LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Thursday, April 24, 2025

TIME – 6 p.m.

LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba

CHAIRPERSON – MLA Robert Loiselle (St. Boniface)

VICE-CHAIRPERSON – MLA Shannon Corbett (Transcona)

ATTENDANCE – 6 — QUORUM – 4

Members of the committee present:

Hon. Min. Asagwara

Mrs. Cook, MLAs Corbett, Loiselle, Maloway, Mr. Narth

Substitutions:

Hon. Min. Naylor for Hon. Min. Asagwara at 6:52 p.m.

APPEARING:

Hon. Lisa Naylor, MLA for Wolseley

PUBLIC PRESENTERS:

Bill 33 – The Public Health Amend­ment Act

David Grant, private citizen

Bill 38 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures)

Ewald Friesen, Canadian Automobile Association–Manitoba

David Grant, private citizen

Rick Rennie, Manitoba Federation of Labour

Bill 41 – The Reporting of Supports for Child Survivors of Sexual Assault (Trained Health Pro­fes­sionals and Evidence Collection Kits) Amend­ment Act

Fernanda Vallejo, Latinas Manitoba Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:

Bill 34 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Motor Carrier En­force­ment)

Kyle Ross, Manitoba Gov­ern­ment and General Employees' Union

Bill 38 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures)

Dave Elmore, private citizen

Bruce Henley, Heavy Equip­ment and Aggregate Truckers Association of Manitoba

MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:

Bill 7 – The Human Tissue Gift Amend­ment Act

Bill 33 – The Public Health Amend­ment Act

Bill 34 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Motor Carrier En­force­ment)

Bill 38 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures)

Bill 41 – The Reporting of Supports for Child Survivors of Sexual Assault (Trained Health Pro­fes­sionals and Evidence Collection Kits) Amend­ment Act

* * *

Clerk Assistant (Ms. Melanie Ching): Good evening. Will the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development please come to order.

      Before the com­mit­tee can proceed with the busi­ness before it, it must elect a Chairperson.

      Are there any nominations?

MLA Shannon Corbett (Transcona): I nominate MLA Loiselle.

Clerk Assistant: MLA Loiselle has been nominated.

      Are there any other nominations?

      Hearing no other nominations, MLA Loiselle, will you please take the Chair.

The Chairperson: All right. Good evening. Our next item of busi­ness is the election of a Vice-Chairperson.

      Are there any nominations?

MLA Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I nominate MLA Corbett.

The Chairperson: MLA Corbett has been nominated.

      Are there any–yes–are there any other nomina­tions?

      Hearing no other nominations, MLA Corbett is elected Vice-Chairperson.

      This meeting has been called to consider the following bills: Bill 7, The Human Tissue Gift Amend­ment Act; Bill 33, The Public Health Amend­ment Act; Bill 34, The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Motor Carrier En­force­ment); Bill 38, The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures); Bill 41, the reporting of supports for child survivors of sexual assault, trained health pro­fes­sionals and evidence collection kits, amend­ed act.

      I'd like to inform all in attendance of the pro-visions in our rules regarding the hour of adjournment. A standing com­mit­tee meeting to consider a bill must not sit past midnight to hear public pre­sen­ta­tions or to consider clause by clause of a bill, except by unani­mous consent of the com­mit­tee.

      In regard to written submissions: written submissions from the following persons have been  received and distributed to com­mit­tee members: Kyle Ross, Manitoba Gov­ern­ment and General Employees' Union, on Bill 34; Dave Elmore, private citizen, on Bill 38; Bruce Henley, Heavy Equip­ment Aggregate Truckers Association, Manitoba, on Bill 38.

      Does the com­mit­tee agree to have these docu­ments appear in the Hansard transcript of the meeting? [Agreed]

      We have been advised that Rick Rennie has registered in person to make a pre­sen­ta­tion to Bill 38. Their name will be added to the bottom of the list as presenter No. 4.

