumping from the blazing plane, and while Mynarski did not survive the burns he suffered, that airman lived to tell of his heroism in that hopeless moment.
The legacy left by Andrew Mynarski, V.C. is well served by the school that bears his name. It is a testament to his selfless commitment that his courage helped bequeath the school that continues to pride itself on striving for excellence, a quality amply displayed by Mr. Mynarski himself.
On their 50th anniversary, I ask all
members to join me in congratulating the school for having embodied the virtues
Mr. Mynarski showed in both life and in death. Congratulations to the organizing
committee for the 50th anniversary activities. May the many alumni attending
events on June 16 and 17 enjoy meeting former classmates and reminiscing about
their school days at
Crocus Investment Fund
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
The government now says it was high risk, but on June 16, 1997, the present Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) stood in this Chamber to say, Crocus is a good fund. He said specifically that his NDP party was proud of the labour-sponsored venture capital fund, and that the NDP had a part in creating and supporting the Crocus Investment Fund.
The present Minister of Health, in talking of the Crocus Investment Fund said, and I quote: That venture capital investment funds are essentially collective efforts on the part of the residents of a jurisdiction whether it is a town, a city or a province to mitigate the effects of large corporate decisions to remove investment from a community. The present Minister of Health made the point clearly that the Crocus Investment Fund was different from other venture capital funds. He very clearly gave the impression, consistent with much else that was said and done at the time, that investing in Crocus was like investing in the province. There was no mention there was high risk.
Mr. Speaker, Crocus investors were misled in the 1990s and at least until 2003, about the nature of the risks in investing in Crocus. Manitobans deserve answers about Crocus because as the Minister of Health said in 1997, it was a collective effort of the Province. The government must call a public inquiry into the Crocus Investment Fund. We Liberals will keep our pressure on the government until a public inquiry is called.
Mr. Denis Rocan (Carman): Mr.
Speaker, I take this opportunity to grieve this afternoon. By way of
background, the reason that I am grieving is that a few years back an
individual by the name of Teddy Bancroft and his lovely wife, Sandra, who had
actually retired to Treherne, moved out of the city of
Teddy and his wife, over several years in the coffee shop, would hear several stories about Chief Yellowquill and the Yellowquill Trail. Teddy and his wife got so taken up by Chief Yellowquill and the Yellowquill Trail that they sold their restaurant, and they started to investigate the true validity and the whereabouts of this particular trail.
After many years of consultations and inquiries and research, talking to several landowners and getting the pictures of this particular trail, he was convinced that they had actually discovered and found the whereabouts of this trail. So we set up a meeting with the Historical Society and Teddy with all his maps, and we sat down. Ted and Sandra tried to explain to them all of this information that they have found. But, unfortunately, the people from the Historical Society had decided that this was not the time nor the place to try and change some of the history books. So Ted and Sandra just went on their way. They had decided, well, that was the end of it.
Well, on several occasions I had the opportunity to meet with Ted. He kept telling me about all this history. So I said to Ted, why do you not do me a favour and just write it down on paper, and I will find an opportunity some time in the Legislature to put it on the official record. This is all that Ted wanted because he wanted to share the information that he has found.
The words that I am going to put on the
record now are from Ted and Sandra Bancroft, and it is titled The Yellowquill Trail.
The story all started when Sandra and I moved to Treherne to operate a restaurant. For about six months I heard many stories of the Yellowquill Trail. I then decided to phone the Historical Branch. They told me that this was not the Yellowquill Trail because it ran east and west and not north and south as was told to me. Many years later I still heard a lot of stories of these people and they all said that this was the Yellowquill Trail. I then decided that this was a historical trail as the settlers survived off this trail. So, on retirement, The Treherne Times knew I was going to do this and they ran an ad suggesting to people who knew of the trail to contact me. Well, I got many calls. I had people take me out, and they showed me approximately 20 miles of the trail that all connected together. Some of the trail was still existing and ruts were six feet deep. Some of the trail did not exist anymore, but it all went together like a glove. With this information, I decided to document the trail. The people who had introduced me to a certain part of the trail signed the map for me and also where the trail existed. I put stakes in the ground and measured between the stakes so that a hundred years from now, with this map and a metal detector, you could still find this trail.
I worked on the trail for approximately
two years, and Sandra was out on the trail with me holding a tape for me. I
documented the trail to the correction line, which was between 20 to 25 miles.
I had been shown where the trail went from there to
Before I started making the trail, I did
some research. I found out that Chief Yellowquill worked with the government on
the making of the following reserves: Long Plain,
George Punton, now deceased, who lived
just across the road from
* (14:40)
A person named Archie Carter lived beside
this trail. Mr. Carter was born in 1901, and these are some of the stories that
he told me. The Indians would come to his mother's house for her biscuits. They
would put up their tent near this house, his house, and they told Mr. Carter
that this trail went through
History of LaVerendrye.
Pierre LaVerendrye used this trail between 1738 and 1740, and he made three
trips. He built the fort at
I received a letter from Sanderson's of
Natives or settlers along the way offered
lodging for the men, a spot on the floor if you would, stable room and feed for
oxen and breakfast for the driver for 75 cents. The early settlers dreaded
those trips. In fact, one homesteader wrote that, of all the hardships he faced
and there were many, marketing the grain was his most worrisome because of the
extreme cold weather. To keep from freezing a driver would repeatedly run back
a few paces from his load and then return, only to repeat the process. By the
time
The CPR came to this area
in 1886, and a platform was then built. Grain was delivered in bags which were
weighed and emptied by hand into boxcars. They held 600 bushels. Because the
train only came to
Jean Davidson of Treherne told me a story
of when she was very young and lived near
When you got sick, an Indian–
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Rocan: Is there leave?
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave?
Some Honourable Members: Leave.
Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted.
Mr. Rocan: When you got sick, an Indian would walk into the bush and would bring out something for you to eat. The settlers liked the Indians and classed them as good, honest friends.
Another person who lived in that area as a settler for 12 years told me he had an agreement with the Indians. They could use his stove and sleep on the floor, but not use his food. When he sold out 12 years later, the only thing he had missing was a kitchen fork, and he believes he must have mistakenly thrown it out as the Indians were very honest and would not steal anything. He classed the Indians as very honest people.
This is as was dictated by Mr. and Mrs. Ted Bancroft, and I appreciate the opportunity to put that on the record on their behalf. But, in closing, I would like to take this opportunity to wish everybody a safe and enjoyable summer, and may God bless each and every one of you. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
(Continued)
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
House Business
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): I wonder if you could canvass the House regarding Bill 212, The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act, seeking leave of the House to ensure that this bill is reinstated in the Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature at the stage at which it was at the Fourth Session when that session becomes prorogued.
Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement? [Agreed]
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, as bills were reported from committee earlier this afternoon, I am seeking consent of the House to consider concurrence and third readings for these bills: Bill 25, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans); Bill 29, The Degree Granting Act; Bill 32, The Real Property Amendment Act; Bill 33, The Northern Affairs Act; Bill 34, The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act; and Bill 41, The Pharmaceutical Act.
Mr. Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to consider concurrence and third reading for these bills: Bills 25, 29, 32, 33, 34 and 41. Is there agreement?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: No. There is no agreement.
Point of Order
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader.
Mr. Goertzen: I simply want the record to indicate that the Progressive Conservative Party was willing to give consent–
Mr. Speaker: Order. It is either granted or it is not granted.
* * *
Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, alternatively then, would you then see if there is unanimous consent of the House to reinstate the following bills in the Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature: Bill 25, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans); Bill 28, The Manitoba Museum Amendment Act; Bill 29, The Degree Granting Act; Bill 32, The Real Property Amendment Act; Bill 33, The Northern Affairs Act; and finally, Bill 38, The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act (Fund for Housing Revitalization).
Mr. Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to receive the following bills in the Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature: Bill 25, 28, 29, 32, 33, 38? [Agreed]
Mr. Mackintosh: Just for the information of the House, Bills 34 and 41 continue under the sessional order and maintain their position as well and do not need leave of the House and as well, 39, small claims and 40, medical amendment.
Mr. Speaker, today is third reading day as discussed with other members, and so, therefore, would you please call the following bills: 12, 14, 20, 11, 34 and the rest in order as they appear.
I understand that, yes, there was not a consent to consider 34 today. So I withdraw that from the list, although I would love to have done that. So the rest in order, then, following Bill 11.
Mr. Speaker: Okay. We will deal with concurrence and third reading of Bills 12, 14, 20, 11, and then we will do the bills in order as they are listed.
Bill 12–The Highways and
Transportation Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 12, The Highways and Transportation Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion
presented.
* (14:50)
Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson):
We concur with the intent of the act on this side of the House to ensure that
the safety of our roads is a priority in the
We saw roads where fuel tanks fell off
trucks. We saw roads where bumpers fell off of vehicles. We saw roads where
recreational vehicles being towed by pickup trucks hit the ditch and caused
large accidents. We saw roads that were deteriorated to the point where tires
were blown and axles were broken off cars. It was just a little while ago, a
week or so ago, when I saw a car parked beside the road, a relatively new car
parked beside the road where the axle and wheel were lying beside the road.
Those are the unsafe conditions that we find
Well, I want to leave on the record, Mr. Speaker, before we leave this session that the Filmon government four-laned 75 highway from Winnipeg to the U.S. border, that it was the Filmon government that started four-laning No. 1 highway from Brandon to Saskatchewan. Over the last seven years nothing has been done except they are now surfacing a 13-kilometre stretch of that road. The rest has still yet to be built. We can go on and on and on with the highway projects, 217, 216, 201, 204, 332, 210, and I can go on and on at the highways that were built during the Filmon administration and the highways minister had the audacity to stand in this House and cite verse and poem. He said nothing had been achieved in highways during those 11 years, 11-and-some-odd years that the Filmon administration had governed.
Well, how wrong they can be and that is just a demonstration, Mr. Speaker, as to how wrong these ministers of this administration and the Premier of this administration can be, and he has been the leader that has led the misinformation that has been constantly present in this Chamber.
With regard to Bill 12, Mr. Speaker, I want to say that we think that there are certain things in this bill that should have been addressed and should have been addressed properly, such things as recognizing that communities in rural Manitoba especially do have needs from time to time to identify events such as fairs, stampedes, rodeos, all those kinds of things, community events, hockey events, baseball events, all those kinds of things should be allowed to put signs up along our roadways when tourists come or neighbours or friends come from out of province and travel and do not always know the exact route to be taken to the event, to allow it to put up those signs to identify those communities. That is what we would have liked to have seen.
That is what we would have put in the act, Mr. Speaker. We would have also liked to have seen an accommodation made, and we put before the committee six amendments to this bill. One of those amendments said that we believe that farmers play an important role in ensuring the safety of our highways. They mow the grass and the hay out of the ditches and the sides of the roads, and they rake it and they bale it. We ask simply that this minister recognize that as a contribution to the safety of our highways and allow those farmers to have those bales stay there so that they can dry to the extent that they can be hauled and stored safely.
The minister denied that. He denied allowing the farmers to participate in the maintenance of our roadways and our ditches. We have never seen that before in this province when there was a charitable offer made. We made amendments. We put forward an amendment that said, let us recognize when there are accidents, and little monuments are put up beside the road identifying those accidents scenes, that those little monuments be allowed to remain on the roadways in commemoration of those people that lost their lives, where the families went to the trouble to identify those areas, and the minister said no.
Mr. Harry Schellenberg, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
That is the problem with this administration. This administration clearly has no compassion for the involvement of the broader community in ensuring that our roadways will be well kept: No. 1, with such actions as helping mow the roads, helping make the hay, feed our cattle with what comes off those roads, to identify accident scenes, to identify unsafe areas by putting up little commemorative crosses and little monuments saying this is where our family members lost their lives on these roads.
We have no compassion for those community
organizations that spent huge amounts of voluntary time organizing community
events such as 4-H activities in rural Manitoba, such as baseball games to keep
our young people off the streets, such as hockey tournaments, such as sunflower
festivals, such as rodeos as will happen again this summer in Morris, Manitoba,
such as all kinds of fairs and events all across this province. Yet this
government and their minister are saying: We do not care about rural
I said clearly, I think clearly, this is a demonstration of an authoritarian kind of government under the NDP administration that we have seldom ever seen in this House before. Safety of roads? Yes, we are all in favour of safety, but when those little monuments in the ditches cause no vision problems, when those community identification signs cause no visionary problems, then why not let them be used to advertise the events that many of these volunteers in these communities have played large parts in to ensure that they are done well and done safely and therefore keep our young kids active in communities and teach them how to make things happen in our communities?
Those are the concerns we have with this bill, and that is why we are going to have some concerns about the passage of this bill.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Oh, the honourable Member for Arthur-Virden.
Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): It is my pleasure to put some words on the record in regard to Bill 12 as well, and I know that my colleague from Emerson has outlined very clearly the impact that this bill will have on rural Manitobans and Manitobans in general, Mr. Speaker.
