LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Thursday, June 4, 2015
Mr. Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom, know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
Good morning, everyone. Please be seated.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): House business.
Mr. Speaker: On House business
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I'd like to advise the House that we intend to sit in Committee of Supply on Friday.
I'm also seeking leave of the House, Mr. Speaker, to see if there's approval of the House to sit in the Legislature and/or Committee of Supply, if we sit in Committee of Supply today, until 6 p.m.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to sit in Committee of Supply this evening until 6 p.m.?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no. Leave has been denied.
An Honourable Member: House business.
Mr. Speaker: The Official Opposition House Leader, on House business.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I am seeking leave of the House for this–for the Legislature to sit during the months of July, August, September, October, November and December of this year.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to have the House sit during the months of July, August, September, October, November and December of this year? [Agreed]
Seems to be agreed.
Any further House business?
Mr. Speaker: All right. We'll move on to calling of second readings of public bills.
Bill 202, are we ready to proceed with that one? [Agreed]
We are.
Bill 202–The Participation of Manitoba in the New West Partnership Act
Mr. Speaker: Then we'll call Bill 202, The Participation of Manitoba in the New West Partnership Act, sponsored by the honourable member for Tuxedo.
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Morden-Winkler (Mr. Friesen) that Bill 202, The Participation of Manitoba in the New West Partnership Act; Loi sur la participation du Manitoba au nouveau partenariat de l'Ouest, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mrs. Stefanson: Good morning, colleagues, and I think this is a great day to–a great way to start the day, to debate the New West Partnership bill once again in the Manitoba Legislature.
This is, in fact, the first time we've had the opportunity to bring this bill back before the Legislature since the recent turn of events in Alberta with an NDP government there. And I'm hoping that with that, Mr. Speaker, that members opposite have had the chance to speak with their counterparts in Alberta and will see fit to pass this bill today. It's a very important bill for the province of Manitoba and indeed for all western provinces in Canada and indeed for our country.
And so I'm hoping that members opposite, as they have taken on their new roles and their new portfolios, the ministers and their new portfolios, Mr. Speaker, that they've had a chance to speak and meet with their new ministers in Alberta and to have discussions around procurement and ways that we can save money in Manitoba by working together and with the other western provinces.
This is a very, very important thing for our economy here in Manitoba, and I'm hoping that this is–has been at least in the top-10 list of these ministers on their priorities, their new priorities in their new portfolios, to see fit to meet with their ministers in Alberta, their counterparts in Alberta, and to have the discussion about the importance of Manitoba's joining the New West Partnership and encouraging Alberta to support our entering into the New West Partnership.
We know what this means to our province, Mr. Speaker. It means great things for the future of our province. What's good for the small- and mid‑sized businesses in the province in areas of procurement and other areas of cost savings, with government being able to work with other provinces to save in the areas of expenditure, in particular in the area of health care, but in other areas as well. The idea is that we can share with the other provinces the trade that we're able to share with the other provinces by way of being able to buy in bulk from other countries and so on is very, very good for our economy here in Manitoba.
And so I'm hoping that because members opposite seem to like to talk a lot about jobs and the economy–they don't like to do a lot about it, Mr. Speaker, but if they really want to do something and take this on, they'll do the right thing here and they'll support this bill, because it's very important. By supporting this bill, this government will send a signal and send a message to the rest of Canada and to the rest of western Canada that they care about small- and mid-sized businesses in our province, that they care about the future of our economy here in Manitoba. And if they truly care about that, they will support this bill.
And I'm encouraging all members of this House to see the light with this bill. They now have their–the new NDP government in Alberta to work with, Mr. Speaker, and I'm hoping that they'll work with that NDP government now in solidarity to ensure that all of our provinces in western Canada can work together to ensure that we have a solid foundation here in western Canada.
So, Mr. Speaker, this bill requires the government of Manitoba to contact the governments of British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan to begin negotiations to join their economic partnership, known as the New West Partnership, within one year after the bill receives royal assent.
And I think today would be a great indication, Mr. Speaker, that this government is in favour of improving our economy here in Manitoba, that they're in favour of working with their NDP counterparts in Alberta and, indeed, with other governments, including the Saskatchewan and BC governments, that it's time to do a positive thing here for our economy here in Manitoba.
I hope members opposite finally see the light and see that we should move this forward to committee today, and I encourage all members of this House to join together, Mr. Speaker, to see that that happens for the future of Manitoba, for the future of jobs and our economy here in Manitoba. Thank you.
Mr. Dave Gaudreau (St. Norbert): Well, I'm glad the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson) is talking about the economy and seeing the light, because it seems like they want to shut off the lights when they want to stop the development of Manitoba Hydro.
* (10:10)
We hear from the opposition all the time about how they don't want to sell power to Minnesota with the new Manitoba-Minnesota transmission line, yet they talk about this New West Partnership like it's everything in the world. You know what? Manitoba trades–over 50 per cent of our economy is with Ontario and Quebec, so we focus with all the provinces across the country and with the United States.
And I know that the stewards of the economy over there like to think that they can dictate that this is going to save and be the answer to all. Well, you know what? I will–I don't think our side of the House has to take any advice on the economy. When you look at the federal Conservative government–their overlords and masters–when we look at what's happening federally, the economy has shrunk by 0.6 per cent three consecutive months in a row, which signals–and I know that they don't understand economics, but that actually signals a recession. Mr. Speaker, the federal Conservative Party has cut so deeply, the austerity that they've done is signalling a recession again for Canada.
But you know what? In Manitoba, things are looking good because our economy is actually growing. We've got the strongest economy in the country right now. We've got growth in our economy. The member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson) likes to say, you know, oh, they like to talk a lot. No, Mr. Speaker, we like to do a lot. We like to build. We're building hydro. We're building our economy with trade.
We were actually the No. 1 country–or city in the Midwest to do business last year. We're the No. 1 economy right now in the country for retail sales. We're the No. 1 economy in growth. We're the No. 1 economy in job creation. We're the lowest–we're the lowest unemployment rate, second lowest unemployment rate in the country. We're actually rated the No. 1 city in Canada–in the mid–in western Canada to do business in. So not only do we talk a lot, we do a lot.
It's the people on the other side of the floor that like to talk and don't understand the economy. It's absolutely unbelievable to me that they are trying to give us advice on the economy when their federal overlords are giving the worst economic advice that we have seen probably in the history of this country. They like to talk a big game about balanced budgets and budgets, Mr. Speaker. Well, you know what we would–the situation we would be in right now with the $550 million worth of slashing and burning that the opposition would do? We'd be in the same position that Canada's in and almost going into a recession again.
But no, no, in Manitoba we're going to continue to grow and we're going to continue to build and we're going to continue to move along. They're so focused on one thing that they've forgotten to realize that there's a multitude of things going on in our economy which actually makes our economy the strongest in the country, Mr. Speaker–the lowest unemployment rates. We work will all our partners from Ontario to Quebec to the Maritime provinces all the way through to the western provinces. We work with all of them.
This deal is not the godsend and the save-all to our economy and to our province. We're also investing in core infrastructure, which is growing our economy yet again. But, once again, the negative nellies on the other side of the House would have us cut that infrastructure investment which would see absolute total job losses, and we would be at the bottom of the barrel just like their federal counterparts have brought Canada, Mr. Speaker, right to the bottom of the barrel. We're looking at a recession again.
The stewards of destruction over there would have Manitoba Hydro frozen in its tracks. They would see Manitoba Hydro development stopped. They would cancel hydro lines to go into Minnesota, which would stop the sale of power which keeps our rates the lowest in the country. And we hear from them on the other side that they talk about–one of them says that Manitoba Hydro does a great job in consulting–writes an article in the paper. Then the other one says, oh, my goodness, we shouldn't build hydro lines through our communities. I can't imagine what a hydro line would look underneath their–would look like underneath their government. It would be a zigzag that would only encompass New Democrat ridings apparently, because they wouldn't want it to run in a straight line because, oh, that would impact their communities as well. The Manitoba government and Manitoba Hydro are growing our economy. They would have the line running all over the place. They wouldn't be growing the economy. They wouldn't be making Manitoba grow.
We would be in the same situation that we were the last time they were in government when we saw highways and roads crumble. You know what we've done, Mr. Speaker? We've invested in our highways and roads, and we're continuing to invest in our $5.5‑billion infrastructure program. Highway 75, which is one of the biggest trade corridors in the country, is being invested in. It's being upgraded. It's taking our goods to market down in the States, and we are running through all of their constituencies–[interjection]–exactly, through their constituencies, all these upgrades. And every time we say we're going to have–upgrade things, they vote against it. The main street of Morris has never looked so good, but they voted against it. They voted against that infrastructure.
They would have the highways crumble. Mr. Speaker, $90 million underneath them, $770 million underneath us: There's the difference. That is what we call growth. We are building our province, and on that side of the House all they do is put forward a resolution that they think is going to do something, but in reality it doesn't accomplish a thing. They keep bringing this one over and over again. And you know what? If we actually said we were going to invest in such a resolution and put some money behind it, they would vote against it. They would vote against it every time.