      Prior to proceeding with public pre­sen­ta­tions, I  would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in a com­mit­tee. In accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allocated for pre­sen­ta­tions, with another five minutes allowed for questions from com­mit­tee members. Questions shall not exceed 45 seconds in length, with no time limit for answers.

      Questions may be addressed to presenters in the following rotation: first, the minister sponsoring the bill or another member of their caucus; second, a member of the official op­posi­tion; and third, an in­de­pen­dent member. If a presenter is not in attendance with their–when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list. If the presenter is not in attendance when their name is called a second time, they will be removed from the presenters list.

      The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript. Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name. This is the signal for the Hansard recorder to turn the mics on and off.

      Order of pre­sen­ta­tions: on the topic of deter­mining the order of public pre­sen­ta­tions, I will also note that we have out-of-town presenters in attendance, marked with an asterisk on the list. With these con­sid­era­tions in mind then, in what order does the com­mit­tee with to hear the pre­sen­ta­tions?

* (18:10)

Hon. Lisa Naylor (Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure): I propose that we go alphabetical and then by order, so that Minister Asagwara's three bills are all heard first. [interjection]

      Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. Out-of-town presenters first.

The Chairperson: Out-of-town presenters first has been proposed.

      Is the com­mit­tee in agree­ment? [Agreed]

      Thank you. With these con­sid­era­tions in mind–no, I've already said that–thank you for your patience. We will now proceed with public presentations.

      So I will now call on Kevin Rebeck, from the Manitoba Federation of Labour. I believe Mr. Rebeck is virtual. [interjection] Okay. So he will be dropped, and we will move on with the list.

      I now call on Mr.–[interjection] Moving forward, I now call on Amanda Culleton, private citizen. Is Amanda Culleton here? All right, moving on.

Bill 33–The Public Health Amendment Act

The Chairperson: Is David Grant here? All right. [interjection] Actually, yes, Bill 33. Mr. Grant, do you have any written material for dis­tri­bu­tion to the com­mit­tee? [interjection] Okay, excellent. Please proceed with your pre­sen­ta­tion.

David Grant (Private Citizen): Okay. I'm concerned about this. Obviously, it's serving its purpose. It was a problem, it was in the news, and this seems to solve that problem.

      But I'm just curious with the wording of it and having had been disadvantaged five years ago with certain laws and so on. So I'm hoping that Bill 33, or the docu­ments that support it, you know, the regula­tions, will make very clear that this is intended for stuff that's going to kill you or that if you spread it to somebody, it could do them great harm, and it won't be applied to influenza, for example. It just says infectious, and we know we face tons of infectious diseases and we defeat them. And I'm hoping that it's made clear that this does not apply to those innocuous infectious diseases.

      So that's basically all I've got to say, and I would hope that the minister will take that into account in applying this.

      So thank you very much.

The Chairperson: Thank you for your pre­sen­ta­tion.

      Do members of the com­mit­tee have questions for the presenter?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): Just a comment and perhaps a reassurance.

      I want to thank you for making the time to present this evening and sharing what I think is a really im­por­tant concern. The Public Health Act is an im­por­tant piece of legis­lation that is fun­da­mentally in place to protect the public from trans­mis­sible, as one example, trans­mis­sible diseases, contagions that can do a lot of harm if left untreated.

      And so I ap­pre­ciate that you flagged a really im­por­tant con­sid­era­tion and you gave an example. You know, we don't action measures under the act for influenza. That being said, we do know that there are even novel, emerging diseases that are highly trans­mis­sible that we need to be able to ensure people can get health care for in safe and ap­pro­priate ways.

      And so I want to–

The Chairperson: The minister's time is–I apolo­gize–the minister's time is expired.

      Are there any other questions?

Mrs. Kathleen Cook (Roblin): Just thank you for your pre­sen­ta­tion and for coming out tonight.

The Chairperson: Are there any other questions from the com­mit­tee?

      All right, thank you, Mr. Grant.

