LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Friday,
November 17,
2006
The House met at 10 a.m.
PRAYER
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Bill 2–The Employment Standards
Code Amendment Act
Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister of Labour and Immigration): I move, seconded by the Minister of Healthy Living (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 2, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act; Loi modifiant le Code des normes d'emploi, be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Ms. Allan: Bill 2, which implements consensus recommendations of the Labour Management Review Committee, introduces amendments that will improve and modernize our employment standards provisions to better meet the needs of today's workers, employers, families and young people.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the
pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
[Agreed]
Bill 201–The Good
Samaritan Act
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I move, seconded by the MLA for Inkster, that Bill 201, The Good Samaritan Act; Loi du bon samaritain, be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, this bill provides protection for Good Samaritans who come forward voluntarily to help people in times of emergencies, major stress or major problems that have arisen.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Headingley Foods
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition:
The owners of Headingley Foods, a small
business based in Headingley, would like to sell alcohol at their store. The
distance from their location to the nearest Liquor Mart, via the
The majority of Headingley's population
lives off
Small businesses outside
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the Minister charged with the
administration of The Liquor Control Act (Mr. Smith), to consider allowing the owners
of Headingley Foods to sell alcohol at their store, thereby supporting small
business and the prosperity of rural communities in
This is signed by Myron Peters, J. Wiens, J. Lee and many, many others.
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 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.
Mr. Speaker, that's signed by A. Ayson, A. Ilagan, Nestor Dela Pena and many, many other fine Manitobans.
Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where the six individuals who were appointed to the Manitoba Legislative Internship Program for the 2006-2007 year are seated. In accordance with the established practice, three interns were assigned to the government caucus and three to the official opposition caucus. Their term of employment is 10 months, and they will be performing a variety of research and other tasks for private members. These interns commenced their assignments in September and will complete them in June.
They are, working with the government
caucus: Ms. Christine Esselmont of the University of Winnipeg, Ms. Emily
Grafton of the
Professor Jean Friesen looks after the
academic portion of the internship. The administration of the program is
carried out by our Clerk, Patricia Chaychuk. The caucus representatives on the
Internship Administration Committee are the Member for St. James (Ms.
Korzeniowski) and the Member for
I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of all members to congratulate the interns on their appointment to the program and to hope that they will have a very interesting and successful year with the Assembly.
Also seated in the Speaker's Gallery we have Emma Hill Kepron who is our new Hansard Indexer.
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here.
* (10:10)
Public Inquiry
Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned that the Manitoba Court of Appeal has sided with directors of the failed Crocus Fund and ordered that the Manitoba Securities Commission hearings into the Crocus scandal be delayed indefinitely.
Given that the Premier has consistently cited the Manitoba Securities Commission investigation as a primary excuse for not calling a public inquiry into the Crocus scandal, can the Premier indicate to the House what position his government took in front of the Court of Appeal on this important issue?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, the member opposite talks about positions on Crocus. I would note that the member opposite last year in the last session asked us not to settle with the Crocus suit, not to settle off with the Crocus lawsuit that was pending. Now he wants us to write a blank cheque to the Crocus investors. We don't flip-flop, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. McFadyen: I know that
the Premier is very proud of his
Given that they know they have a weak case, given that they know they have been complicit in the scandal right from the get-go, why is the government hiding? Why will the government not call an inquiry? Why are they acknowledging through their actions in court by not filing a motion to dismiss that they've got a weak case? Why, Mr. Speaker, when this matter appeared before the Court of Appeal, did the government's Securities Commission lawyer say in their filing with the court that staff of the Manitoba Securities Commission, and I quote: "takes no position on this appeal and will not be filing any factum or any other materials." This is the position of the government lawyers when it came to stalling the investigation by the Securities Commission.
I will table the letter from the government's Securities Commission lawyers saying that they're not going to fight for an investigation by the Securities Commission. Given that the Securities Commission investigation is now effectively dead, now that the Premier's run out of excuses to call an inquiry, will the Premier do the right thing? Will he bring justice for the 34,000 Manitobans who have lost money? Will he today call an inquiry? He is out of excuses. Do the right thing; call an inquiry; stop hiding.
Mr. Doer: I would point out that the Securities Commission is a quasi-judicial body. If we had directed the Securities Commission in any way, shape or form, the members opposite would be rightly calling for the minister responsible's head, Mr. Speaker. The Securities Commission has made decisions in the past. It has made decisions in the past about the selling of Manitoba Telephone shares illegally to one, Cubby Barrett, through the company of Wellington West.
The member opposite, of course, brags in his Web site. He brags in his Web site as being the man responsible in Cabinet for the sell-off of the Manitoba Telephone System. Talk about complicity. It is right in his Web–oh, he took it off his Web site. Oh, he took off selling the telephone system from the Web site– [interjection]
The bottom line is that the Manitoba
Securities Commission does not answer for its decisions on companies in the
marketplace to the government. It is a quasi-judicial body. The member knows
that and to try to pretend that this is not the case is just another example.
Yesterday or two days ago he said that Ontario, in its recent documentation,
indicated and did not mention
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, they've had seven years to buy back MTS and they haven't done it. If he is serious about–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, again the Premier is full of sound and fury making his debating points, but the fact is that he has had seven years to buy back the telephone system. If he was serious about wanting to nationalize the telephone system, instead of playing politics with it, he would have acted by now. But, seven years later, we have the Premier standing up, acting like an opposition leader, throwing around accusations about the credibility of members of this House.
You know what? If anybody needs to apologize to Manitobans and to this Legislature, it's the Premier: for promising to end hallway medicine within six months and breaking that promise; having the temerity to come into the House six months ago and say that there were zero patients in Manitoba hallways when Manitobans know better; for allowing the Hells Angels to move into Manitoba under his watch, Mr. Speaker; a sixfold increase in the number of children in hotels under this Premier's watch; for the Burntwood health care spending scandal; the floodway fiasco. Manitobans have been burned on Burntwood, they have been soaked on the floodway and I think they have every right to be concerned about whether they're being conned on Conawapa.
Speaking of spin, Mr.
Speaker, here's what the NDP leader in Ontario said yesterday in the
Legislature on the issue of deals between Manitoba and Ontario. When the
Ontario minister tried to say that they were in
discussions with Manitoba, the NDP leader, Mr. Hampton said: Well,
that's the media spin, here is the reality.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. I need to be able to hear the questions and the answers in case there's the breach of a rule.
Mr. McFadyen: Thank you,
Mr. Speaker, and the studio audience is in good form over there again today,
but here is the rest of what the NDP leader of
Mr. Speaker, let me make something
perfectly clear. We will build Conawapa. We'll do it on time and under budget
or on budget, unlike the members opposite who bungled every single major
project that they've undertaken in
So let me come back to the question of credibility. If we want to talk about credibility, why doesn't the Premier show some leadership? Why doesn't he do something that demonstrates to Manitobans that he's putting their interests ahead of his party's interests? Why doesn't he call a public inquiry into Crocus? He has run out of excuses. It's time to call an inquiry. It's time to do the right thing for the people of Manitoba.
* (10:20)
Mr. Doer: Well, Mr.
Speaker, the member opposite creates a committee to look at Crocus. He hires an
individual, the Tory hatchet man who just was responsible for taking on an
incumbent Conservative in the nomination race. He hires an individual or
commissions an individual named Don Orchard that wasted $4.5 million on hiring
Connie Curran to fire nurses. He's the only Minister of Health that has ever
engineered a nurses' strike in
The member has no clothing, Mr. Speaker.
Now I know he has premature arrogance. He has already got–assuming what is
going to happen in the next election. We enjoy his condescending talk because
Manitobans will see right through that arrogance, but I want to point out first
of all that the member opposite has not apologized for saying that
An Honourable Member: More, more.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Doer: I want the
member to stand up and apologize for putting false information into the public
record after the Speech from the Throne. He said there was no mention of
Manitoba and eight times
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Mr. McFadyen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The NDP leader of
But let me make something clear. Let me make something clear. Now we know that the Premier is desperate to have a major initiative to run on in the next election after seven years of inaction, neglect and waste. We know that he is desperate to roll out a commitment. He is committing to do something by 2019 when I think any reasonable person might expect that he won't be around to break that promise just like he broke the promise on hallway medicine, Mr. Speaker.