No one is in favour of signs that would
obstruct any kind of traffic flow or any kind of visionary issue in regard to
* (15:00)
In my role as critic for Transportation, when this bill was brought in, I had the opportunity to send out a letter to all the municipalities in Manitoba, and got many replies back from those municipalities and towns indicating that there would be a concern with this bill in regard to some of the local events that the Member for Emerson has just talked about: sporting events, community special events and programs, fairs. It was even mentioned some of the powwows that would take place in some of our communities, Mr. Speaker, those of us that are privileged enough to have those opportunities.
I just want to give you one prime example of the lunacy that might take place if this bill was driven right to its tee, and I say that with respect to that word, but, in one of the communities in my constituency, they have a mascot for their community, and they have been asked to move it because it is six feet inside the boundary of where it would be. There is no road on the other side of it, Mr. Speaker. There is no visionary concern with this. In fact, the only thing at the level of a car's headlights, of a passenger's head in this vehicle would be a four-inch post that the monument sits on. It is 20 feet off the ground, and so it would block no one's vision.
Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to point out that that is one of the reasons why there is some concern with this bill. We need to make sure that we do not have different rules in different areas of the province: those in the North versus here in the south; cities and urban areas versus our communities.
But, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say while we are on the issues of traffic that I live in the constituency where No. 1 highway is, and this government for this whole session has gone on and on and on about the work that will be done on No. 1 highway and the twinning of No. 1.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that
there were 11 kilometres from Hargrave corner to just east of
Last fall, Mr. Speaker, those who are in
charge of the construction contracts, the contractors, did their very best that
they could in making sure that they shaped the base of that new highway all the
way to the Saskatchewan border, about another 23 kilometres from where this
paving will end right now. I just have to inform the House today that there is
no work going on on that road as we speak in this House today. There has been
no work all spring on that road, the twinning from
I want it on the record that the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) in March of '05 indicated that road would be twinned in '06, and this spring on CJOB the Premier (Mr. Doer) himself indicated, no, it will be done in '07.
So, Mr. Speaker, that is the shambles that
this government has in regard to their projects in highways in
Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 12, The Highways and Transportation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la voirie et le transport.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Voice Vote
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. I declare the motion carried.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: On division. The motion will carry on division.
Bill 14–The Water Rights
Amendment Act
Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Northern and Aboriginal Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 14, The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les droits d'utilisation de l'eau, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cliff Cullen (
This is clearly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as we have seen in other legislation the government has brought forward, another example of the heavy hand of government coming forward whereby they are implementing heavy-handed legislation on Manitobans.
Quite clearly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the
presenters that came forward on this particular bill also indicated the very
heavy-handed nature of the bill versus what some of the federal legislation
coming forward is. Clearly, it is the stick approach in
Now what this bill does, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it gives the government the authority to implement water police, if you will, and it gives the government the authority to implement further fines on people in regard to water issues. So we think that this really, this entire legislation and in fact The Water Rights bill itself, legislation, should be addressed.
We feel that, under the existing legislation, The Water Rights Act, as it exists right now, the minister does have authority to address the issues that he may view, or his department may view, as being illegal. So our view is, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that this particular piece of legislation is not necessary, and we had encouraged the minister to withdraw the legislation altogether. We feel that this is just another tax grab that the government is after, and we certainly have reservations about passing this act.
We know this government talks about consulting with Manitobans before they bring in either legislation or regulations under different acts but, quite frankly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that is far from the truth. And just another associated piece of legislation was passed June–The Water Protection Act was passed; then the government very shortly after that brought in the water quality management zone regulations. Quite clearly, there is a very bad disconnect between what the Department of Water Stewardship is trying to impose on Manitobans and what in fact Manitobans really want.
So we feel there is indeed a very bad lack of direction or no direction at all within the Department of Water Stewardship and, Mr. Deputy Speaker, a very bad disconnect between the departments of Agriculture and Conservation, which obviously have various departments that should be looking at agriculture and, in fact, the environmental safety throughout Manitoba.
* (15:10)
So this, in our view, is just another example of that disconnect between the departments and the disconnect between legislation the government is bringing forward, and what Manitobans are really looking forward to, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
So, quite frankly, our view is, as many Manitobans have come to the government and said there should be some incentive packages there for Manitobans to complement water issues and water quality issues in Manitoba, as opposed to the government coming in with a heavy-handed approach–so that is why we, as the Progressive Conservative Party in opposition, have reservations about Bill 14 going forward.
With those few words, I know there is a lot of legislation to deal with today, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but I wanted to tell our concerns to Bill 14. Thank you very much.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Deputy Speaker: We are on debate on Bill 14.
Mr. Lamoureux: I just wanted to put just a few words on the record in regard to Bill 14. I think there are some concerns that we have in regard to it, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Whether it was through committee or second reading, we had the opportunity to put a number of things on the record. It is a bill in which I do not believe that we can support at this time. Thank you.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is the concurrence and third reading of Bill 14, The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les droits d'utilisation de l'eau.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Voice Vote
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Those in favour of the motion, say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Those opposed to the motion, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Yeas have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: On division. The motion is carried on division.
Bill 20–The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm
Lands Ownership Amendment Act
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Concurrence and third reading on Bill 20, The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection des exploitations agricoles familiales et la Loi sur la propriété agricole.
Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 20, The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection des exploitations agricoles familiales et la Loi sur la propriété agricole, reported from the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Food, be concurred in and now be read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Ralph Eichler (
I know with respect to Bill 20, there are some changes in there that are mainly housekeeping, but we would like to see that bill move forward and see that the minister and the government make the changes as necessary. So thank you for that, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 20, The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection des exploitations agricoles familiales et la Loi sur la propriété agricole.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Voice Vote
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Yeas have it.
The Chair declares the motion carried.
Bill 11–The Winter Heating Cost Control Act
Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act; Loi sur la limitation des frais de chauffage en hiver, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Quite frankly, this bill should be renamed the "raid Manitoba Hydro once again legislation," Mr. Deputy Speaker, just like this government did in 2002 when they brought in a piece of legislation that raided $203 million out of Manitoba Hydro coffers. As a result, Manitoba Hydro had to borrow money because they did not have cash on hand. It ended up costing Manitoba Hydro ratepayers double the amount of what they took from Manitoba Hydro.
Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we see
legislation one more time. They did not learn their lesson back in 2002 when
they raided Manitoba Hydro. They had the worst drought in the history of the
Mr. Deputy Speaker, we do know at the time, after the drought, the then-Minister responsible for Hydro indicated that they were not likely to take any more money out of Manitoba Hydro coffers. That was back in August of 2004, right after the drought, and I want to quote and put on the record what the Minister of Hydro said at the time. He said: It is unlikely to the point of absurdity that we would do such a thing in the face of the current situation. We know we had a huge problem last year. We know we have rate increases.