We have invested over $200 million that's going to create 2,200 jobs with CentrePort. Of course, what–wait a minute, they voted against it, Mr. Speaker. When we have CentrePort, they voted against it. They didn't want CentrePort. They don't want to invest in it.
You know what else we're doing, Mr. Speaker? We're investing in a bypass for, oh, wait, another Conservative riding, Headingley. That's going to make goods and services flow better from here to Saskatchewan and out west. But what did they do? They voted against that. So they want this New West Partnership, but they would vote against all of the infrastructure that would have to be put in place to do so.
We continue to invest in all over the province, in every riding. Whether it's ours or Conservative riding, we invest in all of them, Mr. Speaker.
Manitoba currently exports–43 per cent of the total interprovincial trade is with western provinces. That's a strong record. And the 50 per cent to the eastern provinces, that's a strong record. We're not focused on one area; we're diverse. And you know what that diversity has accomplished for Manitoba? The strongest economy in the country, Mr. Speaker, but they would take us down the road of crumbling roads.
I know that the stewards of the economy, the masters of destruction over there, don't understand on anything about building because when they were in government, they cut the funding for roads. They raised the gas tax and slashed the budget for roads. You couldn't ship anything out of the province on the roads that they had. If they were still in power, right now the roads would be nothing more than gravel because they don't invest, Mr. Speaker. But that's okay, because the pony-and-carts party over there, the PCs, pony-and-carts party, would have us running all around the province driving the pony and carts, you know, going back into the 18th century. But our government has a future vision and our vision is to invest in infrastructure and to build roads.
I hear the member for Emerson (Mr. Graydon) over there chirping away. But you know what? He didn't chirp away when we invested in roads in his area. He voted against it. He has a great ride now when he comes to and from the Legislature. There's a beautiful smooth road for him, right through his constituency, Mr. Speaker. But you know what he did? He voted against the very investment that makes his constituency great.
And every single time we put investments in place, they vote against it, Mr. Speaker. You know the hypocrisy between their side of the House and our side of the House is absolutely unbelievable. We come up with a plan, we put the funding in place for it and then we build it. The other side of the House doesn't do a thing. They put all these motions forward and they do not vote for any of the funding that comes through.
And I think that it's absolutely silly that they would put forward a motion when they don't even realize that most of our trade is being done to Saskatchewan–or to Saskatchewan and Ontario and the States right now, and they don't seem to even realize that, Mr. Speaker.
You know, we have the World Trade Centre here is now here, Mr. Speaker. That was brought here underneath our government. But you know what? They voted against any investments into the World Trade Centre. It's unbelievable.
With Budget 2015 we're investing over a billion dollars in our roads and infrastructure that are going to bring goods and services to market. But here they are, voting against it.
We invested highway–the highway that they want to put this midwest partnership into place, Highway No. 1 going west, Mr. Speaker, we've invested in it, and guess what? This week we announced that the speed limit is now 110 because of the investments we've done. We have put new rumble strips, widened the shoulder, new road. Underneath them, they have nothing to talk about because they couldn't invest in a thing. They raised the gas tax and slashed funding to highways.
We're finally getting ahead of what all of the cuts were, that when they were in power, all of the crumbling infrastructure that they left us, Mr. Speaker, and we have a great record on trade and a great economy to show for it. Manitoba is growing. Our economy is No. 1. We have the second lowest unemployment rate. We're doing well here and we'll take no lessons from the members opposite.
* (10:20)
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): Good morning, Mr. Speaker. It's my pleasure to stand and, first of all, refute the comments that have been put on the record for the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Gaudreau).
You know, I always enjoy following the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Gaudreau) because what he lacks in substance he makes up for in velocity and volume. What he lacks in analysis he makes up for in amplification.
But, Mr. Speaker, his comments serve to actually drive down the level of debate on an issue that is of importance to Manitobans. And I shudder to think that any stakeholder groups would actually avail themselves of the opportunity to read that member's comments in Hansard this morning. Stakeholder groups who have skin the game, stakeholder groups that are building this province, stakeholder groups that are investing in our province, and to see the kind of–I will refrain from using the kind of language I would like to. What I will do is I will refer to their comments because if the member won't listen to anything that is said on this side of House, maybe he will listen to industry.
Lack of–[interjection] No, I would challenge the member. He has had his time to put empty words of no substance on the record, and I would challenge him to pay attention now as I put a word on the record from one industry group in this province. Perhaps he could stop his braying long enough to listen to this.
Lack of interprovincial harmonization in Manitoba relative to neighbouring provinces is a drain on industry–that, by the Manitoba Trucking Association, Mr. Speaker. That is one group. That is one group and what they have to say on the idea of reaching across and working collaboratively with provincial partners.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday at committee I had a bill, Bill 203, on pedestrian safety that was heard at committee. And it's a bill that was actually worked to make it safer around schools for students who come and go from schools. And you may ask: why would I put that on the record with respect to a bill about the New West Partnership? Because that bill contains a fundamental provision that would locate the traffic authority in the working group that works together, all the agencies and groups and the interest groups that come together to help plan a new school.
What it in effect does is put all the groups together in one place, working collaboratively together where there can be dialogue and communication, where they can address issues that arise, where they can look at challenges and hear each other's perspectives and the process is strengthened as a result.
We had witnesses come to committee and say in principle that is a good way to proceed. I would suggest for the purposes of this hour's debate that that same principle holds true here.
When it comes to the New West Partnership we know that everyone has a role, and I would submit that business and industry is doing their role; they are playing their role. Business and industry–and I represent Morden and Winkler, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, and I've told the members of this House as well, it is my pleasure to represent an area that is so rich with industries and so rich with businesses, groups that are creating jobs, groups that are knowing their area of expertise, that are developing quality products, goods and services, marketing them both within the province, within our country and around the world. And as I sit in these boardrooms and sit with the principal people, who–with the principal management team, as I walk on the floor of these manufacturing centres, I am so proud that this work is going on in Manitoba.
Well, those companies, they understand what their challenges are and they understand that their competition is not local; it is across the country and it is across the world. And they know that they need to work to access customers. They know that they need to work to build business partnerships. They know that they need to work to acquire the best in skills, knowledge, technologies because they are competing and if they don't do well, they will suffer, jobs will be lost.
But what they also realize is that while it is up to the individual businesses and industries to do what's required by them to compete and win, governments have a critical role to play by ensuring an environment in which Canadian businesses–and in this case, in which Manitoba businesses have every chance to succeed. It's called a level playing field.
And if the member for St. Norbert would stop to listen he would understand that the system is rigged against businesses here in Manitoba. If he does not buy that argument in the macro, let me give him another micro example.
In my first year of representing the constituency of Morden and Winkler, I had a meeting with one company, Meridian Industries, that manufactures smooth-walled bins, and some of my colleagues will know about this company and the goods that they manufacture. These are huge bins with some very high-tech welding, and they're moved–they're gigantic, so when they're moved down the road in these tandem trailers, it's quite a sight to see. The company explained to me that in the province of Manitoba all the regulations that govern the movement of those bins down the highway are different than Saskatchewan and Alberta where they also have customers.
So here's one Manitoba company trying to succeed, building their team, hiring workers, growing the economy, contributing to the taxes that this government so relies on, and they are forced to put a certain number of pilot vehicles to escort this load. When they get to the Saskatchewan border they can turn some of those pilot vehicles around and send them back home because every other Western Canada jurisdiction does not require what this jurisdiction requires for pilot vehicles. This member and his ministers do not understand that that is a real cost to business. They cannot make the argument that somehow Saskatchewan and Alberta do not care about safety. What they need to do is address the fundamental issue that these barriers need to be addressed, and the best way to address those barriers is to be at the table.
The bill that my colleague brings today is significant, but, truly, we are not asking the right question. The right question is not will this government finally look into joining the New West Partnership. The real issue is what reason could this government possibly provide to not want to partner in a group like the New West Partnership that reduces isolation, that creates the conditions where this government can have a seat at the table in a partnership that encompasses 10 million people with a GDP of $650 billion, what possible rationale would they provide to be outside of that decision-making apparatus, surely, not the comments that that member just put on the record. There is no substance there that would rationalize the decision to stay outside and to isolate us from all the opportunity to look at trade barrier, but much more.
Like my colleague, the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), just said there are opportunities here to address things like flooding. We are a province that is prone to flooding and we know that our watershed continues well into Saskatchewan. How can we advocate for the kind of changes we need to without a seat at the table, with the Premier for Saskatchewan being able to normalize relationships? But this government does not believe in normalizing relationships. In my first hearing of a budget in this Chamber, the government went to great lengths to poke the federal government in the eye. They have continued to do so. That is not a way to move our economy forward.