So my question to the Premier is this. In light of the fact that 34,000 Manitobans have lost more than $60 million in Crocus, in light of the fact that we are receiving letters from Manitobans from across the province, including his constituents, will he listen to his own constituents? Will he listen to Manitobans from all over the province instead of trying to create diversions? Instead of creating diversions–
An Honourable Member: Don Orchard.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker,
the Premier wants to talk about contested nominations. Why doesn't he just turn
around, take a look at the Member for
Mr. Speaker, given the number of his
constituents who are looking for justice on Crocus, will he listen to
Manitobans? Will he today call an inquiry? Stop the spin, stop the diversions,
stop the
Mr. Doer: Well, even before
I got to
Mr. Speaker, not to ramble as I criticize
the member opposite for, but he did mention
The member opposite also took off his Web site the fact that he worked for the Mike Harris government on deregulating Ontario Hydro. So here we have a person who was involved in selling the shares of the Manitoba Telephone System after they promised in the '95 election not to sell it. Now, does this sound familiar, Mr. Speaker?
We will not sell Hydro. That's what Tories say before the election and what they do after the election is break their word. They sold the telephone system. He was involved in it and the bottom line is, we don't interfere with the Manitoba Securities Commission. The bottom line, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, we are certainly not asking the Premier to interfere with the Manitoba Securities Commission. We are asking the Premier to recognize the fact which is that the Manitoba Securities Commission investigation is effectively dead. It is effectively dead and, the Premier, for months, as part of his stonewalling strategy on Crocus, has been saying: We've got an investigation going on by the Manitoba Securities Commission, therefore we don't need a public inquiry into Crocus. Well, that investigation by the Securities Commission is now effectively dead.
The excuses are over. Call an inquiry.
Stop hiding. Do the right thing for
Mr. Doer: First of all, I have stated that we have every day in Question Period for members to ask any question on Crocus. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we have an Auditor General's report that is over 200 pages long. Thirdly, last year we went to the Public Accounts Committee. The members asked some outstanding issues at the Public Accounts Committee. They asked about the e-mail. The Auditor General confirmed the e-mail never went beyond an assistant deputy minister. It never went to Cabinet. They asked that question. They didn't like the answer, but they got the answer to the question they asked.
We have stated, contrary to their Finance critic, that we would get the money back from Maple Leaf Distillers. They didn't like that answer. The member opposite is on the public record saying we won't get a cent back from Maple Leaf Distillers. They are wrong on that point, Mr. Speaker.
The issue of legislation, the issue of rate of return for investors, we amended that legislation to clarify it consistent with the amendments we made under the pension act.
Mr. Speaker, there are a number of parties going back to 1992 that are being sued. The former Conservative government is being sued for the seven years they were in office for establishing the legislation, having the conflict, the exemptions they made to Wellington West. That will all be under cross-examination. The investments the Tories made in Isobord, Winnport and Westman will all be under cross-examination.
The investments we made into Maple Leaf Distillers and the money we got returned will be under cross-examination. We respect that. We are more than willing to defend the actions we took in government. I know the former premier would probably say he would be as well, and we're not going to write a blank cheque like the member opposite would.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, I think Manitobans want nothing more than to have the facts on Crocus so that we can do justice to Manitoba shareholders who lost money, restore confidence in our province's capital market so that we can continue the process of creating jobs for young Manitobans and where Manitobans have confidence in our capital markets that have been badly damaged as a result of the incompetence and mismanagement of this government.
Now the Premier can skate all day long, Mr. Speaker. He is a good skater. I know he played football with the Crusaders but he is a heck of a skater. I want to say: Why doesn't the Premier stop bobbing and weaving, stop skating, call an inquiry, go under oath, put his hand on the Bible and tell Manitobans what he knew, when he knew it and why he didn't act when he was told about the problems at Crocus?
* (10:30)
Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite can ask questions anytime he wants. The Auditor General had access to not only meetings that were held, but he also had access to Crocus board minutes and he had access to money. We'd actually changed the law to allow the Auditor General to follow the money. We changed the law in the early 2000s. We changed the law for Elections Manitoba to be able to follow the money which he was unable to do in '95.
I would point out that the Attorney General has a 200-page report. The members opposite walked out of the last Public Accounts Committee. They didn't like the answer to the questions. Who had access to the e-mail? The Auditor General. The e-mail never went further than the ADM. They don't like the answers to the questions.
Will they ever get money back from Maple Leaf? The Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) said: No, no the government won't see a cent of it. We got all the money back, interest and penalties on top of that. We don't have an Isobord on our side. You've got lots of them, Mr. Speaker.
Public Inquiry
Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, on page 169 of the Auditor's Report that the Premier wants to refer to, those in higher authority apparently cleared all actions over the Crocus Investment Fund. What will this government do to respond to Lucille and Barry Bell who say that health and age prohibit us from further gainful employment; at this critical juncture in our lives, it is devastating to have a large amount of our pension frozen.
Will he call an inquiry so we can find out who the higher authority is?
I wanted to ask the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger): Will someone over there stand up and answer on behalf of Crocus?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, Mr. Speaker, the highest authority dealing with Crocus was legislation, and the members opposite asked this question as well in the Public Accounts Committee. The highest authority is this Legislature. This Legislature passed legislation in 1992. The Auditor General said it was confusing on whether it was social investments or rate of return. We have dealt with that confusion and recommended that rate of return be the primary consideration.
The members opposite talk about capital
funds. There's Richardson Funds doing quite well here in
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance would know that the Auditor said that there were sufficient red flags in 2002. What is this government going to do on behalf of Lucille and Barry when they say that currently, I am completely ashamed of my province and its government?
Do the right thing. Protect the people of
Mr. Doer: Well, the member opposite, his leader has said: Don't give money to the Crocus investors, and now has said: Give money to the Crocus investors. I think it is very important we did have the tax provision transferred to investors, as was recommended by the implementation committee. The Auditor General has already stated that the implementation committee has fulfilled all the recommendations that he had made, and he said that in Public Accounts Committee.
Members opposite asked about the red flag. The Auditor General confirmed last year at Public Accounts Committee that an e-mail between one bureaucrat and another bureaucrat never went further than an assistant deputy minister. We don't read all
e-mails in government. I accept that responsibility. We don't, and the members opposite asked that question. They didn't like the answer, and then they walked out of the next committee meeting. That's what they do. They get an answer they don't like, they walk out.
Universal Child Care Benefit
Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, last summer the federal government initiated the Universal Child Care Benefit for all children under six. Can the Minister of Family Services confirm whether foster parents directly receive this benefit?
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and
Housing): I, first of all, want to say to the House
that I am honoured to have the opportunity to serve in this new portfolio and
work with my colleagues in communities for the well-being of vulnerable
children and families. I, also as a preliminary note, want to celebrate the
appointment of our new Government House Leader (Mr. Chomiak).
Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that
the member opposite has some new-found interest in fostering in
Mrs. Taillieu: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Universal Child Care Benefit was intended for families to assist them in covering the cost of child care options, whether that be for stay-at-home parents, family care providers or day care. Why is this minister's government clawing it back at a time when they should be trying to attract more foster families to the system?
Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, the outside reviews into the child welfare system have said that the universal benefit and the amount that flows to the Province should be re-invested in the child welfare system and, specifically, in fostering.
I am very pleased to confirm with this
House that last month we announced a significant increase to the rates for
fostering in
Mrs. Taillieu: Mr. Speaker, at a time when we see an all-time high in the number of children in hotels, why has this minister not been briefed in this area in his portfolio? Why does this government receive this money and not turn it over to foster families who are caring for children? It is called the Universal Child Care Benefit, not the NDP universal, NDP government benefit. How much of the $6-million funding announcement, part of which was earmarked as new money for foster families, is really money from the federal government that was already intended for foster families?