He went on to say it would be pretty imprudent of us in the short run to say, wow, we have a huge increase, let us take it. That would be silly in terms of policy and, obviously, fly in the face of the intention of the regulator.
* (15:20)
Mr. Deputy Speaker, this was after the regulator had to make a decision to increase hydro rates by 7.25 percent as a direct result of their raid. But did they learn their lesson? No, they have another bill in front of this Legislature today which is looking at once again raiding Manitoba Hydro, having Cabinet determine what amount of Hydro export revenues will be put into a slush fund for this government to do as it chooses.
Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker,
Mr. Deputy Speaker, they went on to say that drought is not the single worst risk factor. We will not even get into the issue of the east side or the west side of Lake Winnipeg to build a new transmission line, but they did caution about the catastrophic loss of infrastructure that could even be worse than a drought and have a worse impact on the bottom line of the corporation. They did state under oath that it could be argued that there should be no sharing of export revenue until target equity levels are obtained. This was just in May, and what does the government do in June, just a couple of short weeks later? They ram this bill through the legislation without consultation from Manitoba Hydro officials, and this is ill thought out.
As a result of this legislation and their ability to skim dollars off the top of Manitoba Hydro export revenues, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we are going to see hydro rate increases over and above what Hydro believes they need just to make ends meet. So time will tell, and we know that this legislation is only going to serve to penalize Manitoba Hydro ratepayers even more than this government has done. It is time they kept their hands out of the cookie jar. This is a government that has never seen a pot of money that they could keep their hands off. When you look at all of our Crown corporations, we see time and time again that this is a government, because of its spending addiction, that has to look for every source of income, and they have now politically interfered with Manitoba Hydro once again.
We cannot, and we will not, support this
bill, and we will ensure that ratepayers of
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act; Loi sur la limitation des frais de chauffage en hiver.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Voice Vote
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Yeas have it.
Formal Vote
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Yeas and Nays being called, call in the members.
The question before the House is the concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act; Loi sur la limitation des frais de chauffage en hiver, that this Bill 11 be now concurred in on third reading and passed.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Aglugub, Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Bjornson, Brick, Caldwell, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Irvin-Ross, Jennissen, Jha, Korzeniowski, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McGifford, Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Reid, Rondeau, Sale, Schellenberg, Selinger, Smith, Struthers, Swan, Wowchuk.
Cullen, Cummings, Derkach, Driedger, Dyck, Eichler,
Faurschou, Gerrard, Goertzen, Hawranik, Lamoureux, Maguire, McFadyen, Mitchelson,
Penner, Rocan, Rowat, Schuler, Stefanson, Taillieu.
Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 32, Nays 20.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Chair declares the motion carried.
* * *
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill 27, and then continue with the rest in the order that they appear under third reading and passing.
* (16:00)
Bill 27–The Tobacco Damages and
Health Care Costs Recovery Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale), that Bill 27, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
Mr. Speaker, I have been now in this Legislative Chamber for some six and a half years, and I would begin with a general observation. This session, we have seen an NDP government which is poorly–
Mr. Speaker: Order. I would ask the member up in the press gallery to turn his light off.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the NDP government this session has been poorly organized, has produced the sloppiest series of bills that I have ever seen, and, on the Liberal side, we have provided some 40 or more report stage amendments. We have commented at great length on many of the bills because we see that they are flawed and need major improvements. These deficiencies we have pointed out again and again to the government. They have been quite arrogant and have not listened in spite of some very well thought through and carefully put together suggestions.
You might say that we have sent a ringing message to the NDP that they have no more free ride, that this is a time when we need a lot more accountability. It was very much apparent in this session, and the MLA for Inkster and I are going to do everything we can, not only in this session, but in future sessions to make sure that there is much better accountability than there has been.
In numerous bills that the government has put forward, they have added amendments to provide specific protection to their ministers and individuals who are carrying out their ministers' orders from any neglect or any action that has been done, except where there is bad faith.
Mr. Speaker, this is far too far in removing accountability and democracy from the government of this province. Democracy needs accountability. As my friend said, when he looked at some of these clauses, this government thinks it is God, that it can make no mistake. We know better. We know that it is very important to protect individual citizens and Manitobans from the abuses of government, and we need to make sure that there is proper accountability.
Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sure the honourable member will tie that in to Bill 27, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs–
Order. I was just given some additional information that I was not aware of.
The honourable Member for
Mr. Gerrard: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are the party which, time and time again in this legislative session, has spoken up for accountability. We have introduced amendment after amendment to bring in better accountability, and this government, sadly, has not listened. I would suggest that, at some point in the future, we are going to be coming back, and we are going to revise those sections which remove the accountability of government, because Manitobans deserve better than that.
This government has been sloppy and moving more and more in the direction of trying to control everything from the centre. We saw that clearly in The Public Schools Finance Board Act, where they want to take away a board and replace it with a committee of three deputy ministers, where by using the provisions or the lack of provisions, or what have you, the ability to sequester information from public view, they will be able to hide the deliberations of deputy ministers in this committee, move things behind closed doors and centrally control things rather than having what we see as much better, which is much better openness, transparency and accountability.
We see that Bill 11, which we have just voted against, is a perverse way of approaching this, as even the former Premier Ed Schreyer has said. We look at The Elections Reform Act and we suggest that there could have been much better provisions that could have been put in this bill, that we could have had elections set at defined times every four years, that there could have been recall provisions to recall ministers who do not do their jobs properly and MLAs who are not attentive to what is going on. There could have been much better measures in that bill to provide for better democracy instead of what the government wants to do, which is to control, control and control even to the extent of putting straitjackets on members in terms of how they can act and where they can go in this Chamber.
We have provided positive
suggestions on this side of the House in terms of Good Samaritan legislation, a
bill which would help to decrease the extent of fetal alcohol spectrum
disorders, a bill that would have provided fairer pricing for milk in northern
There have been a number of major issues
this session. Let me talk about one of these. I would put it in this way. The
future of the city of
There could have been an option here to
put that hog-processing plant outside the city just like the hog plants outside
of
There were alternatives. The government
made their choices, and, of course, we make our choice to stand with the
citizens of
* (16:10)
Health care has clearly been a major issue
in this session. We have seen promises and commitments of this government
broken like matchsticks, gone up in smoke, and, sadly, emergency rooms not
working well, poor planning, when they could have and should have made sure
that there were adequate numbers of residents training and staying in
The Pharmaceutical Act, which the government put such a low priority on and then brought it right at the end of the session. Even then there were choices that could have been made, but time and time again, not only from the introduction from second reading and even today, there was a possibility of putting a priority on this legislation and the government chose not to. We would have preferred to see The Pharmaceutical Act go all the way through, but it was the government who set the agenda, the priorities and made the choices. They gave this a low priority.