Bill 38–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act
(Traffic Safety Measures)

The Chairperson: I now call upon Mr. Ewald, CAA Manitoba, Gov­ern­ment Relations, who I believe is on Zoom. All right, Mr. Ewald, please unmute yourself and turn your video on, please.  

      Mr. Ewald, can you hear us?

Ewald Friesen (Canadian Automobile Association–Manitoba): There you go. Hello.

The Chairperson: Yes, all right. Good evening, Mr. Friesen.

      Do you have any written materials for dis­tri­bu­tion to the com­mit­tee?

E. Friesen: Not for dis­tri­bu­tion; it'll be audio.

The Chairperson: Thank you. Please proceed with your pre­sen­ta­tion.

E. Friesen: First of all, good evening. Thank you for the op­por­tun­ity to speak today. My name's Ewald Friesen. I'm the manager of gov­ern­ment and com­mu­nity relations with CAA Manitoba. I'm here to voice CAA's strong support for Bill 38, The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures) to be–and to commend the Manitoba gov­ern­ment for taking this im­por­tant step to improve safety on our roads.

      We have been actively advocating for several key road safety measures since late 2023, with the goal of enhancing the safety of our tow fleet, our contractor network and the many stranded drivers we rescue every day. In part­ner­ship with internal and external stake­holders, we brought these issues to gov­ern­ment, requesting a few helpful amend­ments to the HTA.

      We are extremely pleased to see that one of these amend­ments, spe­cific­ally the use of traffic control devices more colloquially referred to as pylons, are being considered to create a safe workspace, what we sometimes refer to as a safety cradle; that this has been recog­nized in the bill, in addition to the many other con­sid­era­tions with respect to a safe passing distance for cyclists as well as the amend­ments relating–related to snowplows.

      So, firstly, Bill 38 authorizes tow truck operators to use traffic control devices to create a safer working zone when assisting stranded motorists. The reason this is crucial is that it helps us protect both our operators and other motorists. This is not new to how tow services are delivered; this procedure exists and is being used by the tow industry in juris­dic­tions all over the country. Discussions over the past few years between industry repre­sen­tatives, en­force­ment services and gov­ern­ment has high­lighted that there's a mis­under­standing of the purposes of the use of these pylons.

      From our perspective, the use of the pylons, of course, is never to direct traffic or take that respon­si­bility. Our interest in using these pylons is, of course, simply to create greater visibility for oncoming motorists, so as to caution them of a tow ahead. This new legis­lation will, of course, bring this much-needed clarity to this portion of the act.

      Secondly, the inclusion of a clear, one-metre safe-passing distance rule when motorists are passing cyclists, of course, is a sig­ni­fi­cant im­prove­ment in our opinion to what currently exists. The issue is near and dear to the hearts of our members, many of whom enjoy cycling; and contrary to popular opinion, our members identify as motorists as much as they identify as cyclists and pedestrians. So we are, at times, vul­ner­able road users as well. And this new law will, of course, clarify that one-metre passing distance which we are certainly in favour of.

      And thirdly, while this was not some­thing we advocated for spe­cific­ally, we want to voice our support for the additional pro­tec­tions proposed in the bill that clarify driver behaviour when sharing the road with snowplow operators and other winter and maintenance vehicles, including following distance and restrictions on passing. These changes will help reduce collisions and near misses during Manitoba's beautiful yet very wintery months. And, of course, they will work to improve safety not only for maintenance crews but for all drivers out there on the road.

* (18:20)

      We would like to, of course, con­gratu­late the gov­ern­ment of Manitoba on the launch of their new snowplower–snowplow tracker app. We–we're of course very happy to support this new, innovative initiative.

      Of course, we support the measures in Bill 38 to make a tangible–and we believe they'll make a tangible difference to safety on Manitoba roads, protecting vul­ner­able road users and those who work on them. Of course, we know this is, at times, dangerous work. The side of the road is the work­place for our fleet and contractor network, so anything we can do to enhance their safety, of course, is welcome news for your friends here at CAA.