Mr. Mackintosh: You know full well, Mr. Speaker, how familiar members opposite are with clawbacks. I want the member to stand up in this House and apologize to Manitobans for the phoney numbers. Members opposite bring into this House numbers as phoney as I heard on their ads.
It should be known to this House that,
until about two years ago, the number of children in hotels was only counted in
the city of
Appeal of Sentences
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, only this government could claw back money from children, and yet, they ask for an apology from others in this House. Shame on them, I say.
Mr. Speaker, also in
relation to children, on Tuesday of this week, a
I want to ask this Minister of Justice today whether or not he will direct an appeal on these horrific sentences.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, the member will know that I am precluded because of my role as Attorney General from commenting on specific cases.
The member had the judges of the court here two days ago. The member could have gone 10 feet over and asked the judges why they made the decision, but the member didn't because the member, too, is precluded from interfering in the justice system. From the facts of the case that I am aware of from reading in the paper, the Crown prosecutor asked for 18 years and seven years, respectively, for those particular offences.
* (10:40)
Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, this is a very clear issue here. What I am asking the Minister of Justice to do is not to comment on the specifics of the case. What I am asking him to do is to direct an appeal. Manitobans and Canadians, nationwide, are looking at this case and saying: Is there really justice in the province of Manitoba?
These young victims are going to live for the rest of their lives with this horrific crime. If they can't expect justice from this minister then there is nobody who will protect them in this province.
I will ask very clearly again because he knows that he can do this. Will he direct an appeal of the sentences, Mr. Speaker?
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have gone further. In fact, at the federal-provincial conference with the federal Minister of Justice, who is the MP for the member speaking, who makes the criminal law and the sentencing provisions, we asked for automatic sentencing, automatic minimum sentences, on matters of this kind. We asked for stricter sentencing penalties, and the Minister of Justice, who is the member's MP, agreed with us on those particular provisions.
Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable Member for Steinbach, I want to remind all honourable members that when you are putting a question or answering a question, please do it through the Chair.
Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, let's be very clear. He wants to talk about some of the issues on the federal level. There is a bill before Parliament, Bill C-9, which has significant restrictions. He supported and campaigned for members who gutted that legislation on the federal side, members that he campaigned for, and I would say to him that he should go to those federal members and say that they are wrong and that he won't campaign for them anymore if they are going to do that. You can't have it both ways.
Mr. Speaker, this is very clear. This sentence needs to be appealed for the victims who are involved here. I am going to ask him very clearly. There are victims involved who are going to live with this for the rest of their lives. If he wants to deflect, if he wants to not answer the question, it sends a signal to Manitobans and Canadians across this land that there is no justice in Manitoba.
I want to ask him again: Do the right thing for the victims and appeal that horrific sentence.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, if I did as directed by the member would he put out his press release? It is possible any potential appeal could be thrown out of court because of interference in this Chamber by a Member of the Legislative Assembly.
If the member wants the case tossed and wants me to put on the record something to have the case tossed, then it is on his conscience and the conscience of those members who say they respect victims. The Crown prosecutor asked for 18 years and seven years. The member knows that. The member could have asked the judges and didn't. He knows why he didn't walk 10 feet over and ask the judges that were sitting in this Legislature. He knows why he didn't walk 10 feet over and ask the judges because he cannot, and he is trying to deflect it, Mr. Speaker. He knows what the law is, and he is not telling the accurate case in this House because he wants us to have the case dismissed. I think that is deplorable.
Health Care Human Resources
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): In 1999, the Premier promised to end hallway medicine in six months with $15 million. Hallway medicine is alive and well, and yet it was ignored in the Throne Speech. Now hallway medicine has escalated into a severe ER doctor shortage and it is a crisis.
I would like to ask the Minister of Health why she ignored hallway medicine in the Throne Speech. The elephant in the room, why did she ignore it in the Throne Speech? Is it because she doesn't know how to solve the problem?
Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): I am very pleased to receive a question on health care because,
like many Manitobans, when I heard the platform developing from members
opposite, from the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen), abandoning health
care as a priority, I was very concerned. We know, Mr. Speaker, what happens
when members opposite abandon health care. We know that a thousand nurses get
fired. We know that spaces in the medical school get cut because somehow
members opposite think it is a good idea to cut human resources in health care.
We know that facilities in
Physician Shortages
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, if anybody has abandoned health care, it has been the NDP who are rated dead last in the country. If we want to talk human resources, our community ERs are short over 40 percent of our doctors. The hospitals are struggling to keep their ERs open. Doctors are burning out and, on October 19, there was a meeting where it was talked about closing a Winnipeg ER. I would like to ask the–[interjection] A suggestion thrown out at an October 19 meeting was to close the Grace Hospital ER.
I would like to ask the Minister of
Health: Will the Minister of Health tell us what to do if there are further ER
doctors resigning? Will she close another ER in
Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Well, Mr. Speaker, again I am pleased to talk about our government's commitment and making a priority of health care. It is a No. 1 commitment for us, and that commitment, of course, began many years ago.
But, just recently this summer, we introduced the largest first-year class in medical school in three years, the largest class since disco. Secondly, we ensured this past summer, when we were having some challenges in the ER, we implemented programs in the short term, like incentive programs for hard-to-fill shifts, like stabilization programs for longer-term doctors in the ER. So, while we have a long-range plan that, by the way, doesn't include cutting the spaces of doctors and firing nurses, we have an interim plan–
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, their so-called solution was nothing more than a Band-Aid. There's a gaping wound, and we've got a serious crisis in our Winnipeg ERs.
The Premier has become famous for his arrogant and misleading statement that there were zero patients in hallways. All the tracking numbers show that he is dead wrong in putting forward that comment.
I would now like to ask the new Minister of Health if she will ask for a full and honest reporting of ER hallway patients. Will she actually ask for that instead of accepting the false and misleading statements put forward by her leader?
Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, I am shocked and surprised that the member opposite doesn't go to the caucus and ask the former chief of staff for the Filmon government when they established the criteria and accounting for hallways–in January of 1999, the chief of staff for the former premier was involved in it. She may want to ask that question in caucus. We are comparing apples to apples, and I know they don't like that comparison.
Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the Member for Charleswood what the definition of arrogance is. The definition of arrogance is somebody that comes into this Chamber and makes the assumption that he is going to be in government before the people decide. That's a definition of arrogance. It sits two seats over.
Diagnosis and Treatment
Hon. Jon Gerrard (
Today, I am raising concerns of a similar
nature about multiple sclerosis, a very serious disease. We have one of the
highest incidences of multiple sclerosis anywhere in the world. To ensure we
have the very best in terms of prevention, diagnosis and treatment, we need to
make sure our efforts in multiple sclerosis are well supported in
Can the minister tells us what she is doing with multiple sclerosis and the excellent leadership that we have with Dr. Maria Melanson?
* (10:50)
Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): I find it curious strange, although again encouraged about questions about health care which, of course, is a priority of ours. I thought that the member opposite made it quite clear yesterday that he shouldn't speak in areas that might be perceived as a conflict of interest. He can have it one way on one day, Mr. Speaker, but on another day that suits him a little bit better he can have it another.
We certainly do agree the work that is
being done in
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
Bullying Awareness Week
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): I'd like to acknowledge that this week, November 13-19, has been declared Bullying Awareness Week. Bullying in schools is a problem that cannot and should not be tolerated, Mr. Speaker.
A recent Teen Touch survey of students largely between the ages of 11and 14 reported that 76 percent of respondents said that they had been bullied at some point, a very unacceptable number, Mr. Speaker. This is a broad social issue that affects children, adolescents, parents and people in the community as well. It has a number of negative effects including those on the development of young people. Every student deserves a respectful, safe, caring classroom environment as part of their educational experience.
In addition to raising general awareness and education on the issue of bullying, it is essential that the proper tools and supports be made available to those who combat bullying on the front lines on a daily basis, Mr. Speaker. Those who deal with bullying and see its effects first-hand such as students, teachers, parents and others in the community are instrumental in developing solutions to this problem. Supporting their efforts is essential to addressing this very problem.