When it comes to agriculture, we have seen
once again a government which is enmeshed in poor planning. Instead of trying
to balance drainage and water storage and make sure that the investment in
infrastructure was being made to decrease risks for farmers, this government
has time and time again made the choices that it was not going to do that. We
saw this in the
There have been opportunities to do
something about the environment in
When it comes to the North, we tried with
our milk bill, but we also note, for example, that there is a Northern Affairs
Act which could have been put through, but the government chose not to give it
the kind of priority that it needed. More and more we have groups coming from
the North, from
The floodway could have been managed well, but we are $135 million over budget and climbing. We do not yet have an accounting for why it is so far over budget. We do not have a plan yet for what the government is going to do, but we are fearful because time and time again this government has not managed expenditures well, and we fear that we will see a further example of this.
When it comes to Child and Family Services, we have had some 31 children die from homicides over the last number of years. This is a tragedy. It is very, very sad, and it deserves much better than we saw from this government. There have been inquires called into Child and Family Services, but we still have not gotten the proper terms of reference for the external inquiry, and we wait. We were pleased to receive, however, the terms of reference, and reasonably done for the internal inquiry. It is too bad that they could not have at least applied a minimum standard to the external inquiry the same way.
Day by day, we have more horror stories coming forward, more problems, more people in the system ready to come forward with issues because they are so concerned about kids at risk in this province, the way this government is operating the system. We need a much better forum to bring this out into the open and to get it resolved because under this government they are doing everything they can to stop people from speaking, to stop people from coming forward.
We found this year to our horror that the government is running places like 170 Hendon, which are dens of iniquity, of drugs and prostitution, and, surely, if you have a government, it should be a model landlord and not the worst tenant in the province. Shame on this government for what they are doing.
Mr. Speaker, one of the central focuses of this session has been the Crocus inquiry. A public inquiry is badly needed and with every passing day it becomes clearer and clearer that a Crocus inquiry is needed; 33,000 Manitobans have lost more than $60 million.
As I said today in my member's statement, the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) when he was the MLA for Crescentwood, provided a bit of an explanation that the Crocus Investment Fund was really a fund which was a collective of all the province, that it was very different from any other venture capital fund, and that it really was the province that people were supporting, that he never even mentioned high risks or concerns. As recently in his budget speech of 2003, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) was praising Crocus. It is no wonder that so many people feel they have been so badly misled and particularly by this government.
The Minister of Health has been late, other ministers have been, late in prioritizing bills, but the worst offence of the whole is the government not calling a public inquiry into the Crocus Investment Fund. It has been apparent for months, indeed, now for years that such an inquiry should be held. The public demand it. Newspapers all over the province are behind us in our call for this inquiry, and they are working with us. An inquiry will come. It will not serve the government well to delay calling the inquiry. It should be called.
Let me sum up, Mr. Speaker. We have seen a government which has decreased accountability, which has decreased openness in government, which has worked to increase central government control, and which has, time and time again, been poor at managing a problem, has chosen, time and time again, when they see a problem to try and solve it by throwing money at it rather than finding a solution, a long-term solution, a comprehensive solution which is really going to be effective. So, sadly, this has certainly not been a stellar session from the point of view of the government; there are some 11 bills which will not get through because of their poor management and their inability to bend to public pressure to call a Crocus inquiry.
Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): I am honoured to rise today to speak on this bill and to take this opportunity to reflect on the session that is just about to come to an end. This is a bill about smoking, but the theme of my comment is going to be about smoke and mirrors, Mr. Speaker, and some of the other concerns that we have about this government's management of our province over the past period of time.
* (16:20)
Before I get into the substance of my comments, Mr. Speaker, I do want to thank the staff of our caucus and the leader's office for all of their hard work, staff who have served us well through a period of transition, and I thank them for their hard work, their commitment, their energy and their tremendous dedication to our province and to our caucus.
I also want to thank the pages who serve each member of this House day in and day out, and the members of the Clerk's staff who do such a good job of keeping things running on time here and keeping everything in order. They do a terrific job, and we thank them for that.
Finally, while I am thanking people, Mr.
Speaker, very importantly, I want to extend my thanks to the Member for
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the session
that is about to come to a close, I want to share the general tenor of the
comments made by the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) in terms of a very
disappointing and lacklustre performance by the government through this
session. They have created a culture of low expectations in this province. The
Premier's (Mr. Doer) formula to date has been to set expectations low, almost
meet them and then declare victory, and that is a formula that he may think in
the short run serves him well politically, but, in the long run, it does the
people of Manitoba a disservice. I think in the long run that the people of
Mr. Speaker, there a number of important
issues that came to light, a number of important problems that came to light in
the course of this session. First and foremost, the issue of overspending on
the floodway project to the tune of $135 million and counting. It then came to
light that the government failed to take into account important works within
the city of
Mr. Speaker, we are concerned at the lack of planning, and we are concerned at the corners being cut. We are concerned at the tax dollars being spent without results. We are concerned at the fact that deals have been entered into to the tune of $60 million or $65 million, possibly more, benefiting friends of the government without any benefit for the people of Manitoba, and, in fact, potentially at the expense of Manitobans, potentially resulting in corners being cut and safety of Winnipeggers and Manitobans being jeopardized.
Mr. Speaker, on the floodway, we see a
complete and utter failure of management and a failure of leadership. On the
topic of a failure of leadership, we are concerned and have ongoing concerns
about their indifference, the indifference of this government when it comes to
the 33,000 Manitobans who have lost their savings to the tune of $60 million in
the worst financial scandal, one of the worst financial scandals, in
We have called for a public inquiry. We
took every step we thought possible to force the issue, and yet the Premier
stonewalled. He put up a smokescreen. He refused to call an inquiry. The
question that we have, and have had, and continue to ask is: If the Premier has
nothing to hide, why not call an inquiry? Why not give Manitobans answers to
the questions that they have? [interjection]
Why not do the right thing for the people of
Restore confidence in our capital market so that in future, when Manitobans invest in Manitoba organizations and funds, they can invest with the security and the knowledge that they have a government that is looking out for their interests, and not just looking out for the interests of their friends.
Mr. Speaker, we have other areas of
concern, and this is an area of profound tragedy and concern in the area of
Child and Family Services where we see ongoing examples; where workers within
the system are raising concerns, those concerns are being ignored. Cases are
being transferred, and we are unable to get answers as to whether those
transfers are being handled in a way that is competent and satisfactory. We are
not satisfied that children in
We know, Mr. Speaker, that by virtue of the fact that they are involved with our Child and Family Services system, these are young people who are at risk. They live in difficult situations, and we know from time to time that things are going to happen. We regret that and we mourn those losses. But, when we have evidence of government mismanagement, of policy without regard for consequences, of oversight of a massive transfer of case files in a very short period of time without any indication of adequate follow-up, we become profoundly concerned that young people are suffering. Lives are being lost as a result of mismanagement and a lack of regard for the impact of those policy changes on the very people who are most vulnerable in our society. We have asked questions on this through the session and, to date, have failed to receive any satisfactory answers.