This partnership has implications for health care. I think about the way Manitoba approves drugs in the province. We are a very small province in relation to Ontario, 1.35 million people. Think of the possibilities–I just think off the top of my head, wouldn't be–we'd be well served to at least examine whether there might be economies of scale if we would partner with Saskatchewan for drug approval. I don't know, but how can we know? How can we know if we sit outside, if this government puts their head in their sand and pretends that somehow there's nothing wrong? That member for St. Norbert (Mr. Gaudreau) said this would not accomplish anything at all. We do not agree. This bill should pass.
* (10:30)
Hon. Kevin Chief (Minister of Jobs and the Economy): I do want to remind members opposite that over and over again–not our government, but there has been validator after validator about the strength of Manitoba's economy. In fact, Mr. Speaker, CIBC World Markets, Scotiabank, BMO Capital Markets, TD Bank, Royal Bank, CMHC, IHC, Global Insight, Laurentian Bank–validator after validator, they talk about the strength of Manitoba's economy: one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country, one of the strongest job growths, one of the best private sector job growths, four out of five jobs being full-time. The story of the economy is quite strong.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kavcic from BMO Capital Markets, a senior economist, had this to say to investors: First we must praise the often overlooked but now rising star on the regional labour force map, Manitoba.
So we're seeing people that are validating the strength, the diversity of our economy. And part of that strength, Mr. Speaker, is the people that we work with; people like under the leadership of Ron Koslowsky from CME. And one of that–one of the reasons for that is we continue to invest in and work with–and people who know that Manitoba has a geographic advantage, that we are seen as the centre and the heart of a continent.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, as a province, we do more than 50 per cent of our trade and work with businesses to the east of us. We, of course, continue to work with the west of us. We continue to work with all provinces, both in the east, the north, south and the west.
One of the things that we see, Mr. Speaker, is over the last number of years that there's been plenty of trade that we've done. In fact, our exports have increased by $4.1 billion, 44.8 per cent. And one of the things that we also have been able to invest in is key strategic trade routes, north, south, east, west.
Some examples: investing in Highway 75 and making sure that we are flood proofing that, Mr. Speaker; Highway 1 to the west, another key strategic trade route, you know, increases safety; very proud that the member from Thompson yesterday was able to announce the increase to the west of us a speed limit 110; Highway 1 to the east, upgrades.
And there's still more to come. We continue to invest in these strategic trade routes. We continue to have conversations with our partners to the west and to the east of us, Mr. Speaker.
The other thing that we do, Mr. Speaker, is we continue to invest in and all around the city of Winnipeg, our capital region: the southwest Perimeter, Headingley bypass, CentrePort.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, I was at a trade infrastructure luncheon that was hosted by Economic Development Winnipeg, hosted by CentrePort under the leadership of Diane Gray, which, of course, we continue to invest in and work with. Also, Chris Lorenc from the Manitoba Heavy Construction. These are the people that put on this trade infrastructure luncheon.
And we got John Law was the featured speaker, the president of Lawmark International and the co‑author of building of–Building on advantage: Improving Canada's trade infrastructure. So John Law is somebody who looks at the provinces, he understands what the provinces are doing, and he did a report. And he was brought as the featured speaker.
The Leader of the Opposition, I was glad, joined me at this luncheon. And the leader asked the question. He wanted to know about Manitoba's infrastructure plan and about trade infrastructure. And John Law was really clear–and I know the Leader of the Opposition didn't forget, because his message was clear, it was direct and it was simple. He simply said Manitoba is seen as a leader in the nation when it comes to trade infrastructure. And why? Because we have a long-term plan–a long-term, sustainable plan for businesses.
And Ron Koslowsky from CME will say the same thing; Chris Lorenc will say the same thing, that this government's ability to work with the private sector is an enormous advantage and unique throughout the country, that our ability to work with businesses is a huge advantage.
And at the end of the day, when he finished asking this question, his message was simple: Without question, Manitoba is doing it right. And why, Mr. Speaker? Because we are at the heart of the continent; we take full advantage of being in the centre of the country.
But there's other validators. I was up in Steinbach; very proud that that's where they make COLD-FX, and Valeant shut down a shop in one part of the country to expand their businesses here in Manitoba. So you ask the folks from Valeant, major manufacturer, you're closing down shop in one part of the country and opening up shop here. Why are you doing that? Message was simple: Manitoba is an affordable place to do business.
Second thing that Valeant and the folks there recognized is that we have a young and the fastest growing demographic, an incredible talent pool that can be trained, a credible group of people that work hard for their neighbourhoods and their communities, that are proud of who they are, proud of where they come from, and they want to give back. These are what people are noticing. They're seeing this. And the other thing that Valiant said is that we're proud to work with a government that is willing to train, willing to upgrade and willing to support their workers. The message was simple.
I was down in Brandon, joined there by my–both my colleagues, Brandon East and Brandon West, with Zenith; very proud to do an announcement. You talk to the business owners up in Zenith, and they said–their message was clear–they said that they're–of course they're proud of their business. They know that the best way that they can give back to their community is to hire local people. You talk to local people and you talk to the workers. And I talked to the workers; we were there. And they said they love working for Zenith because Zenith invests in them so they can make a good living for themselves and their families, and then they can give back. And what they deeply appreciated by the Province is that they–we will stand with those business to train, to work with, to upgrade these workers.
So we don't stop there. Canada Goose–you know, we have harsh winters. Canada Goose–expanding; they're now in Winnipeg. They continue to expand. Why? Why are they expanding? Affordability. It's a great place to do business, just makes economic sense. No. 2, they love our fast and growing young demographic, a group of young people who say they're proud of who they are, and they want to give back, and they want to hire those people because they know the–that they are the most talented people that live in Manitoba than anywhere in the nation. And they have a government that will work with them to train this demographic, that will train these workers.
Over and over again, Mr. Speaker, there's story after story about the work that we're doing, that we're standing with businesses, we're training this young and fast-growing demographic. You know, Mike Moore from Manitoba Home Builders' Association says there's never been a better place to start your own business. He says it's possible in Manitoba that after six or seven years as a tradesperson that you can start your own business. So we're–as we're encouraging, we tripled the amount of apprentices. We're trained over 10,000 people to say, there's a great job for you. I mean, this–when you have a strong economy, it creates demand, and you've got this demographic that will meet that demand; we're in good shape. So Mike Moore's message was plain and simple. Manitoba Home Builders' Association–what did he say? There's never been a better place to start your own business.
What does Rosemary Sparks say from BuildForce Canada? This is validator after validator, Mr. Speaker. What does Rosemary Sparks say? Not only does she–not only does BuildForce Canada recognize the amount of jobs that are coming, just in the construction field alone, that there's never been a better time to get involved in the trades in Manitoba. So you look at validator after validator, you talk to people who drive business in our province. Their message is simple. There's never been a better time to be in Manitoba. There's never been a better place in the nation to start your own business. You talk to people like Michael Legary. You know, if you're an established or an aspiring entrepreneur, there's no better place–and that's why we're seen as leaders when it comes to start up–to starting your own business.
So I want to thank you.
* (10:40)
Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's an honour to get up in support of this bill brought forward by the member from Tuxedo. Participating–participaction of Manitoba in the New West Partnership is important for Manitobans and it's very important for the economy of Manitoba.
This is at least the fourth time that I know of that this bill has been brought forward. I know it was brought forward by a member from our side. Before I started in–as an MLA, I was involved in one of the–in one of my roles as a critic to bring it forward. But–my colleague from Emerson has brought this forward, and now my colleague from Tuxedo.
This bill is very important for the economy of Manitoba. I mean, trade between provinces should not be restrictive, but it should be one that's a positive experience. It'll cut red tape. It'll make things easier for provinces to trade. I mean, we know how important partnerships are. Everything we do in life involves a partnership. We partner with our spouses. We partner with businesses. We partner with everything we do to make it better. We go on trade missions. I'd like to know how many members opposite have been on trade missions. Why do we go on those trade missions? We go on those trade missions to make partnerships. We make partnerships to help the economy of Manitoba. We make partnerships to make it better for the people of Manitoba.
It is important that we do join with other people to try to make things better. A good example of this is the New West Partnership. There's a lot of people who are in favour of this. There's trucking companies who'll standardize rules and regulations between provinces. They will be able to put groups together for buying–like, buying groups also can save a province a lot of money. We just don't understand why this NDP government is not willing to support this bill. It may be because they just are afraid of the bill, but it's a good bill and they don't know how to handle it. I don't know what the reason is. But now with Alberta changing governments, maybe this is something that they will start listening to because they'll sure want to have partnership arrangements with Alberta. So I would encourage the members from opposite to think about it because this is a important bill for Manitoba.
Manitoba has a lot to offer, and there's no reason why we shouldn't be leveraging everything we have in Manitoba. We live in the centre of Canada. Everything that goes east and west has to come through Manitoba–unless some of it goes a little bit through the States–but the majority of goods passing east and west have to come through Manitoba. So Saskatchewan, Alberta, Ontario, they all need us so why aren't we forming partnerships with these? Like, I mean, we have a lot to offer. We have CentrePort, we have the Port of Churchill. When I was on a visit up north talking to people, they feel that Churchill is an important part of Manitoba and we know it's an important part of Manitoba. They've talked about building a east-west connection between The Pas and Edmonton. Well, you can't do these things unless you form partnerships with those other provinces. And I believe that this bill is one bill that should be passed. It is important. Manitoba depends on interprovincial trade more than other provinces; 43 per cent of our trade is with New West partners' members.