I would therefore like to take this opportunity to commend all those who have spoken out against bullying or taken action in some other way. Bullying is a community problem and requires the whole community to respond. I'd like to recognize the parent advisory councils and other local groups that have dedicated their time and effort to addressing this very important issue. I also want to specifically thank the teachers for all that they do, Mr. Speaker, with this very important issue. It is through their efforts that we can stop bullying in our schools and on our streets and create a safe and respectful environment in our classrooms. Thank you very much.
Grey Cup
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto):
Yes, Mr. Speaker, this Sunday I will be at Canad Inns Stadium in Minto
constituency with 44,000 of my closest friends to celebrate
It's more than just a football game. The
Grey Cup festival is the stuff of legends. While all fans want their own team
to win, the Grey Cup unites Canadians from across the country including more
the 15,000 visitors to
Visitors from across
As a true-blue supporter, I am delighted
the Grey Cup will put the Winnipeg Blue Bombers on a solid financial footing,
not only eliminating the club's deficit, but putting the Bombers on the road to
future success. I'm satisfied that this bright future will include the club's
11th Grey Cup victory in
I am certain that all members of this Legislature join me in welcoming all football fans and in hoping for yet another classic Canadian football championship. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Osvita Foundation Inc.
Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, The Osvita Foundation Inc. of
Last evening the foundation honoured the
Metropolitan and the Archbishop of the Central Dioceses and Metropolitan of
The guest speaker, Dr. Roman Yereniuk, also paid tribute to the former premier of our province, Duff Roblin, because it was during his term in office that the English-Ukrainian Bilingual Program in Manitoba was established, and also it was this premier who honoured the work of Ukrainians in Canada by erecting the Taras Shevchenko monument on the grounds of the Manitoba Legislature.
On behalf of all Manitobans, Mr. Speaker,
I would like to congratulate both Metropolitan Stinka and Metropolitan Huculak
for their contributions to this country and also for becoming the new
metropolitans for this country just recently. I'd also commend the foundation
on their ongoing support of the English-Ukrainian Bilingual Program in
War Memorial (
Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, last week while I was in my former homeland of the Netherlands to celebrate my uncle Ome Harie Houben's 90th birthday, I was privileged to place a small Canadian flag on a memorial honouring the death of 10 allied airmen, of whom three were Canadian. The memorial, consisting of an artistically designed broken propeller, honoured Harold Heath, 19; Chipman Fraser, 22; and three British comrades whose RAF Vickers Wellington was shot down by the Germans on September 3, 1944.
Eight days later, another British plane was shot down, and among the five casualties was 27-year-old Canadian, Irwin D. Fountain. The memorial is located approximately two kilometres from my former hometown, Slek-Echt, and is located on the beautiful grounds of the Lilbosch Trappist Monastery.
Later that day I arrived at the
Elmer Raymond Lindoff was born in
* (11:00)
Throne Speech
Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I rise today to address this lacklustre Speech from the Throne, and once again it is filled with empty promises and disappointing announcements. It has confirmed what we have known for years, that this government is out of fresh innovative ideas. It cannot move this province forward. This Throne Speech fails miserably at addressing the challenges that Manitobans face and demonstrates that the NDP government is out of sync with the public's values and wishes.
While Manitobans have been calling for strong policy that will fix our roads, keep our streets safe and keep our young people in Manitoba, this government has provided a Throne Speech that is full of political posturing and the rehashing of projects that have already been committed to. The NDP government is looking backward, defending its own record, rather than looking forward to protect and advance the future of the province.
We have seen a speech with flaws, Band-Aid solutions and promises to what the NDP think Manitobans want, not what they really need or want. What we saw was no significant commitment to lower taxes and address the growing gap between Manitoba and other provinces when it comes to competitiveness, no long-term strategy proposed to rebuild our infrastructure that has been neglected for years, no practical measures to get tough on crime and keep our streets safe.
Manitobans deserve a government that is tuned in and responsive to their values and goals. They want accountability and sustainability, realistic solutions, not pipeline dreams. This Throne Speech was a major chance to address issues that have long been neglected in this province. Unfortunately, this NDP government did not seize the opportunity and Manitobans will continue to pay the price. Thank you.
(Second
Day of Debate)
Mr. Speaker: Resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Member for St. Norbert (Ms. Brick), that the following address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: We, the members of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, thank Your Honour for the gracious speech addressed to us at this Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature of Manitoba, standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, who has unlimited time.
Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to rise on this motion to debate and discuss the Throne Speech just released by the government.
I do want to just say that we certainly appreciate the direction and the guidance that you continue to provide to this House and look forward to working with you over the coming days in this session. It is a little bit of a shorter session than we would have liked, but we know that's not within the Speaker's control. Thank you again, Mr. Speaker, for your good work in presiding over the House.
I also want to just take a moment before we get into the substance of the Throne Speech to acknowledge the contributions of the table officers for their diligence during the session and their knowledge of the proceedings of this House which are helpful to all members, myself included, and also the Sergeant-at-Arms and his staff for keeping with our great parliamentary traditions, and those, as well, who work so hard in Hansard to make sure that they get our comments on the record accurately and quickly as we work here day in and day out.
I also want to just acknowledge the gallery officers for ensuring that the public is given every opportunity to come and watch these proceedings. It is an important role maintaining order in the gallery so that Manitobans can come and participate directly in the democracy of our province.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like just to take a moment to thank His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor for all the work that he continues to do representing our province and for his work on Wednesday at the Throne Speech proceedings.
I also want to congratulate and welcome our pages. I am sure you'll find your experience in the Manitoba Legislature memorable and hopefully enjoyable and also enlightening from time to time. Thank you in advance for the work you'll be doing to ensure that our proceedings run as smoothly as possible.
We are also very privileged, Mr. Speaker, to have some outstandingly well-qualified legislative interns. I have had the opportunity to meet the three interns serving the opposition caucus and to speak briefly with those interns who are providing research to the government caucus. Their support for our researchers and for our team is certainly valuable. I also would just want to indicate my hope that their experience in the coming months will be most rewarding.
The internship program would not be possible without the direction and support of their academic director, and I thank Professor Jean Friesen for her leadership and the role she plays in overseeing this important program with our Manitoba Legislature.
Mr. Speaker, we in the opposition caucus
are always pleased to have the opportunity to provide the government with ideas
to move
What we are concerned about, though, Mr. Speaker, is something much more fundamental, and the Throne Speech on Wednesday was emblematic and symbolic and indicative of a government that has run out of steam. After seven years in office, seven years of inaction, neglect and waste, we have a Throne Speech on Wednesday that is filled with new spending but entirely lacking in vision.
It is filled, Mr. Speaker, to the extent
that there are new ideas with political gimmicks, promises to do certain things
by 2019, long after the life of this government and probably the government
after it have expired. They have missed an opportunity to lay out a positive
vision for
We
have a government that shamelessly steals ideas from opposition and/or the
federal government. This Throne Speech is riddled with ideas and initiatives
that came from Progressive Conservatives at the provincial level and
Conservatives at the federal level. Take, for example, the initiative related
to grandparents' rights. This is a bill introduced twice before and twice
ignored by the government, and it took a rally in front of this building this
past summer on the part of grandparents to get them to pay attention. This is a
pattern of this government. Unless it gets into the media, unless people come
to the front steps of the
So, with the hard work on the part of the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat), we are pleased to see that the government is going to move forward finally with legislation that deals with the very important issue of grandparents who wish to and who have a valuable role to play in connection with their grandchildren in the case of marital breakdown. Now we know, Mr. Speaker, of course that the court requires discretion, but first and foremost the interest of the children must prevail. But we also need to consider the positive impact that grandparents can have in the lives of their grandchildren when a family breaks down. These are often difficult and painful circumstances for families, and we think it appropriate that a steadying and constructive role by grandparents be acknowledged in provincial legislation. We are pleased to see that moving ahead after years of delay.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we have been calling for months and years on the government to deal with the issue of interfacility ambulance transfer fees. It was first announced in the 2005 Throne Speech and now, finally, after years and months of calling on the government to take action to deal with this blatant unfairness, our system of ambulance transfers moves ahead. They have listened to our party, and they are moving ahead and we thank them for doing so.