      The proposed amend­ments aren't just legis­lative tweaks in our opinion; they protect and save lives. Tow operators will have their safety best practices recog­nized and confirmed in legis­lation when it comes to the use of these pylons, and, of course, this will be reflected in our training manuals. The cyclists and drivers will enjoy much-needed consistency and clarity with regard to the law by way of measurable standards for safe passing. And finally, winter main­tenance crews and all drivers benefit from clearer rules that prevent collisions during critical road maintenance operations such as snowplowing.

      We hope this bill will lay the foundation for additional im­prove­ments to the HTA, such as their continued exploration of the enhanced lighting options for tow trucks and expanded use of active live lanes during emergency response situations. Just to explain, there are sometimes moments when a tow operator needs to make a decision about what is most safe. And so there is still some work to be done there, and we look forward to working with the Province of Manitoba to further enhance the safety of everyone out there on the road.

      Then we want to especially commend the Province of Manitoba for engaging with stake­holders, listening to com­mu­nity feedback and, most of all, taking action. Bill 38 reflects the co‑operative spirit of these discussions over the past year, and these amend­ments reflect a thoughtful, 'collaboratal'–col­lab­o­rative process that we are–have been proud to be a part of.

      In closing, I'd like to urge MLAs to support the swift passage of Bill 38. These amend­ments are not just technical changes; they are about protecting lives and preventing injury. The sooner these measures become law, the sooner we can ensure greater pro­tec­tion for our roadside workers, our cyclists, our snow­plow operators and the Manitobans who have time and again indicated their willingness to drive lawfully and safely.

      Thank you, again, for the op­por­tun­ity to speak. We look forward to your continued part­ner­ship and working 'collaborty'–col­lab­o­ratively in the future.

      Thank you very much.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Friesen, for your pre­sen­ta­tion.

      I'd like to just remind all members of the com­mit­tee that you have 45 seconds to ask a question but that  the presenter has unlimited time to answer the question.

      Do members of the com­mit­tee have questions for the presenter?

Hon. Lisa Naylor (Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure): Thank you, Mr. Friesen, very much for your pre­sen­ta­tion. I really want to thank you, first of all, for what a great partner CAA has been through the dev­elop­ment of this bill and for the im­por­tant advocacy that you've done. I also ap­pre­ciate you high­lighting the very im­por­tant life-saving nature of this bill and just how valuable all aspects of it are for your industry and organi­zation.

      So I thank you for taking the time out of this evening to appear here on com­mit­tee and share those thoughts with us. And I also look forward to our on­going col­lab­o­ration.

The Chairperson: Mr. Narth–oh, sorry.

      Mr. Friesen, you had a response?

E. Friesen: Only to say thank you very much, Minister.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Friesen.

      Mr. Narth has a question.

Mr. Konrad Narth (La Vérendrye): Yes. Thank you, Mr. Friesen, for taking the time to be here with us today and extensively going through the legis­lation. The only question that I would have for you is around the traffic control device addition for tow trucks, since your organi­zation is an expert in that.

      My question would be: Have you been involved with con­sul­ta­tion around regula­tion of–or additional regula­tion within the legis­lation around the traffic control devices, how they're used and how that's going to be–

The Chairperson: The member's time has expired.

      Mr. Friesen, do you have a response?

E. Friesen: I think I can respond in part.

      Their usage will be at the deter­min­ation of the tow truck operators them­selves. Ultimately, while these proposed amend­ments do not mandate tow operators to use traffic control devices behind their vehicle during a tow, it's a may, not must, amend­ment that we  had proposed. And I believe that these changes address that request.

The Chairperson: Mr. Narth, do you have another question?

Mr. Narth: Yes; just quickly, yes.

The Chairperson: Mr. Narth.

Mr. Narth: Thank you for that response, Mr. Friesen. Just to expand on that: wondering if you and/or your organi­zation feel that there should be standardization around the use of traffic control devices, moving forward in the future and the expansion of regula­tion in this legis­lation.