I mean, we can see that the New West Partnership encompasses Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, and that would give us a lot more people to work with because we could convince them that they need us as well as we needing them. It would eliminate barriers between trade and allow for the mobility of labour to move back and forth between provinces, to standardize a lot of information and laws that we now have.
This agreement would make it a lot easier for labour to move back and forth between provinces. So if we're short of labour–like, right now Alberta's in a bit of a slump with oil. There's a lot of people there who may be wanting to come back to Manitoba to work here. Now, if we have all of our labour laws that are the same, it makes it a lot easier for them to come across.
I really would encourage this government. It has the opportunity to pass this bill and do something to increase our ability to be more economically viable in this province and increase trade with these other provinces and use our ability that we have here to make Manitoba a better province. I do not know why they are not wanting to pass this bill but I would encourage all of them to look at this bill, take a serious look at it and pass this bill.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): It's my pleasure to rise and to speak today to Bill 202. And this, I have to admit, Mr. Speaker, this does a look a little familiar. And, as you know, we are limited to speaking to these things once and so I had to go back and check and just exactly see had I spoken to this particular bill. But no, it just looks very similar to ones that we've seen before here in this House. And so it begs the question of whether there's any new ideas coming out of the other side of the Chamber.
But that being said, I do appreciate the opportunity to speak and especially following the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Chief). And I have to say that I think he–his remarks were bang on in terms of focusing on what is important with regards to our economy and with trade, and that is it's the people, Mr. Speaker, and I think that's really what our government has focused on.
And I think the Finance Minister, in fact, said in his budget speech, you know, that, you know, there's a whole bunch of statistics and there's all these numbers and there's a whole bunch of detail that goes into a budget, and of course that's important. But what's really important to the people of Manitoba is how this will impact them. And, of course, the people of Manitoba see on a daily basis how our budget and how our government is affecting them.
So we're clearly focused on people on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker and, you know, whether that be, as the member for Point Douglas said, on entrepreneurs, whether it be on the not-for-profit sector in our economy, or just on the average hard-working folks that want to get out there, have a job, contribute to the economy, stay in Manitoba and build a future for their family, that's what's important.
And so I think that's what I'd like to focus on. Of course, I do want to talk a little bit about our–about the stats and about our investments specifically with regards to trade. But I do want to keep that in mind, of how this impacts people in my constituency, people in constituencies all over this province. And anytime we have a chance to get up and speak to–about the economy and to issues related to our economic growth and success is a good day, Mr. Speaker. This, I'm–I appreciate the opportunity to once again to do this because we're now able very clearly to show what our record is.
And, you know, there was a time, Mr. Speaker, when there was an economic downturn throughout the world and here in Manitoba some shaky economic times, and our government did make the difficult choices, and they did–we did draw a line in the sand and it was an issue that we were trusting the experts, we were looking to economists around the world, we were, you know, listening to our constituents and we were listening to the people of Manitoba. But it was unknown.
And weren't alone in this, our government wasn't alone in this. Many governments around the world faced this, similar choices. Some made the opposite choice and I think we can clearly see where they landed. But we made this choice, Mr. Speaker, and that had to be something that we followed through with.
Now we don't have to guess whether it will work or whether it did work; we can see on a day-to-day basis the impact that it's had in our province. And the experts said we should invest now, we should focus on growth and we should make that difficult decision. And here we are, Mr. Speaker, with one of the strongest economies in Canada. When uncertainty is here again, once again Manitoba stays steady and stays growing, and that's what our constituents have told us they want to see.
So what is our approach to trade and what is our approach to building the economy? Well, we focus on opening new markets for Manitoba businesses, and that's within all Canadian provinces and territories, Mr. Speaker. It's international, it's with the United States, it's all over the world and that has been our focus.
* (10:50)
And again I want to go back to the idea that we as a government, we don't control all levers in the economy–we don't pretend to, we don't want to. We see the value in enabling entrepreneurs, in enabling small businesses, you know, reducing the small business tax to zero, giving them the opportunity to grow and to expand. And you don't have to look far, Mr. Speaker, to see what that has resulted in; Innovation Alley in our very own Exchange District here in Winnipeg has been a great example of giving folks the tools they need and giving them the support that they need and letting them flourish, and that's on the world stage.
You know, increased trade is opening new opportunities in Manitoba businesses, creating good jobs to ensure that families can build a future here, and again, Mr. Speaker, that's the key, is giving folks a clear source of optimism and a focus on building their future here with their families and continuing to be successful. Our economy continues to thrive and the plan that our government put in place is helping to fuel that success.
So it's not–as I said, it's not just us saying this now. Mr. Speaker, our constituents are saying this to us, but also the experts are saying this. This is not just here ourselves talking about ourselves. This is folks that I–I would imagine that the members of the opposition would heed their words and would listen to, folks like the Royal Bank of Canada, and their outlook said that Manitoba remains–the forecast remains bright. Third best in 2015, 2.6 per cent growth, which is above the national average which, of course, we know is very much fluctuating these days on those outlooks. Here in Manitoba steady growth has been projected: employment growth, 1.6 per cent giving people that opportunity to get a good job and to build their future here. You know, we know that here in Manitoba we benefit from a strong manufacturing sector which is four times of the oil and gas extraction industry. We are building all sectors in the economy.
So who else? Royal Bank, again, I would imagine the folks on the other side of the House would respect what they have to say. They don't want to talk about that. But the Conference Board of Canada, as well, and, you know, certainly not a traditional friend of ours, but they can see when a plan is working and they can see when good ideas are put into place. So the Conference Board of Canada says Manitoba's economic performance will be among the nation's leaders over the next two years, real GDP growth of 2.8 per cent in 2015 and 2016. In 2016, Mr. Speaker, we are projected to lead all provinces in growth, which is an exciting goal to strive for. The Conference Board of Canada is also forecasting a growth of 2.5 per cent in 2015 for the city of Winnipeg, which is the strongest growth of any–rate of any growth for any city in the Prairies. And, of course, the real success, I believe, is the second lowest unemployment rate, the strongest job growth in the nation and the best private sector growth. Private sector growth this is us enabling and to–assisting the strong private sector to be successful.
In the last 10 years, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to trade our exports have increased by $4.1 billion. We know that trade is important to Manitobans that trade here in this province is strong and we've identified that our geographic location can be a strong advantage for us. We're here at the centre of the continent, the heart of the continent have–as some have called it, and our transportation system which we've invested in and built, has become a hub of trade for partners to the east, to the west, to the north, to the south, all over the continent and beyond.
We're investing in upgrading that infrastructure to ensure that Manitoba businesses get their goods to market. So this is a double benefit: not only are Manitobans working on the infrastructure that's being built, jobs are being created, investment in terms of the dollars spent on the infrastructure itself and then the infrastructure which enables our goods to get to market, which is so important to those who are exporting to Canada and beyond. Our five-year, $5.5-billion core infrastructure plan will improve our trade and transportation networks, and they will create good jobs for all Manitobans.
I could go on and on, Mr. Speaker. I will very quickly list just a few of the strategic investments we're making with regards to trade, whether it be CentrePort Canada Way, the Trans-Canada Highway, Highway 75, Highway 10, Highway 6, Highway 9, we could go on and on. There are so many opportunities for us to invest in this trade, to invest in the things that are important to Manitobans. We know that economic prosperity and strength in Manitoba enables people to be optimistic, to build their futures here and to make the most of their contributions to Manitobans. And we know that if we enable them, if we give them the opportunities, that they will thrive, that they will flourish and that our province will continue to grow into the future.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): It's a pleasure to rise and put a few words on the record in support of Bill 202 that my colleague from Tuxedo has brought forward.
And, yes, it should be recognizable by the members opposite. It should be recognizable for another reason other than the fact that they had voted against free trade and co-operation with our partners to the west of us. It should be noted that Manitoban businesses that have done very well have done very well in spite of–in spite of–this NDP government–in spite of it.
In fact, I would like to just put something on the record. The Premier (Mr. Selinger) has said, I think we always have to find a way to help the whole country come together. Mr. Speaker, the Premier of the province, the Premier, the Leader of the NDP party, can't keep the party together, for goodness sakes, and he wants to address the country.
Why would he not join the New West Partnership, which is already in place, which will be a benefit to all of Manitobans? What we see is we have problems in agriculture. We've saw what the country of origin labelling has done to Manitobans, what it has done to all of Canada. But the co‑operation of the 10 provinces, through the federal government, we have been able to at least address some of this.
We took a look at the savings that could be had in health care. Those savings are enormous, and I'm not going to go into them and individually. The technology that is out there that can be accessed, the buying power of a co-op.