Mr. Speaker, we have been calling for
years for the government to undertake a review of regional health authorities.
We know that under the watch of this government our regional health authorities
have turned into monsters. They have grown exponentially as the bureaucracy has
grown, and they are talking about shutting down emergency rooms in
* (11:10)
We also know that, speaking of slow melts,
there is a challenge of dealing with global warming and greenhouse gas
emissions, and we are pleased to see the government picking up an idea that was
floated at our annual general meeting two weeks ago and move ahead with an
initiative to encourage the use of hybrid vehicles as a way of cutting down on
emissions for fossil fuels. It is long overdue. We know greenhouse gas
emissions have grown steadily in
Mr. Speaker, we've also seen in the Throne Speech a little bit of me-too-ism, and that's okay too. When you've run out of ideas and you have to look to the federal Conservatives for inspiration, that's not such a bad place to go for good ideas. So what they've done is introduced income splitting for seniors, and I want to just take a moment to indicate our support and our encouragement to the federal Minister of Finance, Mr. Flaherty, for moving ahead on income splitting for seniors to bring the tax burden off Manitoba senior citizens who have spent a lifetime paying into government and deserve to be treated with respect in their old age. We're pleased to see the government following the federal Conservatives on this initiative.
We also see the government in its Throne Speech committing to new funding for transit. It's gratifying to see the government doing what it already had to do, and that's spend federal money that's coming into the provincial government under a federal-provincial agreement where the federal government told them to spend the money on transit. This is not a new idea. It's something that the government was required to do under the agreement, and it's something that the government is now doing in response to an initiative that took place at the federal level. I thank the government for, in its own foot-dragging way, moving forward on spending federal money in areas that are important to Winnipeggers and important to other people who live in cities around our province.
In addition to those ideas in the Throne Speech borrowed from Progressive Conservative and Conservative governments, we had a series of re-announcements, Mr. Speaker. That's something that we're getting used to from this government. Again, when you're out of steam, you need to find a new way to put a new gloss on old announcements, and that's what we saw plenty of in this week's Speech from the Throne.
We had the scene on Wednesday with the government playing politics by announcing funding and programs over and over again. Let's just take a few examples. They're going to spend money on infrastructure, effectively a re-announcement of the announcement the Premier (Mr. Doer) had made a number of weeks earlier. When you look at the way they're going about this infrastructure challenge, panicky announcements on the eve of an election with no plan, with no assurance to Manitobans that they are going to get value for that money spent, no commitment to what's actually going to happen in terms of highway building, which is so long overdue in Manitoba, but they roll out $4 billion which seemed to come out of nowhere in highway spending. We don't have the foggiest idea at this stage of the game as to how that money is going to be spent and whether Manitobans are just going to get more of the same; the way we were soaked on the floodway fiasco, the way we were burned on Burntwood. We need to know, as Manitobans, whether the government has learned anything from its seven years of mismanagement, and we need to know whether we are going to have a repeat of what we've seen in these various other NDP fiascos.
We now find out, just before the Throne
Speech was introduced, that the government is cancelling bridges connected to
the floodway project. These were bridges that they deemed essential just a year
ago to provide Winnipeggers with 1-in-700-year flood protection. All of a
sudden, a year later, these are optional, Mr. Speaker. We know that
"California Dreamin'" is one of the Premier's favourite songs, but
we're concerned that it's looking more and more like bridges under troubled
water in the event of a 1-in-700-year flood. We think that Manitobans deserve
better. They deserve to have their hard-earned tax dollars treated with
respect. They deserve value. They deserve to get benefits when their money is
spent. We see a record number of boil-water orders in
We also saw a repetition in the Throne
Speech of their old promise to do child welfare reviews. This is what they do
consistently. Every time we have a problem in child welfare, the first step in
the NDP playbook is deny the problem. The second step–first is deny the
problem, and if that doesn't work, try to blame it on somebody else. If that
doesn't work, Mr. Speaker, have a review. When the review comes out, and it
turns out to be a whitewash, start to point the blame at others. It's not good
enough. We had in this Throne Speech again a pathetic re-announcement of a
child welfare review which didn't get to the bottom of the chaos that we now
see in our child welfare system.
We think the government and the Premier
(Mr. Doer) need to take personal responsibility for staying in the province
until this challenge, this crisis in our child welfare system is fixed. The
flimsy, passing reference to child welfare in the Throne Speech I think
demonstrates a government that has completely lost touch with the important
things in
What's just as interesting as what was in
the Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker, is what was missing. It's what was missing that
says as much about this government as what was actually in the Throne Speech:
meaningful tax relief.
We are one of four provinces that still
has a payroll tax: a tax on jobs and a tax on investment in
Now we saw in this Throne Speech absolutely nothing in terms of a concerted effort to create opportunities at home to keep young Manitobans in our province. Now they've done some flimsy things on the surface. They created the name of a department. We've now got a new government department for competitiveness, but the fact is you can change the chef, but if the recipe remains the same, then it's the same crummy stuff they've been feeding us for the last seven years, Mr. Speaker.
We've got the same old
tired, rerun ideas, the same old passive-aggressive, anti-business attitude
that permeates the NDP, and nothing could be more clear about their lack of
commitment to business in
Mr. Speaker: Order.
* (11:20)
Mr. McFadyen: It's time, Mr.
Speaker, to start looking at the challenges that we face today: high taxes,
record red tape, crumbling roads, the worst health care system in
Think of the message that
this sends to vulnerable children in
Mr. Speaker, let's now
look at the most infamous broken promise in
Mr. Speaker, the Premier needs to spend
less time in
The best he can do–[interjection]
You know what this reminds me of, Mr.
Speaker, after months and years of denying that we have a problem with young
people leaving Manitoba, No. 1, their leaked initiative to the Free Press–what is it, Mr. Speaker, an
initiative to keep young people in Manitoba. What an admission of failure after
seven years. Seven years of denial followed by an admission that they are
failing young people. Seven years of denial on hallway medicine. I hope that
the Premier will do the right thing on this case as they did in the Throne Speech
with respect to young Manitobans and admit that they have got it wrong on
hallway medicine, admit that they haven't solved the problem and get on with
it. Fudging statistics does nothing for
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Hells Angels
moved into
What Manitobans require and what Manitobans deserve is a government at the provincial level that is committed to enforcement. Enforcement means police, prosecutions, jails and courts, Mr. Speaker. It doesn't require more news releases and more legislation. What we need is action on enforcement.
What we have today, Mr. Speaker, and we
are grateful as Manitobans for this, is a federal government committed to
getting serious about amending the Criminal Code in order to bring real
consequences for criminals in
It is shameful, and I don't know why the
government won't make it clear, make it abundantly clear. As they distribute
the propaganda around
After inmates were given the right to vote
in Headingley, Mr. Speaker–I recall inmates were given the right to vote–that,
as I recall, seven out of 10
Mr. Speaker, on justice, we know that we
need a plan to crack down on gangs. We know that we need to deal with the
challenge of addiction in our communities. We need to see a concerted effort.
We know that, if they can beat crime in
Mr. Speaker, speaking of injustice meted
out to Manitobans under this government, we have the issue of the Crocus
scandal. We have Manitobans who put their faith in this government. We have
Manitobans who received the advertising. They got the material in their pay
envelopes: Buy into Crocus; Get the tax credits; Buy into Crocus and support
the
Now, what we see is that the primary leg of the stool–the Premier's defence, the Premier's evasion on Crocus, has rested on a three-legged stool. One of which was the Manitoba Securities Commission investigation. That leg has been kicked out. The stool has fallen down. It is time for the Premier (Mr. Doer) to stop making up excuses. It is time for the Premier to call an inquiry into Crocus and do justice to those thousands of Manitobans who have had their retirements negatively impacted as a result of this government's neglect in its oversight of the Crocus Fund.