E. Friesen: That's a very good question; thank you.

      For our purposes as tow operators, since we are not officially emergency vehicles in the legal sense–there are different regula­tions affecting fire, paramedic and police–we're regulated a touch differently. So our ambition with this change was, of  course, to represent our fleet operators and the contract network who are also employed by us.

      So as far as further extrapolating or insisting in any way that these traffic control devices be used in industries beyond what's requested is out of the scope of our request.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Friesen.

      Are there any other questions?

      Seeing no other questions, we will move on to our next presenter. I call Mr. David Grant.

      Good evening, Mr. Grant. Do you have any written materials to share?

David Grant (Private Citizen): Just this stuff.

The Chairperson: Excellent, please proceed with your pre­sen­ta­tion.

D. Grant: I'm in favour of this. I've been driving for an embarrassingly large number of decades, and most of it in the winter. And passing a snowplow in the winter is a scary thing, and I was young and once did that.

      Anyway, but the one thing–it doesn't seem in this bill that there's an exemption for the tow–the snow­plow when it's got its blade up, when it's just returning back to the shop. And this bill would seem to forbid passing a truck going half the speed limit on a nicely cleared road. So I would like to see that im­prove­ment.

      And the last presenter made reference to keeping road workers safe. I remember being in this room 12 years ago, and Minister Braun had a bill up, and I was in favour of it, and she wanted an im­prove­ment for roadside workers.

      Anybody who's driven across the US or other parts of Canada, if there's workers over there in the ditch, there's concrete between you and them, and we don't do that yet here. And I'm sort of a broken record, keep repeating this, and it isn't really part of this bill, but I would just remind you that if we really want to protect workers, we'll put up a line of concrete so that anybody who does fall asleep doesn't hit them; he hits the concrete.

      As I say, it's a popular thing, and Minister Braun assured us–assured the com­mit­tee, the standing com­mit­tee back then, that it would be done. And it didn't. She was earnest about it. But anyway, I'd just remind you of that.

      The other one on the bicycle clearance: those who are vexed by bicycles notice that, sometimes, bicycles go within–while you're stopped, they go within a metre of you. And I would suggest that, a system where bicycles were identified, when bicycles are racing in Europe or whatever, they wear a bib, and the bib has a big 43 on it. And you can see from a distance who that guy is. And if we had a require­ment that people who are riding their bikes in traffic had to have a numbered bib registered with the Province, then they would have an incentive to actually behave.

      So the one question I have here with regard to the bill is: If you're standing still and somebody goes within a few inches of you, does that count? And, you know, hopefully, it doesn't.

* (18:30)

      But the other is, if we really do want safety, we would put numbers on bikes. And I remember when I was a kid, we had a number that was a quarter of an inch high under the seat and it didn't do any good, but with the popularity of nylon bibs in athletics and racing and so on, bike racing, it's entirely practical, and I would suggest that would be a marked im­prove­ment in safety.

      Can you imagine what traffic could be like in rush hour if none of the cars had number plates? Now, it's that number on your car that keeps the craziest of us behaving. And if none of us had a number plate, I can imagine things could go very badly, and so that's where we are right now with people on foot and people on bicycles. The worst of them, the most dangerous of them have no incentive so, again, I've presented this idea to city hall too and it didn't get anywhere.

      But, again, it's some­thing to keep in mind, if you really want to keep bicycles from getting squashed by going through red lights–if they had a number plate, a number bib, and there's enough cameras in cars that the chances of them getting away with doing that were not great.

      So that was all. And thank you very much for the invite.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Grant, for your pre­sen­ta­tion.

Do com­mit­tee members have questions?

MLA Naylor: I want to thank you for taking the time, Mr. Grant, to come in and share your thoughts about the bill.

      And, as com­mit­tee members know, usually this time period is for me to ask you questions and not the other way around, but I do want to clear up any misconceptions and let every one of the com­mit­tee know that the rules around snowplows only apply when the winter maintenance vehicles are operating and doing their work. Those rules don't apply when they're just travelling between the maintenance yard and where they're working.