And Manitoba is a co-operative province. When you look all over in Manitoba, there are co‑operatives. The reason that they're there is because of their buying power. This NDP government proposes that they are there for the small businesses, but, no, they want to stop them. They want to stand on their throats. They're standing on their backs, taxing them. That we're the highest taxed province west of Quebec, and they say that's good for Manitoba? Mr. Speaker, that's not good for Manitoba.
We can take a look at standardization in many of the different industries that could be accomplished with this type of partnership, but, Mr. Speaker, they don't seem to understand that.
I'm going to give another one of them an opportunity to stand up and speak against Manitoba.
Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): Well, how do you follow that, Mr. Speaker? It's always a treat to follow my honourable colleague from Emerson.
This proposal has come to our Chamber a few times. We're getting close to a Groundhog Day moment, you know. Dog barks, car door slams, child laughs, oh, and we got the New West Partnership again.
There might be a few reasons, Mr. Speaker, why this particular proposal has not gone forward and why it might not go forward this time either. And I know it might be a bit of a challenge for members opposite to wrap their heads around this, but I'll start with some of the basics.
It's just the basics. If you are in the middle of a continent and in the middle of a country that is several thousand kilometres in size, does it make sense, Mr. Speaker, to direct your entire economy in just one direction? Members opposite seem to think so. Even after Alberta had this little thing called an election, where, you know, there's a different colour now inhabiting the foothills of the mighty Rockies, they still seem okay with only looking westerly. I can't imagine the nightmares they must be having of, you know, the suddenly socialist hordes of oil workers coming across–
* (11:00)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer) will have eight minutes remaining.
Res. 8–Recognizing Jordan's Principle
Mr. Speaker: The time being 11 a.m., it is time for private members' resolutions, and the resolution under consideration this morning is entitled Recognizing Jordan's Principle, sponsored by the honourable member for Agassiz.
Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I move, seconded by the member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard),
WHEREAS across Canada, there is a lack of jurisdictional clarity between the government of Canada and the provincial and territorial governments as to which level of government should pay to ensure that First Nations children receive essential medical care; and
WHEREAS article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; and
WHEREAS all children in Manitoba, regardless of government disputes, deserve to have their health protected without ever having to sacrifice this fundamental right; and
WHEREAS Jordan's Principle, named after Jordan River Anderson of Norway House Cree Nation, who spent his entire short life battling Carey‑Fineman-Ziter syndrome, was unanimously passed in the House of Commons on December the 5th, 2007; and
WHEREAS Jordan's Principle states that the rights of the child should be regarded first and foremost when considering the provisions of health care and social services; and
WHEREAS Jordan's Principle has yet to be formally recognized in the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, despite the reality that Manitoba's First Nations children continue to fall victim to government jurisdictional disputes.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the provincial government be urged to formally support Jordan's Principle and its implementation in order to provide necessary care for all children in Manitoba while reaffirming the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable member for Agassiz, seconded by the honourable member for River Heights,
WHEREAS across Canada, there is a lack of jurisdictional clarity between the–dispense?
Some Honourable Members: Dispense.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense.
The resolution is in order.
Mr. Briese: I'm pleased to rise to speak to this resolution this morning.
I want to give special recognition must be paid to the memory of the resolution–whose memory this resolution attempts to honour. As we are so privileged today to democratically debate this proposed resolution in the Legislature, the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, it must be acknowledged that this debate will take place on Treaty 1 territory, on the traditional land of Anishinabe people, the homeland of the Metis Nation, the crossroads of the Anishinabe, Metis, Cree, Dakota and Oji-Cree nations.
I want to thank the member from River Heights for seconding this resolution. He, over a number of years, has been a strong proponent of this resolution, putting forward several bills. He put forward a bill in 2008, Bill 233–two bills in 2008, another one in 2009 and a resolution in 2008. And he's tirelessly pursued this, as has the member for Riding Mountain (Mrs. Rowat). They've both been very instrumental in proposing and implementing Jordan's Principle.
This is an issue that should transcend bipartisanship and ensure that First Nations children receive necessary medical care on a non-partisan issue. This resolution will require NDP support, and both Progressive Conservatives and Liberals in this House encourage the NDP to support this today.
Because of the importance of this resolution, it gives me great pride to speak to it today, and given the recent release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action recommendations, this resolution couldn't be more timely. In the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report recommended–recommendation No. 3 calls upon all levels of government to fully implement Jordan's Principle. And the Premier (Mr. Selinger) has made some ministerial statement comments on the Truth and Reconciliation report, and this certainly falls in with some of the comments he was making. While supporting this resolution today, and the commission recommendation No. 3 will truly show that the Manitoba government is willing to practice what they preach. You know, how can we expect anyone to believe the Premier if the members–the government members don't support this resolution?
Jordan Anderson passed away February the 2nd, 2005. That's 10 years ago. In the–in different things that have been said in the–over those 10 years, in 2011, the chiefs were drawing attention to–the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs were drawing attention and held a press conference to try and get the governments to be accountable on this issue. That was in 2011. That also is four years ago. The federal government passed a unanimous resolution in the House of Commons supporting implementation of Jordan's Principle, and that resolution was actually put forward by an NDP MP. But every time we brought this issue forward in the House and the member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) has brought it forward in the House, the government has–the NDP have chosen to talk it out and not let the resolution pass.
With the things that are showing up with the many, many recommendations in the Truth and Reconciliation document, it–and this being one of the very early ones in that document–it appears that the timing of bringing this resolution forward is really timely. It's something that should be done, should have been done long ago, but we have a chance to carry this through today, and I encourage the members on the–of the government, on the other side of the House, to support this resolution, and let's get this process moving along.
We've seen there are still cases where the jurisdictional dispute continues, but what we see when we raise this issue in the House is the NDP choose to try and pass the blame to the federal government. The federal government already have their resolution passed in their House; there hasn't been one passed here. And there is a memorandum of understanding that goes back a number of years between the federal government and the provincial government, and the NDP seem to be even reluctant to follow-up on that memorandum of understanding.
We have children still falling through the cracks today, and that's simply unacceptable. No child should suffer because of a jurisdictional dispute between two levels of government. There's been just huge number of different entities that are supportive of this, and I don't know why the NDP wouldn't see fit to support this resolution and move it forward.
Jordan's Principle has received international attention and support through Amnesty International, UNICEF, the Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada, the Aboriginal Nurses Association, Inuit organizations, chiefs from across Canada, the national Indian child‑welfare league and many, many others. And this is from AMC 2007 annual report. Jordan's Principle is supported by over 1,500 organizations and high-profile advocates.
* (11:10)
It's certainly high time that the government of the day forgot their concerns about partisan lines and moved forward and supported this bill. I don't know how many times they can say that it's always somebody else's fault; it's nobody else's fault. It's in our Legislature, it's in our House, it's here that we have to decide, today, whether we're going to support this resolution or not.
We have two of the political parties in support of this bill. We ask the government of the day to come forward and support it, too.
I know I have a number of colleagues that want to speak to this, so, with those remarks, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Hon. Sharon Blady (Minister of Health): I'd like to thank the member for bringing forward this resolution and to begin by acknowledging, and I'm happy to hear that he did the same, that we do stand on Treaty 1 land territory and to thank those Aboriginal people that continue to make us welcome despite a long history of colonization. And I am proud of the fact that Manitoba is the only province that entered into Confederation under indigenous leadership under the leadership of Louis Riel and his provisional government, something that this government had recognized.
I'm also proud to be a part of a government that actually works with First Peoples, and Jordan's Principle is a very important principle and, again, I actually thank the member for recognizing the fact that this is something that New Democrats across the country have been leaders on. And it was in 2007 in December when–it was Jean Crowder, the member–a Member of Parliament, who introduced Motion 296, Jordan's Principle, named in memory of Jordan River Anderson, which received unanimous support in the House of Commons.
And we are very much in support of Jordan's Principle on this side of the House, and I guess what I can also say in regards to that is it's not just about being about supportive in words; it's also important to be supportive in action, and that I can say that this side of the House and this party has always been very supportive and worked in collaboration with First Peoples, including on issues of health, because health and the social determinants of health are a key part of the reconciliation process and we are in a historic week this week, with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the recommendations that they've given and the implications that those have, actually for the health and well-being of First Peoples.
As many know in this Chamber that previous to coming to this Chamber, my job description overarchingly was as a decolonization scholar, as an ally to indigenous populations, and that that journey began at a young age through the benefit of working with many indigenous elders and healers who had crossed paths and came into my life, and to them I am eternally grateful for the lessons that they have taught me and that they continue to teach me.
And what that meant for me was the opportunity to then go out into the community and teach and to be an educator, both to Aboriginal and non‑Aboriginal post-secondary students, as well as actually some elementary and middle school students when called in as a guest speaker, but to work with them as part of, again, a larger decolonization and reconciliation process that put education into their hands on health and well-being.