We are concerned about the fact that
This is something, Mr. Speaker, that we are concerned about because it is Manitobans who pay the price for this mismanagement. It is Manitobans who pay the price when they go to an emergency room, expecting help, expecting care. They have a Minister of Health telling them that everything is fine, when the facts tell a different story. Again, this is a shameful example of a government that prides spin over substance, that prides spending over results.
Mr. Speaker, we have raised in the course
of this session concern about the fact that Manitoba students, after four
years, four years after finding out that they are way behind where they should
be in terms of mathematics, in terms of their language skills. Four years
later, we have not only not made progress, but we have fallen behind in some
key indicators of performance by
In the area of mathematics, the government measures eight different categories, and in four of those categories students are performing at a lower level today than they were four years ago when the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell), at the time who was Minister of Education, said: We are not doing very well. We need to do better. We need to get to work. I give the Member for Brandon East credit for recognizing the problem four years ago.
I simply ask: What has the government been doing for the past four years to address these very serious deficiencies in our health care system?
He raised the issue, Mr. Speaker, and then they kicked him out of Cabinet, and that is what happens. That seems to be what happens in this government. That seems to be what happens. They should have whistle-blower protection for the Member for Brandon East. He blew the whistle on his own government and they sent him packing.
Here we are with the Minister of Health who, four years later, gets up in response to a question and says they have had stakeholder consultations, their response to serious questions about their lack of performance in the area of education. And the list goes on.
Workers Compensation Board, whistle-blowers fired, incompetence protected. On the budget, we see $8 of new spending for every $1 in tax relief; $8 of new spending [interjection] Spending without results, Mr. Speaker, and, if we thought we were getting results for that money, then we might be satisfied. We might be prepared to support the budget, but, when we see example after example of mismanagement, of money being spent without regard for results, we have to be concerned that Manitoba taxpayers are being taken to the cleaners, that, compared to their counterparts in other provinces, Manitoba taxpayers are falling further and further behind as they have a government that takes more and gets less on their behalf.
* (16:30)
We saw, during the course of this session,
Mr. Speaker, that small business in
We cannot keep up on this route, Mr.
Speaker. We know that across the country the tide has been rising. The problem
in
Mr. Speaker, in the course of this session we raised concerns about Bill 11, the anti-environment Bill 11, and the hypocrisy of a government talking out of one side of its mouth, says that it supports Kyoto; out of the other side of the mouth it says we want to encourage the burning of natural gas. We are glad that we stood up to the legislation and we are glad that the government reluctantly backed down and we are pleased that the government, in this one very small respect, listened to those who said that they were wrong and changed course.
But we are concerned about the fact that in changing course they went from subsidizing the burning of natural gas to encouraging the burning of taxpayer and ratepayer funds with a new political slush fund set up under Bill 11 today, Mr. Speaker. It is a shameful piece of legislation and we were right to vote against it, and Manitobans have every reason to be concerned about what is going to happen with their Hydro rates, with their Hydro dollars that they put into the corporation and that are being used for political purposes.
Mr. Speaker, we were pleased in this
session to have the government adopt the idea put forward by the Member for
Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) on legislation to support families and to encourage
young people, require young people to go into treatment for addictions. We are
pleased to support that piece of legislation, and I acknowledge the Member for
Steinbach and members of our caucus for advancing this issue and bringing it
forward, so that young people in
Mr. Speaker, the whistle-blower legislation did not make it through this session. We thought the legislation was full of holes. We continue to think so. We were prepared to support it and get it through on the basis that sometimes half a loaf is better than nothing at all, and so we were prepared to support it. It did not get through and, again, the government will try to blame the Liberals for this. We were prepared to give it leave, but it was this government that introduced the legislation late. They introduced a legislation that was full of holes and they ought to be ashamed.
It is not just the fact that the legislation had holes, Mr. Speaker, that the whistle-blower legislation was full of deficiencies. I think it is interesting to reflect on the process that got us to this point. I know that there must be an NDP damage-control handbook that is distributed to all Cabinet ministers and staff. It has not yet leaked, and I know that, if we do a FIPPA, it will be years before we get any kind of a response, but I know that if we were to get our hands on the NDP damage-control handbook, that it would go something like this:
Step 1: If you see a problem out there, you see an opportunity to score some political points, throw money at it. Step 2: When they mess up and they misspend the money, try to cover it up. Step 3: If the cover-up does not work and if it gets leaked, then deny it. Step 4: If the denial fails, then discredit whoever it is that tried to bring forward the information. The next step, Mr. Speaker, is that if you cannot discredit the person who brought forward the information, then try to spread the blame. If that does not work, if the blame-spreading strategy does not work, then say, oops, and introduce a piece of faulty legislation as part of the damage-control strategy.
That is how we got the whistle-blower
legislation, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is important for Manitobans to know
that history. I know that the NDP damage-control handbook would say that by the
time the faulty legislation fails to get through the House because he had
introduced it too late, hope that the people of
Mr. Speaker, the story of this session has
been one of spending being up, results being down, whistle-blowers being fired
while incompetence is protected. The level of spin is up while real information
is being suppressed. These are serious issues. These are issues that go to the
quality of life of Manitobans, and in time, and we know that sometimes a
government can skate for a period of time, but in time, these things start to
catch up. In time, the results start to speak for themselves. In time, we see
young Manitobans looking at
Manitobans deserve better. Seven years into this government, we have a growing list of examples of inaction and mismanagement without accountability, spending without results and denials and spin every time somebody tries to hold the government to account.
Mr. Speaker, this session is, I think, the
epitome of an NDP government that is running out of steam, that is more
interested in spin than getting results. We think the people of
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I am glad the members opposite are cheering on the Leader of the Opposition for more. He is going to get more and more and more time as Leader of the Opposition in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker. You know, sometimes–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: Thank you. Mr.
Speaker. Sometimes you see an opposition go out with a bang and sometimes you
see it go out with a whimper. I have never seen such a big whimper in my life
than this afternoon from the Leader of the Opposition. You know, I do not know
what advice, and talk about whistle-blower legislation, maybe we need
whistle-blower legislation every time Don Orchard comes into this
So what do we get out of this great guru of Conservative thinking? This ghost from the past, the ghost that stole Christmas from the nurses a few years ago and gave them a lump of coal until they went on strike for 30 days. What do we get from the great strategist that the member opposite is now using and was here yesterday presenting whatever to his people? We got personal attacks, Mr. Speaker.