      And, as well, cyclists being–who overtake a vehicle, a stopped vehicle, this does not apply. It's when a car or truck is passing a cyclist, then this applies–

The Chairperson: Member's time has expired.

      Mr. Grant, do you have a response?

D. Grant: No, I think that's entirely fair and I guess what we can do is for the purpose of the bill, we say that a dump truck with a blade two feet in the air is not a snowplow. In effect, that's what the bill is saying; is that if the blade's down and it's making a mess, it's a snowplow. So thank you very much for clarifying that.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Grant.

Mr. Narth: Thank you, Mr. Grant, for taking the time to be here with us today and for your comments. My question would be, and then I think the minister had answered that but for clari­fi­ca­tion, your concern is that there's shared obligation and respon­si­bility for both motorists and cyclists in maintaining the one metre set-back distances. Is that correct?

The Chairperson: Mr. Grant, your response.

D. Grant: Yes, my response is that there are a whole lot of things that drivers and bicyclists do that are bad and we can't deal with them all here. But the one that does come to mind is: cars are stopped at a light, bicycle pulls up to the first one and is sitting less than a metre away. I would suggest that this bill would require that driver to sit and wait until the bike is more than a metre away because, otherwise, you're passing a bike a foot away.

      So again, that's some­thing that, hopefully, if we do the bib thing, bicyclists will not be splitting lanes. I notice that there are parts of the US where big motorcycles are allowed to split lanes and that. I have a motorcycle and I would never do that. That's just–I can't say crazy, but it's an invitation for serious injury if you're going between the lanes of traffic in a motorcycle. But, anyway, thank you for that question.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Grant.

Were there any other questions?

All right. Thank you, Mr. Grant.

      I now call on Bill 38, Mr. Rick Rennie.

Rick Rennie (Manitoba Federation of Labour): Thank you very much and thanks for the op­por­tun­ity to be here to speak to Bill thirty–sorry.

The Chairperson: Thirty-eight, Mr. Rennie. Do you have any materials to distribute for the com­mit­tee?

R. Rennie: Yes, I have 12 copies of my pre­sen­ta­tion.

The Chairperson: We'll just take a moment to dis-tribute that.

      Mr. Rennie, the floor is yours.

R. Rennie: Thank you for this op­por­tun­ity to be here to present on Bill 38 on behalf of the Manitoba Federation of Labour.

      The MFL is the province's largest central labour body. We're made up of more that 30 affiliated unions, repre­sen­ting 130,000 unionized workers in the public sector, the private sector and the building trades.

      And, of course, work­place safety and health is a key priority for the MFL and our unions. We conduct health and safety research; we provide health and safety edu­ca­tion and training; we lobby and advocate for stronger laws, stricter en­force­ment, greater invest­ment in injury and illness pre­ven­tion to keep all workers safe and healthy.

      Therefore, while we are, of course, sup­port­ive of any measures that increase safety for motorists, cyclists, pedestrians and everyone on our roadways, our main interest in this bill is the potential to improve safety for workers who operate winter maintenance vehicles such as snowplows, and roadside vehicles including tow trucks.

      So regarding winter maintenance vehicles, the positive measures we think contained in this bill include: increasing that distance that drivers must maintain behind these vehicles on the highway; prohibiting passing a winter maintenance vehicle in certain circum­stances; and specific require­ments when meeting a winter maintenance vehicle on a roadway or at an intersection. The amend­ments also allow the operator of a tow truck or other vehicle provi­ding roadside assist­ance to set out traffic control devices to safeguard them as they go about their work.

      When we need the services of a plow or a tow truck operator, it is often when weather con­di­tions are at their worst, and anything we can do to better protect their safety and their lives as they provide these vital services is some­thing I think we should all support.