And so this is something that I take very seriously on both a personal and a professional level, and I can say that the hard work and persistence of not just myself but others has not gone unnoticed. On February 12th, 2009, for example, Sheila Fraser commented on Jordan's Principle at committee at the House of Commons saying we've been very actively involved with Health Canada and the provinces, particularly Manitoba, where this has come up and we have active case management, kids are being dealt with, and the principle is being applied.
Should also note that Manitoba was, in fact, the first jurisdiction to bring the federal government to the table to work on this issue, and we're committed to honouring our agreement with the federal government and to continue to actively work with them to implement Jordan's Principle.
As a result of the collaborative effort between governments and communication among assigned staff, informal case conferencing has had success in minimizing the impact of jurisdictional disputes. And our government has made a commitment to develop a formal process to resolve funding disputes between the provincial and federal governments for services to First Nations children with multiple disabilities or those with complex medical needs–and I'll speak to that point a little bit later. This dispute resolution process is now in place, so if a case like Jordan's comes forward again, it can be resolved.
And I'm also proud to say that Manitoba Health, Healthy Living and Seniors is currently working with the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs to review this process and ensure that it works for children and their families. And representatives from the provincial and federal governments and the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs are continuing to work together to identify service gaps and differences in services that are available to children with disabilities living both on and off reserve in Manitoba. And this is important information, Mr. Speaker, that will help address the need for comparable levels of service for all children living with a disability, so we know there's more to do, but we're continued to work with our partners on this.
This week's release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report on residential schools, as I said, marks a historic moment for Canadians. But, again, we have to make sure that this is not just a milestone moment that comes and passes. I know that that has been an issue before.
When the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples' Gathering Strength report was issued, those of us that worked with indigenous communities and as activists and academics knew that it came to be known in indigenous communities as gathering dust, rather than Gathering Strength, because nothing was done by successive governments in this regard.
And, again, reflecting on the work in the past and that track record, in 1995, as a member of the Cabinet of the formal federal Liberal government, which decided to stop funding Aboriginal child-welfare agencies for inflation increases, the member from River Heights thought that that budget was tough but fair, as he said in the Hansard on February 28th in the House of Commons. And so, despite being–claiming to be an advocate for First Nations people, he also displayed a profound lack of understanding of Jordan's Principle when he argued that it should apply to non-First Nations children–and this is in correspondence with my office of October 23rd, 2008–and the whole point of Jordan's Principle is, in fact, to put the well-being of First Nations children ahead of federal and provincial jurisdictional issues.
So we continue to work with all partners involved, and, as I say, I take this commitment personally, but I do want to remind members that there are new challenges put before us now with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and their recommendations, including recommendation 18, calling on all federal, provincial, territorial and Aboriginal governments to acknowledge that the current state of Aboriginal health in Canada is a direct result of previous Canadian government policies, including residential schools, and to recognize and implement health-care rights of Aboriginal people as identified in international law, constitutional law and under the treaties. And I can say that with my–within my own department, we are doing exactly that, and have processes and programs in place that involve making sure that appropriate–culturally appropriate and culturally-informed care is a key part of health service delivery.
And, again, and many members in this Chamber know, that's something that I have done for years, that, in fact, it's an interesting–again, there's a certain irony, I find, in this being brought forward, because, again, my commitment to this is personal and fits into the larger issue of this party in this side of the House. I'd like to remind members opposite that in 1990–April of 1998, the Pawley government put the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry in place. April 26th an unfortunate election happened where members opposite formed government. And what was interesting is the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, in fall 1991, issued their report.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if members opposite remember what happened with the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry report when it arrived in fall of 1991. Well, apparently, members opposite didn't even crack the plastic off the publication, take a look at it, much less implement it. And it took after–it was the September 21st election of 1999, when this government came in, we cracked the plastic off those things. We opened up the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry that–the documents sent in from the commission, and in November of that very same fall, the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry commission was put together.
* (11:20)
In April 17th of 2000, they issued their first quarterly report and those recommendations were accepted. And by summer of 2000, memorandums of understanding were in place, and I myself along with others were hired under the Aboriginal child‑welfare–the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry Child Welfare Initiative to begin work on this.
So if we're looking about–looking towards track records and looking towards commitments, I can tell you actions speak louder than words, and the actions have come from this side of the Chamber. So, yes, we accept and we'll move forward and continue to work on Jordan's Principle.
I do want to remind members opposite that again they talk about we blame the federal government; no, we're just asking the federal government to come to the table and do their part because our government has stepped up to ensure that every Manitoban has access to safe quality care, and we routinely cover health-care expenses. So, again, even though it's a federal responsibility, as of the end of last year, Health Canada owed us over $28 million just for air and ground ambulance transportation. I wonder if members opposite will talk to their federal cousins about having Minister Rona Ambrose cut me a cheque for the amount they owe us.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time has elapsed.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise on Treaty 1 territory and on the homeland of the Metis nation to second this resolution put forward by the member for Agassiz (Mr. Briese).
I want to thank the member for Agassiz for bringing this forward. I note that it is being brought forward now in the year 2015 which is the 10th anniversary of when Jordan's Principle was first enunciated. It's the 10th anniversary of when Trudy Lavallee wrote in the Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health of Jordan Anderson and expressed her wish that there be a principle called Jordan's Principle, and that that principle would have children in First Nations communities treated equally with children in other parts of Canada and in other parts of Manitoba where we're concerned in our home province.
I think it's important to tell a little bit of the initial story, and that is that Jordan River Anderson from Norway House was born in 1999. He had, it's true, complex medical needs, but after a period of time, it was about two years, it was decided that he was medically ready to go home. And sadly, because of arguments between the federal and the provincial government over who would fund what, he never did go home and in fact died in hospital.
Jordan River Anderson was visited a number of times by Trudy Lavallee with the then grand chief, Dennis White Bird, and they were able to talk to and try their best to work with the family and with both provincial and federal governments to get a resolution to this in a speedy way. But it never happened.
And Trudy talks of the time that she was there visiting Jordan Anderson and of how, you know, he responded. He was clearly a human being who should have been treated in fairly and equitably and well and should have been able to go home.
Mr. Jim Maloway, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
So the fact that he did not led to Jordan's Principle. It was brought forward by Trudy Anderson–Trudy Lavallee in the fall of 2005. I saw the article and within a few days had raised this in the Legislature in December of 2005 as an important principle that the government in Manitoba and the government in Ottawa should work on, not only that the principle itself should be implemented, that it should be, from a matter of practice, something that we act on and make sure is working day in and day out.
In 2008, in June, I brought this forward to second reading, and at second reading it had tremendous support from people in the Aboriginal community. There were present the southern grand chief, Morris Shannacappo; the MKO grand chief, Sydney Garrioch; the Keewatin Tribal Council grand chief, Arnold Ouskan; the former AMC grand chief, Dennis White Bird; Cindy Blackstock, who came from Ottawa, the executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada; Councillor Mike Muswagon of the Norway House Cree Nation, and many, many others. There was clearly a lot of support for putting in place Jordan's Principle.
I brought this back when the NDP would not let it proceed as a resolution in the fall and September of 2008. And at that point, as a resolution, it was again debated. I presented the need and the arguments. The minister of Health said, well, the problem is the definition of complex needs. I'm afraid that the minister of Health missed the point, and that is that it's not just children with complex needs who need equality of services.
And as the resolution put forward by the member for Agassiz (Mr. Briese) and myself says, this is the care for all children in Manitoba and, as the resolution refers to, that Jordan's Principle states that the rights of a child should be regarded first and foremost when considering the provisions of health care and social services.
And I have talked with Trudy Lavallee who brought this forward to start with, and she points out that social services, in her view, as she presented it initially, were to include not just what we have under Family Services, but what we have under educational services and other social services. And I think this is important to recognize because these are important areas where we should have equality as well. But, once again, the NDP would not let the resolution pass.
There has been a–of course, a case conference procedure put in place. The problem is that when Jordan was there, there was in essence a case conference but it never resolved the situation in time. And case conferences, although they can work sometimes, are not enough and we need to be able to act quicker.
There are continuing issues with the implementation of Norway–at Jordan's Principle, as Mike Muswagon, the councillor who was involved early on, is still involved and brought to me again recently. I have worked with a whole variety of people over the years, and most recently in the by-election in The Pas, our candidate, Inez Vystrcil-Spence, who had worked closely and is–was and is the director of health for MKO, brought forward and ran in part because she was concerned of the slowness about actually implementing fully, in a reasonable way, Jordan's Principle.
I note that the Minister of Health (Ms. Blady) today says that there is a government commitment to develop a formal process for implementing Jordan's Principle. We are 10 years after Jordan's Principle was first put forward. Surely, children in First Nations communities are more important than to have, 10 years later, still developing a process. Not good enough, Mr. Speaker. Let us, at a minimum, pass this resolution today.
The Minister of Family Services (Ms. Irvin‑Ross) spoke recently that she and her party were very strong supporters of Jordan's Principle; they should have no problem in passing this today. This principle has been around now for 10 years. There has been much talk from the members of the government that they support the principle, but they have never voted for this principle in the Legislature, and I would ask them to consider today to at last vote in support of Jordan's Principle today.