Mr. Speaker, we also see from this
government a complete lack of strategy in this Throne Speech to promote growth
in our agricultural economy. We know that agriculture is changing throughout
the world. We know there are heavy subsidies in the
We need a government that is going to provide. We need a government that is going to look forward and say, what kind of future lies ahead for our rural communities, and what are we going to do to encourage the transformation of our rural economy so that young people don't have to do what they've been doing for the last seven years and leave their communities in order to find opportunities elsewhere, Mr. Speaker.
* (11:30)
Now, we know that there are challenges in agriculture that go well beyond the borders of Manitoba, but we need a government that is going to be in the corner of Manitoba farmers, in the corner of our rural residents and fighting for them instead of working against them, which is what this government has done every step in the day along the way.
A $2-a-head tax on cattle, Mr. Speaker, a failure to respond in a timely way to the BSE crisis that was ravaging our beef sector. We now see contradictory positions on the pork industry, 27 million of taxpayers' dollars put at risk at OlyWest at the same time as we have an open-ended moratorium in the pork industry.
Mr. Speaker, we believe an environmental review is overdue for the pork industry. We support a review of the environmental implications of what is going on with the pork industry in Manitoba, but to have an open-ended moratorium which sends a signal that there is no certainty, there is no planning, there is no foresight on the part of the government, is to drive away investment as a further blow to Manitoba's rural economy.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we see suddenly the New
Democrats have been converted to democracy when it comes to agriculture in
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, I had
occasion to meet with more than 800 rural Manitobans last night; they are not
impressed. They want change. They want change, and I can tell you that we have
had a growth in our party's membership over the last nine months. Over the last
nine months we have seen a growth in membership in our party from rural
Mr. Speaker, the Premier (Mr. Doer) is throwing out comments from his seat today. The Premier is making comments from his seat today.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition has the floor.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker,
the Premier is making comments from his seat. I think he said something about a
hatchet man. I just want to let the Premier in on something, because I know he
is spending a lot of time in
Now, we have seen in the Throne Speech a
commitment to do something by 2019, and that relates to the Conawapa project.
We support hydro development in
Mr. Speaker, we have seen that Manitobans
have every reason to be sceptical about this government's ability to manage
major projects on their behalf. We've seen with the mismanagement of a
floodway, a project labour agreement that has cost
Now, Mr. Speaker, here we see after a year
of bungling and mismanagement on this project, that the only bridges that the
Premier is building are bridges to his friends in the labour movement. He
should be building bridges that allow Winnipeggers to get in and out of
Mr. Speaker, we just see time and again,
and again another major omission from this Throne Speech, time and again a
story of misplaced priorities. We see the government launching and spending
hundreds and thousands of dollars on pre-election, taxpayer-funded election
advertising campaigns. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. It eclipses anything
that's ever been done under any previous government in this province. I can
tell you that if the government has $1.6 million to spend on a politically
motivated spirited energy campaign, why not take a chunk of that and have a
campaign aimed at recruiting more Manitobans to become foster parents so that
we can start to deal with the real problems facing Manitobans and not have them
subjected to these phoney pre-election taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns?
It is a question of priorities. It is a question of priorities. We need a
government that takes a hard look at the challenges that we face, spends their
time and energy on those things that are important. Time and again we see a
government that is more interested in advertising and junkets to
Mr. Speaker, we see today, and we've seen
it repeatedly, governments and companies in other provinces,
* (11:40)
So, Mr. Speaker, sadly, we have witnessed
a Throne Speech from this government with no fewer than 12 references to the
1980s and the 1990s and little or nothing looking to the future for the benefit
of young Manitobans. This is absolutely unacceptable. It is absolutely
unacceptable. We today remain one of
We have a government that is content, that
is satisfied and, almost, I think, proud of the fact that they are excellent at
getting handouts from the federal government. That is one area where I give the
Premier (Mr. Doer) credit. That's right. There used to be a joke in
Manitobans have a proud history of standing on our own two feet. We deserve better than a cap-in-hand government that is mired in mediocrity. The Throne Speech does nothing to move us forward. It does nothing to move us toward a province that can stand on its own two feet with pride and optimism.
So, Mr. Speaker, we see today a Throne
Speech that has completely failed to lay out a path for a better future for
The Premier has heckled consistently from his chair from the beginning of this speech, and we know that, if he put as much energy into coming up with new ideas and drafting a Throne Speech as he puts into one-liners and callous jokes in this House and non-stop heckling, Manitobans would be better served.
With regret, after reviewing this Throne Speech, this last-gasp, pre-election Throne Speech from a tired NDP government, for all of the reasons I've already referred to, I would move, seconded by the Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire),
THAT the Motion be amended
by adding at the end of the motion a sentence with the following words:
But this House regrets:
(a) the government's failure to provide meaningful and competitive tax relief for Manitobans; and
(b) the government's failure to provide foster placements for the unprecedented number of children in care housed in our hotels; and
(c) the government's failure to acknowledge that hallway medicine still exists in Manitoba, and that it has now progressed to a crisis in Winnipeg's emergency rooms due to a critical shortage of doctors; and
(d) the government's failure to implement an effective strategy to reduce wait times for diagnostic testing, surgical procedures and appointments with specialists; and
(e) the government's failure to address the critical shortage of health care professionals, which is crippling the ability of the system to provide timely access to care; and
(f) the government's failure to keep rural emergency rooms open despite promising to do so, forcing Manitobans to travel crumbling highways to access emergency care; and
(g) the government's failure to offer assurances to students and parents that educational outcomes and greater accountability in education are a high priority; and
(h) the government's failure to call an independent public inquiry into the Crocus Investment Fund scandal, which resulted in 34,000 Manitobans losing more than $60 million; and
(i) the government's failure to ensure prudent expenditure of taxpayers' dollars, spending millions of dollars on rebranding campaigns and pre-election advertising; and
(j) the
government's failure to support the construction of a new transmission line for
hydro-electricity on the east side of
(k) the government's failure to implement a long-term provincial strategy to recruit and retain police officers; and
(l) the government's failure to crack down on auto thieves and gang activity; and
(m) the
government's failure to address court backlogs and the flourishing remand
culture in
(n) the government's failure to focus on the competitiveness of our post-secondary institutions compared to others across the country; and
(o) the
government's failure to provide a strategy to promote growth in
(p) the government's failure to implement a plan to market by-products of the biofuel production process; and
(q) the government's failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and
(r) the government's failure to acknowledge that it was Manitoba Progressive Conservatives who announced ideas for rebates on hybrid vehicles, an external review of the regionalization of health care and grandparents' rights legislation; and
(s) the
government's failure to ensure the promised level of flood protection for the
people of the City of
(t) the
government's failure to provide better economic development opportunities for
rural and northern
(u) the
government's failure to create a competitive environment that encourages
private sector businesses to come to
(v) the government's failure to address the out-migration of Manitobans, especially our youth.
AND HAS
THEREBY lost the trust and confidence of the people of
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
* (11:50)
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Before moving the motion, I would like to ask the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition: The verbal wording was different than the written wording, so I will go through all of them first and then you can say if you agree. We are after the seconder of the motion:
THAT the Motion be amended by adding at the end of the motion the following, you said "sentence" but in the wording it says "words."
So that is one. Maybe we will just go through all of them and save a little bit of time.
If you just follow me, then in:
(b) the government's failure to provide foster placements for the unprecedented number of children in care housed in, and you added "our" before "hotel".
Okay. Then in:
(g) the government's failure to offer assurances to students and parents that educational outcomes and greater accountability in, and two words–and followed "the" that was left out of your comment, and then "education" and then also "system" was left out of your verbal comment.
Then we will go to (i) and where it says "Hydro ratepayers" in the written form, you substituted "Manitobans." So if you are agreed to take out "Manitobans" and if we could put in "Hydro ratepayers." Okay.
Then we will go to the back of the page 4:
(s) and for the government's failure to ensure the promised level of flood protection for the,
you
added "people of the" City of
So, if you are willing to delete that wording, we will print it as it is written.
So, with those changes, if you are agreeable, then we'll proceed with the motion.
Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, to the extent that the oral comments didn't conform exactly to what is written, I would simply ask that what we submitted in writing take precedence over the oral comments.