      As I read the provisions of–the proposed provisions in Bill 38, I was reminded of the last time, just over a decade ago, when The Highway Traffic Act was sub­stan­tially amend­ment to better protect workers on our highways. Those changes were made, as many of you will recall, in the aftermath of the death of a flag person who was killed by a vehicle traveling through a construction area.

      One of the key weaknesses identified in the system governing traffic through construction zones at that time was a lack of clarity on exactly what the rules are, or were, regarding speed limits in these zones. As the MFL noted at that time, the vast majority of drivers want to follow the law and do the right thing. It is incumbent upon lawmakers, therefore, and traffic author­ities to make sure the rules are clear and that people know what they are.

      Therefore, con­sid­erable resources were dedi­cated at that time to areas such as highway signage, public edu­ca­tion to high­light and reinforce these new rules. It is im­por­tant that the changes proposed in Bill 38 be similarly communicated and reinforced. I encourage the department to use all available means to accomplish this.

      That includes, again, highway signage, notices, public edu­ca­tion. MPI and SAFE Work Manitoba, for example, both regularly run campaigns on traffic safety, and I encourage the de­part­ment to col­lab­o­rate with them and any other partners you can identify to help build awareness of the new rules. And we look forward to see those edu­ca­tion initiatives rolled out in conjunction with the proposed changes taking effect.

      On behalf of the MFL, and parti­cularly the workers directly affected by these changes, I com­mend the gov­ern­ment on bringing them forward and I thank you for this op­por­tun­ity.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Rennie, for your pre­sen­ta­tion.

      Are there any questions from the committee?

MLA Naylor: Thank you very much for your pre­sen­ta­tion, Mr. Rennie. I have certainly ap­pre­ciated the recent meeting that we had with MFL, parti­cularly focused on the op­por­tun­ities for a good edu­ca­tion rollout about this plan.

      So, again, you're a valuable partner to us on this as well as many other things across gov­ern­ment. And, you know, I'm reminded, as you're speaking, of the upcoming Day of Mourning for workers who are lost at–who've died at work, and you–it's very poignant that that's coming up on Monday, because I think that's such an im­por­tant reminder of exactly what these changes are trying to prevent, and to keep our workers safe, our, you know, union members safe that work for our gov­ern­ment; but also who do this work across the province–

The Chairperson: The member's time has expired.

* (18:40)

R. Rennie: Thank you very much. I would just like to thank the minister for that, and speaking of Day of Mourning, to also point out that although they're not all or exclusively people that drive equip­ment for a living, I think it's worth noting that every year in Manitoba the leading cause of–apart from occupational diseases, the leading cause of work­place fatalities is traffic accidents, people that are driving in the course of their em­ploy­ment.

      So, again, maybe not specific to these workers, sometimes it is. But yes, anything that we can do to keep everybody, but including workers who drive our roads every day in the course of their em­ploy­ment, safer, we're definitely in support of it, so.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Rennie.

Mr. Narth: Yes, thank you, Mr. Rennie, for taking the time and your clear explanation of the changes and im­prove­ments in the legis­lation. I ap­pre­ciate your com­ment on making sure that the legis­lation is clear and concise and that the messaging is able to be effectively done for all Manitobans to realize those changes.

      Would there be any additional messaging that you would recom­mend around passing a vehicle like it states, safely, without any exact explanation? Would you have any additional sug­ges­tions that the gov­ern­ment could improve on this legis­lation?

R. Rennie: So I just say, while I very much ap­pre­ciate the question, I'm really not an expert in how, you know, whether, for example, a specific speed limit versus general guidance would be–so I'm afraid I'm really not the person to answer your question. I apologize.

The Chairperson: Are there any other questions from the com­mit­tee?

      Thank you, Mr. Rennie, for your pre­sen­ta­tion.

Bill 41–The Reporting of Supports for Child Survivors of Sexual Assault
(Trained Health Professionals and
Evidence Collection Kits) Amendment Act

The Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 41.

      I will now call on Fernanda Vallejo to come to the podium.