Let us move forward together. There has been enough talk. There is time, at least, to put on the record that all parties unanimously support Jordan's Principle. It is important for the children of our province. It continues to be vital. We should all support this principle and not just in words but by voting today for this principle. I hope all members will do so, and I hope we can get unanimous agreement to move forward.
* (11:30)
Thank you, miigwech, ekosi.
Ms. Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to share my background as a health policy analyst for the Cree Nation travel council. I sat on a jurisdictional round table where we researched and examined the gaps between federal and provincial jurisdictions in regards to providing health-care services to First Nations on reserve. And we were provided funding when I was in that position with the Aboriginal Health Transition Fund. The fund was designed to improve access to health care for Aboriginal peoples in Canada. The Aboriginal Health Transition Fund goal was to support better integration of federal-funded health systems in First Nations and Inuit communities with provincial, territorial health systems and through the adoption of existing provincial, territorial and health-service systems to better meet the needs of all Aboriginal peoples including Metis and those living off reserve. The funding was also intended to increase the participation of Aboriginal peoples in the design, delivery and evaluation of health programs and services that affect them. In 2007 I was in this position, and whenever we would meet in our round tables, we would always have the Jordan's Principle on our mind and in our spirit and amongst our discussions as First Nations. Part of our round table, we had representatives from the regional health authorities, First Nations leadership and health-care service providers as well.
So with that, by examining the provincial and federal health jurisdictions, it gave me a true light on what we're supporting today. And I wanted to share that our government works to ensure all children no matter where they live receive comparable health services. We're doing our part to ensure a situation like Jordan's does not occur again and that a child's health-care needs are addressed without delay or disruption.
And as a Manitoban and as a First Nations woman, I'm proud to say that Manitoba was the first province in Canada to implement Jordan's Principle, and I'm also proud to say that our government approached our First Nations to engage in a collaborative solution. We want to avoid a situation like Jordan's occurring again. That's why we pushed the federal government to formalize the case‑conferencing mechanism designed to settle funding disputes, and I'm thankful to our colleagues in the federal NDP for putting forward this bill for Jordan's Principle. I'm also proud to say that we're committed to honouring our agreement with the federal government and continue actively to work with them to implement Jordan's Principle. And our government made a commitment to develop a formal process to resolve funding disputes between provincial and federal governments for services to First Nations children with multiple disabilities or complex medical needs. This dispute resolution process is now in place so if a case like Jordan's come forward again, it can be resolved. And representatives from the provincial and federal governments and the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs are also continuing to work together to identify the service gaps and services–and differences in services that are available to children with disabilities living both on and off reserves in Manitoba.
We know there's a–there's more to do, and we're committed to working with our partners on this. And as a First Nations woman raising a child with a chronic disease, I have hope this collaboration will benefit all of us. Our government is optimistic and hopeful, including myself as a First Nations woman, that this increased understanding will lead to new conversations and opportunities for partnerships for true reconciliation for all First Nations throughout Manitoba.
And I just want to share with the House the recommendations from the TRCR call to action. Recommendation No. 19: we call upon the federal government in consultation with Aboriginal peoples to establish measurable goals, to identify and close the gap in health outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities and to publish annual progress reports and assess long-term trends. Such efforts would focus on indicators such as infant mortality, maternal health, suicide, mental health, addictions, life expectancy, birth rates, infant and child health issues, chronic diseases, illness and injury incidents and the availability of appropriate health service.
Recommendation No. 20: In order to address the jurisdictional disputes concerning Aboriginal people who do not reside on reserve, we call upon the federal government to recognize, respect and address the distinct health needs of Metis, Inuit and off-reserve Aboriginal people.
So with that, Mr. Speaker, I'm just glad to share my experience, first-hand experience, in dealing with our jurisdictional issues that are being addressed through Jordan's Principle. Thank you.
Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): I'm pleased to put on the record my thought and concerns with regard to the delay in the government side support for a private member's resolution that has been before the House several times over the past decade.
This resolution has been brought forward by the member for Agassiz (Mr. Briese) and seconded by the member–the honourable member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard). It's a private member's resolution that I believe needs to be taken seriously, especially with what has been put forward by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as a call to action, as recommendation No. 3 in the top five as being critical in dealing with the issues that face so many families in Manitoba who reside on First Nation communities.
This issue transcends bipartisanship in ensuring that First Nation children receive necessary medical care in a non-partisan issue. And this issue developed and came to the forefront with Jordan River Anderson's death, Mr. Speaker. It was brought forward when he was ill, and through dispute this young boy died in a Winnipeg hospital 500 miles away from his family, and all of us who are parents, grandparents, to know that you have a very sick child who has the opportunity to have his remaining days with his family in his home community would be measured–it would be immeasurable to have that opportunity to be put to rest in your own community and die in your own community. And to know that family and extended family members did not have that opportunity to show their love for Jordan in his final days is just–is very hard to appreciate and understand.
But the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report recommendation No. 3 calls upon all levels of government to fully implement Jordan's Principle, so I believe that in memory of Jordan this principle is not lost. This opportunity by this government to support what we have been pushing for, for almost 10 years, should be supported and implemented.
I was encouraged to hear the words put on the record by the member for The Pas (Ms. Lathlin) who sat on a jurisdictional round table to address the gaps between the federal and provincial government. Her expertise and her knowledge with regard to this issue is paramount. She knows first-hand what it is like to have children who are facing health issues who need support, and I encourage her to continue her battle and to know that on this side of the House we support your efforts and we will do what we can to support that; because we believe that all Manitobans deserve equal and quality care when it comes to their loved ones.
So I encourage her to continue her battle and rely on the support of all members in this House to continue with that, because Manitoba has had the opportunity to implement this recommendation, and we'll continue to fight for that.
* (11:40)
So we believe that with the commission's recommendation and putting it in the top five as No. 3 is a boost. It raises it to a national level, the need for these types of issues to be addressed, because it's not only about the health care of Manitoba First Nations children, it's talking about the social well-being within communities and to ensure that the supports are available for children not only in health, physical health, but mental health as well. So I believe in Jordan's memory this is something that could go a long way in showing Manitoba's leadership on this issue.
The Minister of Health (Ms. Blady) talked about and indicated on the record that health and health determinants were a key recommendation in the reconciliation commission's comments. So she knows, she gets it and we encourage her as a leader within the Department of Health, the minister responsible, to take a leadership role and push. With her expertise and her knowledge and her background I believe that she has a significant role and we look to her to provide that leadership and to move forward on these recommendations–and this recommendation in particular is something that she can lead on.
Manitoba signed a memorandum of understanding with the federal government a number of years ago and it has gone nowhere since. And as the member for The Pas (Ms. Lathlin) indicated, there has been a jurisdictional round table who was denied funding to continue the work that needs to be done with regard to moving this issue forward. So let's quit chatting about this around the table and let's actually start moving forward with some actions with regard to this. Manitoba First Nation families deserve this.
We talk about rural health care and northern health care and the lack of services and supports available. Well, this is just another challenge. It's not that there's doctors–a shortage of doctors or nurses, this is now talking about a bigger block, a bigger challenge with regard to federal and provincial governments not getting along and not moving this issue forward.
So we see on the government side a couple of players who have indicated their support for Jordan's Principle and the work that needs to be done to ensure that jurisdictional gaps are being addressed and those challenges being addressed. And we are encouraged by those words that have been put on the record, but we need more than that; we need action. So I look forward to seeing more being done with regard to this issue.
As the member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) has indicated, we've brought this resolution forward a number of times and we've supported it. We've had members of the First Nation community in the gallery, key members of the community within our province, key members of the community from across the country, in the gallery supporting our efforts to get this resolution put forward to show that this government actually is committed in more than words, but in action to getting this done. And we've been disappointed.
So we want to see this government support this resolution, and let's get moving on this. Let's not continue to see individuals like Jordan River Anderson who has to die in a Winnipeg hospital 500 miles away from his family, without the support of this government's actions.
We see that there are over 400-plus similar cases of children across Canada whose health care and well-being is currently up in the air while this government decides whether or not to pay for the services they need. These governments federally and provincially need to start working together because there are over 400 families who are looking for some leadership from this–within this province and with this country to do something about it.
So we don't need to look at developing a process to implement. You've already signed a memorandum of understanding. So start acting on those recommendations. Start acting on that memorandum of understanding. Start honouring Jordan River Anderson's memory and Jordan's Principle, and get to the bottom of this.
With those words, I'm looking, as I said earlier, for the leadership from this government and we've seen and heard from members opposite from the government side who have experience and keen interest in this issue. So let's put the partisanships aside and let's look for a clear response from this government to act on this recommendation.
So I want to thank the member for Agassiz (Mr. Briese) and the member for River Heights for bringing this resolution forward. It's a very important one and I look forward to some action. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Peter Bjornson (Gimli): I'm pleased to rise in the Chamber today to speak to this resolution and thank the members from Agassiz and River Heights for bringing this resolution forward.