Mr. Speaker: I thank you very much for that.
It has been moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen), seconded by the honourable Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire),
THAT the motion be amended–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.
THAT the Motion be amended by adding at the end the
following words:
But this House regrets:
(a) the government's failure to provide meaningful and
competitive tax relief for Manitobans; and
(b) the government's failure to provide foster
placements for the unprecedented number of children in care housed in hotels;
and
(c) the government's failure to acknowledge that
hallway medicine still exists in Manitoba, and that it has now progressed to a
crisis in Winnipeg's emergency rooms due to a critical shortage of doctors; and
(d) the government's failure to implement an effective
strategy to reduce wait times for diagnostic testing, surgical procedures and
appointments with specialists; and
(e) the government's failure to address the critical
shortage of health care professionals, which is crippling the ability of the
system to provide timely access to care; and
(f) the government's failure to keep rural emergency
rooms open despite promising to do so, forcing Manitobans to travel crumbling
highways to access emergency care; and
(g) the government's failure to offer assurances to
students and parents that educational outcomes and greater accountability in
the education system are a high priority; and
(h) the government's failure to call an independent
public inquiry into the Crocus Investment Fund scandal, which resulted in
34,000 Manitobans losing more than $60 million; and
(i) the government's failure to ensure prudent
expenditure of taxpayers' dollars, spending millions of dollars on rebranding
campaigns and pre-election advertising; and
(j) the government's failure to support the
construction of a new transmission line for hydro-electricity on the east side
of Lake Winnipeg, which will cost Hydro ratepayers over $500 million; and
(k) the government's
failure to implement a long-term provincial strategy to recruit and retain
police officers; and
(l) the government's failure to crack down on auto
thieves and gang activity; and
(m) the government's
failure to address court backlogs and the flourishing remand culture in
(n) the government's failure to focus on the
competitiveness of our post-secondary institutions compared to others across
the country; and
(o) the government's
failure to provide a strategy to promote growth in
(p) the government's failure to implement a plan to
market by-products of the biofuel production process; and
(q) the government's failure to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions; and
(r) the government's failure to acknowledge that it
was Manitoba Progressive Conservatives who announced ideas for rebates on
hybrid vehicles, an external review of the regionalization of health care and
grandparents' rights legislation; and
(s) the government's failure to ensure the promised
level of flood protection for the City of
(t) the government's failure to provide better
economic development opportunities for rural and northern
(u) the government's failure to create a competitive
environment that encourages private sector businesses to come to Manitoba and
spur job creation and economic growth; and
(v) the government's failure to address the
out-migration of Manitobans, especially our youth.
AND HAS THEREBY lost the trust and confidence of the
people of
The motion is in order, so we will now continue our debate.
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to debate the Throne Speech and the amendment that has been just moved by the Leader of the Opposition.
I do want to say at the outset that I want to welcome the new pages and the interns to the House and also note that it may be my last speech before the election. I know some of us may not be back. We never know when we go into an election whether we are going to be re-elected or not. Some may not even know whether they've been renominated or not, but this is what happens in a democratic environment and we have to be prepared for an election which possibly could not be until June of 2008. So we may be here quite a long time.
I noted with some disappointment that one of the members opposite lost his nomination last night, and it may be a long time for him in this House if he has to sit here as not the candidate for his party for another year, year and a half.
Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I noted that the Leader of the Opposition looked very crestfallen and defeated with the announcement of the Conawapa project and, you know, I can see why. Because just two days earlier, on November 13, the Winnipeg Free Press–the Winnipeg Sun, pardon me–carried a story entitled "Tories open to private-sector Hydro deals," in which the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) talked about future Hydro developments, his vision of future Hydro development involving private-sector deals.
Now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you know that in
Two days after that, we have a Throne Speech in which we announce that we are going to proceed with Conawapa. Conawapa is a 1,250-megawatt project representing roughly 20 percent of what we have currently installed. So a huge, huge project second only to the Limestone project of 20 years ago. This Leader of the Opposition, based on his announcement on the 13th, would be planning to develop it under private auspices.
We announced it two days later, and in the days following our announcement, what has this Opposition Leader said regarding Conawapa? He's totally retreated; he's gone negative on the project. He would like to support it, but he knows it is a winner with the public and it's going to hurt his chances in the election. So he is caught between a rock and a hard place here. So what has he done? He stood up in the Legislature in the last couple of days saying basically bad things about the project: Oh, it can't happen. It is not there yet. We don't have firm power sales. The market is not there for the power, totally the opposite of what he was saying two days earlier when he was happily announcing that we would be doing future projects being opened to private-sector development in the Hydro deals. Now, two days later, he is not talking about this anymore. Matter of fact, he has gone negative. He is not saying, well, the government is doing a great job here. Conawapa should be developed, and let's go back to my great idea of two days ago in which I said we should involve the public sector in the financing. He's all of a sudden said, no, we don't need the project. It is not necessary anymore. It was necessary on the 13th, and now on the 15th it is not necessary anymore. Matter of fact, it has gone from being necessary on the 13th to actually being a negative on the 15th, right? It is going to bankrupt the province. We are not going to be able to sell the power.
This is at a time when we are selling all the power we can produce. This is at a time when we have had the largest net income Manitoba Hydro has ever experienced, has ever seen. The past year, in the report ending March 31, which I just happen to have a copy of here, it indicates that they have a record net income of $415 million due to the high water and the record energy exports which, by the way, the consumption of energy in North America is not projected to be dropping any time soon. If anything, we should have been developing this project earlier.
* (12:00)
In fact, if the previous Conservative
government hadn't sat around for 11 years, they should have been out trying to
get an agreement with
Fortunately, the economy is very good. We
are selling all the power we can produce. We made $415 million pure profit last
year. Our previous net income record was $270 million just in 2001, and, in
fact, Manitoba Hydro was
This is a good-news story and nowhere do I see any reference in the member's amendment, which we are addressing now, to the issue of Conawapa, once again one of the biggest mega-projects this province will be facing in the next couple of years by far, the 1,250-megawatt Conawapa project, and no reference whatsoever to it in their amendment to the Throne Speech.
An Honourable Member: Maybe they forgot.
Mr. Maloway: I think they may not have forgotten; maybe they like the project, and they just don't like the idea that the government's developing it, because once again they are missing an opportunity to reward their friends.
Now, speaking of rewarding friends, they only know too well how to do that. We talked this morning about MTS and what happened to MTS, and the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) stood up, and I think we were all here as witnesses, and what did he say? He said, well, buy it back. Well, isn't that sweet? He was part of the group who engineered the sale below market, $13 a share. They only charged seven; they got a loan of seven, so they basically got it for less than the 13, then turned around and days after many investors were selling these very same shares for $30. Today the shares I believe–I do not own any–are in the $40 to $42 range.
So now the Leader of the Official Opposition, get this, says, buy it back. This is Tory economics. These are the big business brains over there, right? You want to turn your economy and turn your future over to these guys who want to sell an ongoing asset at 13, less than 13, and then they want to buy it back at 42, and why would they do that? Well, so they could sell it again at 13. No wonder there are so many happy Tories. You know, whenever I see a Tory convention I see a lot of happy people there, and it's not just the alcohol that is making them happy. I mean, we all have our party conventions. Our people usually seem to be a little more concerned and serious than the Tories seem to be at their conventions.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I see the Tory campaign being a little bit deflated here because of the happenings of the past few days, and I think they are scrambling to try to get back on track here. They also made some tentative announcements of what they plan to do when they are in government. One of them was the grandparent access protection and, of course, we have announced that. That is one plank in their platform that we thought so highly of that we are going to introduce it. So they should be happy about that.
Number two, they announced a rebate for purchasing hybrid cars. Now, my understanding is they had just announced a tax credit which, of course, would just benefit richer people, and we are announcing a rebate for purchasing the hybrid cars. So the rebate is better which helps all people and is better than a tax credit. Now, to be honest with you, I can't see the super rich getting into a Prius anyway. I don't think that's the market for the Prius. So I don't think we're going to be sending too many rebate cheques. But, when the Tories concocted their plan, they were careful to make sure that, if any rich people did want to buy a Prius, they'd at least get a tax deduction out of it.