* (16:40)
You go back through Hansard, and you will
find all the questions that I raised to the former premier. You will never find
that kind of personal attack on the former premier. You read Hansard, and I
guarantee you the people of
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. [interjection]
Mr. Doer: The member opposite, who did not remember that she was the legislative assistant to the Minister of Health.
Mr. Speaker, I would point out that today they ended up with FIPPA. The member opposite, was it Crocus or was it this or that? It was FIPPA. He led with FIPPA, just led with FIPPA today, just hit us over the head with a wet FIPPA question today.
You know, Mr. Speaker, the great irony, of course, is that he was the chief controller of information under the former Filmon government. Maybe you better talk to your Justice critic about all these things in the past.
Mr. Speaker, this is the FIPPA policy of the Progressive Conservatives when the member opposite was chief of staff: Please be advised that access to information concerning the number of people on surgical waiting lists cannot be granted, as this information–now, get this–does not exist at Manitoba Health. Get this: Access to information concerning the number of people on diagnostic waiting lists has been denied in accordance with 32(1) of The Freedom of Information Act.
Mr. Speaker, I want you to know that the
people of
Mr. Speaker, we certainly want to thank all the legislative staff. We want to thank the people at the table, the pages and others who had to work in this session. We know how hard they had to work.
I regret that after a number of days in
the session that the deal that we agreed to in writing a year ago was not
completely fulfilled. It made our worry about the budget obviously valid. There
are long-term consequences for that, Mr. Speaker, because I thought it was in
everybody's best interest, in the long run, to have a schedule that allowed the
people of
We agreed to come in in October. We did
that. We agreed to come back with a budget in March. We did that. We agreed to
have the Estimates ready in a way that was unprecedented. But we have sat twice
as long as
I would point out that the Crocus audit–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, it is too bad, because this agreement was reached after the audit was released, a month after the audit was released last year, and we kept our word on our side. The consequences, unfortunately, will be in the longer term, and I regret that.
In terms of dealing with the priorities of
Mr. Speaker, today Stats Canada came out
with a survey, 87 percent satisfaction rate with the health care system in
We have promised to have
more young people stay in
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: We were losing
close to 500 a year in the nineties, every year a net loss of people. Mr.
Speaker, we are now obviously not where we want to be, but every year over the
last five years, we are averaging 500 more people between the ages of 15 and
25. When you look at the economic numbers, you were averaging 2,500 new jobs a
year in your 11 years. We are averaging over 7,000 new jobs a year here in
We promised more apprenticeships in
Mr. Speaker, we are also recognized by
* (16:50)
We promised 20 police officers; we
delivered 94. We promised eight new prosecutors in the election campaign; we
have delivered on all eight. We promised public safety investigative units that
would be expanded; we have done that. We have promised to deal with immobilizer
expansion; we have done that. We promised a high-risk sex offender registry; we
have done that. We promised to lobby
You know, Mr. Speaker, members opposite
talk about children. I would point out that some of the funding cutbacks for
social programs in the draconian budget of 1995 by the federal government is
not exactly the finest hour for early childhood development in
Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of affordability. Members opposite take a tax cut. [interjection] Of course, the member opposite worked for the former government. When they reduced the property tax credit for people, they called that a spending decrease. So, in 1992 or 1993, when the tax bill went up $105, $14 was the City of Winnipeg, if I am just talking about the City of Winnipeg; $16 was for the school division; and $75 was a tax increase from the former Filmon government. They, then, called it a spending decrease because, of course, a credit was an expenditure. So this is how they communicate issues of tax reduction.
When we eliminated now the ESL, when we
came into office, it was two taxes on homeowners. Not one, but two. Mr.
Speaker, we not only kept our promise to increase the property tax credit, we
also promised to eliminate one of the two taxes on homeowners in
When we came into office–[interjection] Well, I will get to the farmers in a minute. I will get to the swaggering agricultural producers in a minute, because, Mr. Speaker, again, members opposite increased the portions that farmers pay on farmland in the early 1990s. They talked a good game about farmers, but they shafted farmers by increasing portions. I do not know one member of their caucus to stand up for farmers. Why did they not stand up for farmers?
The businesses in downtown
An Honourable Member: Why are you against downtown development?
Mr. Doer: I have nothing
against it, because, you know, the policies, the boarded up and for sale that
we inherited from the Tories, those buildings are being built now. Look at the
endangered species, the building cranes that are in downtown
Of course, the Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson) voted against the new arena, but I think I have seen her there having champagne along with all the other Conservatives, a sticky wrist from all the celebrations of the new vision. The Member for Tuxedo voted against the arena. Boy, was she ever there with bells on when the new building opened up. Talk about hypocrisy, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we also promised to live within balanced budget legislation. We lived within the balanced budget legislation that was brought in by Premier Filmon. It was balancing the operating revenue and operating expenditures and also the utilization of the fiscal stabilization report. The Auditor General said in '98 that this did not fully represent all the finances of the province, and it also said that the issue of unfunded liabilities of pension was not being properly disclosed by the government. We also found out that $500 million of capital for health care was not being disclosed. We found that out from a rating agency.
Mr. Speaker, we have put all those numbers on the summary financial budget. We have now got a 40-year plan to clean up the unfunded liability of pensions that started 40 years ago which has been praised by the bond rating agencies, and we have committed, now that we are coming to '07, we kept our promise on the Filmon balanced budget legislation, and we are going to be the ones bringing GAAP financial accounting standards here in Manitoba. Members opposite did not do it.
Mr. Speaker, we have promised to lower the
corporate tax. We promised to lower to 14 percent. We have lowered it to 13.
When we came into office the members opposite, again, had those crocodile tears
for small businesses. The small-business tax in
Mr. Speaker, when we go
into the next election campaign, the people of
Well, Mr. Speaker, the
Autopac rates are the lowest in North America, the Hydro rates are the lowest
in North America, the rates for all the Crown corporations are the most
affordable anywhere in
I say to the people of Manitoba if you want to develop Hydro like we do, for the benefit of all Manitobans, if you do not want to see Hydro robbed away from your children and grandchildren, do not vote Tory; vote for a party that will represent all people and will use Hydro for the benefit of all citizens, and that is our government, and that is what we pledge to you.
Mr. Speaker, I support the tobacco legislation that is before this Chamber. Thank you very, very much.
* (17:00)
Mr. Speaker: It is five o'clock and we have an agreement, but, before I do, I have a short statement for the House here.