Yesterday it was 12 years since I was first elected to this Chamber with many of my colleagues here on this side of the Chamber and a few from the opposition benches as well, and it's been a privilege to serve in this Chamber.
And, certainly, one of the things–as I already announced, I will not be seeking re-election. One of the regrets that I have as I leave public life is the lack of progress that was made nationally with respect to First Nations education. And I think it's appropriate that we're talking about this resolution today, the day after the truth and reconciliation committee delivered its recommendations and the final report to Ottawa, and with a number of issues that have had a renewed attention, if you will, federally and nationally with respect to First Nations issues. And as I reflect on my term as minister of Education, just about every year at the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, we would talk about the need to engage the federal government to work on improving educational outcomes for First Nations learners.
And I believe it was about six years ago we had a national summit through the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, and that summit was supposed to be a historic summit in Saskatoon to discuss educational issues for First Nations learners and what we needed to do to bridge that gap. And my words six years ago still apply today. When many people would preface their comments by saying, this is a historic summit, it is a historic summit because things will change and we will do better for our First Nations communities and our First Nations learners and have more First Nation students graduating from our schools, well, I prefaced my final comments at that meeting by saying the only way this summit will be a historic summit is if something changes, because if it doesn't change, then it's just another summit. Regrettably, that event in Saskatoon six years ago was just another summit.
Things have changed provincially as many jurisdictions have worked with their First Nations communities to improve outcomes in the education system, and we've been leaders in that regard with many of the things that we've done through the Aboriginal academic achievement action plan, through the Aboriginal Education Directorate, through the incorporation of a number of different curricular outcomes in our curriculum for First Nations education and for the benefit of the education of students throughout the public school system to understand the injustices of the past, but to also talk about the possibilities for the future.
But this speaks to–and they're–the members opposite say this is a non-partisan issue, and, you know, it is a non-partisan issue. I mean, now we see former Prime Minister Joe Clark and former Prime Minister Turner joining forces to talk about Aboriginal education. Perhaps those two prime–former prime ministers also have a regret that things weren't done and things weren't changed and things weren't better for our First Nations learners in our schools across the country.
Now, we're speaking about an issue of health for our First Nations with respect to–and jurisdictional issues around health care for our First Nations persons, but the issue is, quite frankly, that it always comes down to jurisdiction. And that's regrettable because a person born in Manitoba is a Manitoban; a person born in Manitoba is a Canadian. And the fact that we are fighting over jurisdictional issues for our First Nations communities, quite frankly, in the 21st century is appalling. Regrettably, that is the case. But I have to say that here in Manitoba we have made significant inroads in communicating and working with the federal government, contrary to the perceptions of members opposite and what I've actually just put on the record as far as educational issues are concerned.
* (11:50)
But with respect to Jordan's Principle, we have made significant inroads to work with our federal government. In fact, we were the first jurisdiction to bring the federal government to the table to work on this issue. And we were also committed to honouring our agreement with the federal government and continuing to actively work with them to implement the principle.
And there have been results from this engagement with the federal government. As a result, efforts between governments and communication among staff and case conferencing has had success in minimizing the impact of jurisdictional dispute. We made a commitment–we made a commitment to develop informal process to resolve funding disputes between provincial and federal governments for services to First Nations children with multiple disabilities and/or complex medical needs, and this process is now in place so if a case like Jordan's comes forward it can be resolved.
Manitoba Health, Healthy Living and Seniors is working with the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, and we're working to review the process and ensure that it also works for children and their families. And we have representatives from both the Province and the federal government and the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs continuing to work together to identify the service gaps and differences in services that are available to children with disabilities living both on and off reserves in Manitoba. So this is important information that will help address the need of comparable levels of service for all children living with a disability. But we do know that there is more to do and we're committed to work with our partners to do this.
And, again, we're having this conversation after the historic release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report and, again, I would hope that it is, indeed, historic because it will be historic if things change. And I'm optimistic that things will change. I'm optimistic that governments across the country–provincially and our federal government and our First Nations partners can work together to make the necessary changes to address these issues that have so–put such a black eye on our history as a nation and embarrassment to our nation that these things had persisted as long as they have. But I am optimistic and hopeful. Our government's optimistic and hopeful that increased understanding will lead to the new conversations that need to be had. And opportunities for partnership and true reconciliation with all First Nations throughout Manitoba and across Canada will, indeed, be the result of the commission report and the political will to do something about it.
So if you look at the truth and reconciliation committee and recommendations from page 2 to 3, there is a call to action. Item No. 18: We call upon the federal, provincial and territorial and Aboriginal governments to acknowledge that the current state of Aboriginal health in Canada is a direct result of previous Canadian government policies including residential schools, and to recognize and implement the health-care rights of Aboriginal people as identified in international law, constitutional law and under the treaties. No. 19 recommendation says: We call upon the federal government in consultation with Aboriginal peoples to establish the measurable goals to identify and close the gaps in health outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities–and to publish annual reports, as already mentioned by the member from The Pas.
These are not only a call to action, but they're a call to accountability and measurability of the outcomes of these particular recommendations. And we're hoping that, and I'm optimistic that, there will be a commitment by our federal government working in partnership with the provincial and territorial governments, working in partnership with the Aboriginal leadership across this country to make these things happen.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
And the recommendations that come out of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report include No. 20: In order to address the jurisdictional disputes concerning Aboriginal people who do not reside on reserves, we call upon the federal government to recognize, respect and address the distinct health needs of the Metis, Inuit and off-reserve Aboriginal peoples. And, of course, this speaks to the basic premise of Jordan's principle. And, of course, this–Jordan's principle was introduced many years ago, and yet we see this as one of the recommendations being forward–brought forward again in the truth and reconciliation committee–commission.
So, Mr. Speaker, I am optimistic. I am hopeful that things will change, and we need to see that political will across the country to make things change so that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and their work is truly historic and not just another report, but it will be truly historic and change our nation for the better for our First Nations community and all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time on this matter has elapsed.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could have unanimous consent of the House not to see the clock until a matter dealing with a specific motion that we are discussing has been dealt with, and in the meantime, continue the debate on the matter.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to not see the clock to have–well, I'm assuming that the minister, the honourable Government House Leader, is referencing the discussion between House leaders, which I would prefer not to take place on the floor of the House, but also is asking for leave of the House to allow the consideration of the resolution currently before the House to continue and to not see the clock, if I've interpreted that correctly.
I'm going to recess the House for five minutes and then we'll call it, and the clock will not proceed and it will not be 12 noon until we've had a chance to deal with this matter.
The House recessed at 11:56 a.m.
____________
The House resumed at 11:59 a.m.
Mr. Speaker: Will the House come back to order, please.
The honourable Government House Leader, on House business.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I'm asking leave of the House not to see the clock for two minutes.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House not to see the clock for two minutes? [Agreed]
* (12:00)
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I believe that we're going to vote on the motion, and I hope we can get it done in two minutes, but I also want to raise a point of order.
Mr. Speaker: If there's a point of order, for information of the House, that should be raised at the first opportunity, and this–I'm assuming that this would be the first opportunity. So I need to have some clarification from the House on what the intent is.
Are we going to deal with the point of order first? Are we going to deal with the resolution under consideration?
Some Honourable Members: Point of order.
Mr. Speaker: Okay, we'll deal with the point of order first.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Chomiak), on a point of order.
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it had been the government's intention to introduce a motion with respect to the sitting of the House in order to clarify the sessional order and the matters with respect to the sitting of the House. And insofar as we haven't got the time to extend the clock or leave to do that, I just want to indicate that we are seeking the leave of the House to do that.
Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on the same point of order.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): I'm not entirely sure what the Government House Leader is referring to, so for that reason we're going to deny leave.
Mr. Speaker: Okay, on the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, I didn't hear with respect to any breach of a rule or practice of the House, and so there- I must -fore respectfully rule that there is no point of order.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: If there is–and it was a request, I understand, that–seeking leave of the House, and leave has been denied, so that there is no other matter.
And since–unless the honourable Government House Leader is rising on another matter of privilege or point of order.
Mr. Chomiak: On House business, I'm asking leave of the House to complete the matter of the PMR and not see the clock until the matter with respect to the matter of the PMR has been dealt with by the Chamber.
Mr. Speaker: Okay, so if I understand correctly, then, we're seeking the opportunity to not see the clock until we have dealt with the resolution that is under consideration for the House currently. Is that–am I understanding correct? Okay.
And so leave has been agreed to to not see the clock until we have dealt with that matter? [Agreed]
Okay. Any–
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: So the question before the House–we're ready for the question on the resolution? [Agreed]
Question–is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the resolution? [Agreed]
Ms. Blady: I would ask leave of the House to see the resolution as being accepted unanimously by this Chamber.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House–the pleasure of the House to adopt the resolution and let the record show that it was unanimous? [Agreed]
Okay, I believe that concludes the business of the House this morning.
The hour being past 12 noon, this House is recessed and stands recessed until 1:30 p.m. this afternoon.