Another area that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) announced that he would like to make some moves on was a review of the health authorities, and there I agree with him 100 percent. But, surprise, surprise, we are going to do that. We have announced in the Throne Speech that this coming year we are going to do an independent review of the regional health authorities. I might remind the honourable member that, in fact, it was the Tories who brought the regional health authorities in, in the first place. They try to pretend that this monster that's out there, the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, that's growing tentacles; they like to talk about that. That is their baby. That was their baby from 10 years ago when they were in power. That was Don Orchard's baby. Don Orchard brought that in, and we inherited it from them.
As a matter of fact, we made some improvements. The Member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) was the Health Minister at the time when we amalgamated the two boards, because the way they were going, they had two. One wasn't enough. They had to have two. So where was their focus? They were too concerned about selling the telephone company off at $13 a share to focus on the health care system which had two authorities. So we have streamlined those authorities. I would be the first to admit that I think we really do need a review. We have to get a handle on the regional health authorities and just where things are going in that area.
So I think now that it may be prudent for the Leader of the Opposition not to announce any more platform because he's three for three at this point. He's proposed three and we've adopted three, and we've got a lot tolerance. We can keep going on this. He proposing them, we'll keep implementing them. Keep the good news coming, guys.
Now the members' amendment which we are to
be addressing dealt with the area of taxation. There, again, the opposition
certainly has a lot to worry about because they're used to the old-style NDP
governments that aren't really too concerned about the finer points of
corporate taxation. But they found that this government is a moving target on
these points, and they're finding it very hard to make hay. They line up with
their business friends periodically and announce that we've got to reduce the
corporation tax to keep in line with
But the fact of the matter is for those
people who think that they were great tax cutters when they were in government,
let me tell you that, in 1987, it was the previous NDP government that raised
all the taxes that gave them all the revenue that they needed for the 11 years
they were in government. So we went and raised the taxes for them, and they
didn't reduce them at all. So, in terms of the corporate taxes, on January 1,
* (12:10)
In terms of the payroll tax, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) wants to talk about the payroll tax and he should know, if he looks into the history of the payroll tax, that, in fact, we did increase the exemptions over the years. So, in fact, no real small businesses are paying the payroll tax any more. There was a point at which it was fairly low and there was a lot of paperwork involved, but the exemptions were raised and raised so that only very large businesses are, in fact, even paying the payroll tax.
So, if he wants to eliminate the payroll tax, if that is what he's saying, I want to know how he's going to replace the revenue. How is he going to replace the several-hundred-million-dollars worth of revenue that he's going to forgo in terms of giving up the payroll tax?
So these are the issues–[interjection] Yes, is he planning to sell off Hydro plants? He's already talked about all the new developments being in private hands. Well, you know, it's not probably a large jump to think that maybe he might be wanting to sell off some of the existing to pay for the elimination of the payroll tax that he's talking about.
The Member for Emerson (Mr. Penner) was talking about an increase in the sales tax. There are all kinds of little tax increases over there in the opposition. They talk a great line when they're in there with their Chamber of Commerce buddies, you know, taking their orders, right? Then they come out and they make these announcements that they want to increase the sales tax.
So this is what they're going to say when they're in opposition. When they get in government it's a different situation. They didn't lower the corporation taxes when they had 11 years to do it. They did not eliminate the payroll tax when they had 11 years to do it. They lived off the taxes that were fairly high and robust during those 11 years. They didn't decrease them at all. By the way, when they did want to decrease them, guess when that was–1999. It wasn't believable. It wasn't believable. The public didn't believe them and out they went.
Now they're crying that,
in fact, they were right all along and, in fact, there was room to reduce the
taxes and, in fact, that billion-dollars worth of income came into the
government, and we have been spending all that money that they would have liked
to give away, give back in tax cuts. The fact of the matter is we've taken that
money and we put it in the health care system. That's not what they would have
done. They would not have improved the health care system with that billion
dollars. They would have used it for their tax cuts and
Now, let's look at where we were in 1999
just in the condition of the downtown of
Well, let me tell you, Mr. Deputy Speaker,
that today that house and property could be selling for $60,000, $70,000 or
$80,000. Right? The downtown development during their 11 years was
non-existent. They couldn't build the arena. They didn't build the arena. The
arena got built under the NDP. The new Hydro building is getting built under
the NDP. The
When their leader stands up and says, oh, we are going to have private development in Hydro, are they going to be believable? That is their problem. We have been catching all the inconsistencies in the last few days of the Leader of the Opposition, just constant inconsistencies. He makes an error and he doesn't apologize for it. He seems like he is a guy who calls it as he sees it, but if he doesn't see it, he makes it up. And he is making these factual errors. I think they have got some problems over there, and so the sooner we have the election, the happier I'm going to be. We don't want to give him too much more experience here to try to get this thing right.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
So, Mr. Speaker, there are a number of other announcements that we have made. The criticism of the members opposite has been that the Throne Speech is a little bit too specific. They think this kind of looks more like a budget, or a pre-budget Throne Speech, and, well, I have seen 20 or so of them and this one does look a little specific.
But, for the first time in
So, Mr. Speaker, there's only good news coming out of this government at this time. The opposition is basically just grasping, grasping at straws to try to get some traction. I guess that is what it is. They thought if they changed leaders, they would get some traction, and they probably did a little bit better in that area than they were doing, but there's still some wheels spinning here.
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to just ask you how much time I have. [interjection] Okay, thank you.
Mr. Speaker, in the last six years, we
have spent a billion dollars to rebuild and modernize health facilities since
1999. We've had emergency room upgrades in
You know, the Member for Steinbach is always critical of the government that we are not spending enough money in his area. Well, there's the proof to him, and the member will be voting against the Throne Speech when we are doing good things for his constituency. In the last seven years, we've provided funding for 10 new schools, 13 replacement schools, 48 additions and more than 600 renovation projects.
It reminds me back in the early '80s, when it came time for the election in 1981, that was a fundraiser for the party, I would be out talking to engineers and architect firms and so on, and they'd say, you know, we're not really NDP. We are kind of Conservative inclined here, but, you know, we can't afford those guys because they shut the province down. When Sterling Lyon got elected in '77, we had Limestone starting up, and what did he do? He mothballed it. He shut it down. And, in 1981, the same architects and engineers who were literally starving under the Tories who were leaving the province in droves; they were voting NDP. We couldn't turn them away. They were breaking down our doors to write us cheques at a time when they could because they wanted to get rid of these guys. They wanted to see development and what did we do? We built the Limestone project. We built it a billion dollars under budget and what did the Liberal Leader say? The previous Liberal Leader was calling the project "lemonstone." You know, negative, negative, negative, yet this project is one of the biggest projects in Manitoba history and has paid for itself probably over and over and will certainly, by the end of the project, over its useful life, pay for itself many, many times.
This government, the NDP, since 1969, has always been proactive. It is active. We have been builders. We have made some mistakes, but we don't go in and hack and slash and burn like the Tories do when they are in government, and that is what the public is going to see from this group if they manage to get elected.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we have announced a new Department of Competitiveness, Training and Trade to reduce red tape in government, focussing on the creation of a single-window service for business. Well, the Chamber of Commerce should be very happy with that. What have they been saying about it? [interjection] Yeah, I have been waiting to hear what they have been saying about that. The single window is a very good idea and, as a matter of fact, the government has to develop that for all its services on-line, its services to the public. Not just services to business should be delivered through a single window but services to the public. Services that the government puts on-line to the public should be delivered in the same manner, through a single-window service.
In terms of population
gain, Mr. Speaker, between 2000 and 2006 we recorded a net population gain from
other jurisdictions with 6,683 more people coming to
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have many, many other points here that I could deal with. I know that my time is coming short, which may be my last speech before the election, so I guess I should be wanting to make it as long as possible.
In
Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable member's time has expired.
Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker: Call it
12:30? [Agreed]
The hour being 12:30, this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. on Monday.