As this is the last sitting day of the spring session, I request that members remove the contents of their desks today. If you have copies of Hansards that you no longer require, you are asked to place those in the blue boxes designated for recycled Hansards. If you have paper items other than Hansard which you would like recycled, we have brought large recycling containers into the Chamber today for that purpose. Lastly, if you require assistance with moving any material from your desk, please speak to the Chamber staff. Thank you for your assistance in helping to recycle.
The hour being 5 p.m., I am interrupting proceedings in accordance with the sessional order adopted by the House on June 9, 2005.
At this time, I will be putting the questions required to conclude concurrence and third reading on all bills that are at that stage without further debate or amendment.
In the case of concurrence and third reading motions that have yet to be moved, the concurrence and third reading motion must first be moved. However, the member moving the motion will not have the opportunity to debate it, nor will other members have the opportunity to debate it. I will then put the concurrence and third reading motion to the House for a decision to be made. This process will continue until all concurrence and third reading motions are disposed of without seeing the clock.
In addition, there is a requirement that today Royal Assent must be held on bills that have had concurrence and third reading agreed to prior to the House adjourning.
We were on Bill 27. Bill 27 had been moved, so is the House ready for the question on Bill 27?
Concurrence and third reading, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 4–The Dangerous Goods
Handling
and Transportation
Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 4, The Dangerous Goods Handling and Transportation Amendment Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill
13–The Conservation Districts
Amendment
Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 13, The Conservation Districts Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 15–The Emergency Measures
Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 15, The Emergency Measures Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 16–The Corporations Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move that Bill 16, The Corporations Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Government House Leader, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance, that Bill 16, The Corporations Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 17–The Securities Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move that Bill 17, The Securities Amendment Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Government House Leader, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance, that Bill 17, The Securities Amendment Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed
to.
Bill 19–The Agri-Food and
Rural Development Council
Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 19, The Agri-Food and Rural Development Council Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Food, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion
presented.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed?
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: On division? On division.
Bill 21–The Public Health
Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 21, The Public Health Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 22–The Elections Reform Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 22, The Elections Reform Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 23–The
Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 23, The Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 24–The Consumer Protection Amendment Act
(Government Cheque Cashing Fees)
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move that Bill 24, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Government Cheque Cashing Fees), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Government House Leader, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance, that Bill 24, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Government Cheque Cashing Fees), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 30–The Fires
Prevention and
Emergency
Response Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 30, The Fires Prevention and Emergency Response Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Food, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 31–The Animal
Diseases Amendment Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 31, The Animal Diseases Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Food, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 35–The Public Schools
Finance Board Amendment and The Public Schools
Amendment
Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 35, The Public Schools Finance Board Amendment and The Public Schools Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Bill
36–The Youth Drug Stabilization
(Support
for Parents) Act
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 36, The Youth Drug Stabilization (Support for Parents) Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 37–The Labour-Sponsored Investment Funds Act,
2006 (Various Acts Amended)
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 37, The Labour-Sponsored Investment Funds Act, 2006 (Various Acts Amended), reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion agreed to.
* (17:10)
Mr. Mackintosh: It is my understanding the Lieutenant-Governor is ready to come into the Chamber.
The Acting Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (Raymond Gislason): His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.
His Honour John Harvard, Lieutenant-Governor of the
Province of Manitoba, having entered the House and being seated on the Throne,
Mr. Speaker addressed His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor in the following
words:
Mr. Speaker: Your Honour:
The Legislative Assembly of Manitoba asks Your Honour to accept the following bills:
Madam Clerk Assistant (Monique Grenier):
Bill 44 – The Appropriation Act, 2006; Loi de 2006 portant affectation de crédits
Bill 45 – The Loan Act, 2006; Loi d'emprunt de 2006
Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): In Her Majesty's name, the Lieutenant-Governor thanks the Legislative Assembly and assents to these bills.
Mr. Speaker: Your Honour:
At this sitting, the Legislative Assembly
has passed certain bills that I ask Your Honour to give assent to.
Madam Clerk Assistant (Monique Grenier):
Bill 4 – The Dangerous Goods Handling and Transportation Amendment Act; Loi
modifiant la Loi sur la manutention et le transport des marchandises
dangereuses
Bill 11 – The Winter Heating Cost Control Act; Loi sur la limitation des
frais de chauffage en hiver
Bill 12 – The Highways and Transportation
Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la voirie et le transport
Bill 13 – The Conservation Districts Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi
sur les districts de conservation
Bill 14 – The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les
droits d'utilisation de l'eau
Bill 15 – The Emergency Measures Amendment Act;
Loi modifiant la Loi sur les mesures d'urgence
Bill 16 – The Corporations Amendment Act; Loi
modifiant la Loi sur les corporations
Bill 17 – The Securities Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les
valeurs mobilières
Bill 19 – The Agri-Food and Rural Development Council Act; Loi sur le
Conseil du développement agroalimentaire et rural
Bill 20 – The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership
Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection des exploitations
agricoles familiales et la Loi sur la propriété agricole
Bill 21 – The Public Health Act; Loi sur la
santé publique
Bill 22 – The Elections Reform Act; Loi sur la réforme électorale
Bill 23 – The Safer
Communities and Neighbourhoods Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi visant à accroître la
sécurité des collectivités et des quartiers
Bill 24 – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act
(Government Cheque Cashing Fees); Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection du
consommateur (frais d'encaissement des chèques du gouvernement)
Bill 27 – The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act; Loi sur le recouvrement du montant
des dommages et du coût des soins de santé imputables au tabac
Bill 30 – The Fires Prevention and Emergency Response Act; Loi sur la prévention des incendies
et les interventions d'urgence
Bill 31 – The Animal Diseases Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les
maladies des animaux
Bill 35 – The Public
Schools Finance Board Amendment and The Public Schools Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la
Commission des finances des écoles publiques et la Loi sur les écoles publiques
Bill 36 – The Youth Drug
Stabilization (Support for Parents) Act; Loi sur la stabilisation des mineurs
toxicomanes (aide aux parents)
Bill 37 – The Labour-Sponsored Investment Funds Act, 2006
(Various Acts Amended); Loi
de 2006 sur les fonds de placement des travailleurs (modification de diverses
dispositions législatives)
Bill 42 – The Budget
Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2006; Loi d'exécution du budget de 2006 et modifiant
diverses dispositions législatives en matière de fiscalité
Bill 300 – The Association of Former Manitoba MLAs Act; Loi sur
l'Association des ex-députés de l'Assemblée législative du Manitoba
Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): In Her Majesty's name, His Honour assents to these bills.
His Honour was then pleased to retire.
God Save the Queen was sung.
O
Mr. Speaker: The hour being past 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned and will return at the call of the Speaker. Everyone have a great summer.