      Good evening, Madam Vallejo. Do you have any written material to share with the committee tonight?

      All right, the floor is yours.

Fernanda Vallejo (Latinas Manitoba Inc.): Okay, so my name is Fernanda Vallejo. I work with new­comer and immigrant families. I founded Latinas Manitoba.

      So I want to speak in support of Bill 41 because I see how hard is for families when a child has been hurt. Just one week ago, a mother from our com­mu­nity came in tears because her four-year-old little girl suffer of abuse. So they–she took her to the hospital. She didn't get any results. She was just told the police is going to follow up with your social worker. And tomorrow is Friday; it's been more than a week; she doesn't know what to do.

      So this bill is really im­por­tant because not all children get the help they need in time, in many com­mu­nities, especially rural or immigrant com­mu­nities. Families don't need–they don't know what to do, yes, especially for new immigrants, new­comers; we don't have enough infor­ma­tion here. I tried to contact the Women's Health Clinic, checking if they were able to support her. They said maybe you should go to another clinic; we won't be able to.

      Right, so–yes, so we need to also have maybe more doctors that speak our language. So now we have a lot of Spanish-speaking people coming to Manitoba–and police officers; I think there's only one police that speaks Spanish.

      Yes, that's all that I have to say.

The Chairperson: Gracias, Mrs. Vallejo.

      Does the com­mit­tee have any questions for Mrs. Vallejo?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): Thank you so much for your advocacy and the work you do in com­mu­nities, particularly new­comer com­mu­nities. It is so im­por­tant to have strong voices like yourself to help families navigate the systems that exist in very challenging and personal situations.

      I would hope that, if you're able, we can connect after this com­mit­tee and make sure that that family gets connected to the right care that they need. Someone on my team will follow up with you right after this, if you're comfortable, to get you that contact infor­ma­tion and we'll make sure that we get that family the care that they need.

      This bill does really im­por­tant work, but we know there's much more work to do as a gov­ern­ment to make sure that all com­mu­nities, parti­cularly new­comer com­­mu­nities, get access to those services, and want to reassure you that we're actively doing that work and would love to work directly with your organi­zation to help enhance it.

      So thank you for your courage today and your voice.

The Chairperson: Mrs. Vallejo, do you have a response?

F. Vallejo: No. I ap­pre­ciate your help and I'll be waiting for more assist­ance.

The Chairperson: Are there any other questions?

Mrs. Kathleen Cook (Roblin): Hi. I just wanted to echo the minister's comments and thank you for the work that you do every day with new­comer families and for taking time to come here tonight and advocate on their behalf. Thank you.

The Chairperson: Are there any other questions from the com­mit­tee? Once again, gracias and good evening.

      All right. We will then circle back to Bill 38. Is Amanda Culleton–sorry–Bill 33.

      Is Amanda Culleton here? All right. Seeing that Amanda Culleton is not here, her name will be dropped from the list.

      Is Mr. Kevin Rebeck available online? All right. If Mr. Kevin Rebeck is not available online, he will be dropped from the list as well.

      That concludes the list of presenters I have before me.

* * *

The Chairperson: In what order does the com­mit­tee wish to proceed with clause-by-clause con­sid­era­tions of the bills?

Hon. Lisa Naylor (Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure): Now it's my turn to talk. We would like to go alphabetical with numerical order within the alphabetical order. So, to be clear, Asagwara–7, 33, 41; Naylor–34, 38.

The Chairperson: Excellent. We will now proceed with clause by clause of bill in alphabetical order, I believe, starting with Minister Asagwara, then fol­lowed by Minister Naylor.

      So Minister Asagwara, we will proceed with Bill 7, then 33, then 41; then Minister Naylor: Bill 34, then 33. [interjection] 38–sorry. I will repeat. Minister Naylor: Bill 34, then 38.

Bill 7–The Human Tissue Gift Amendment Act

The Chairperson: Does the minister respon­si­ble for Bill 7 have an opening statement?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): No.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Minister.

      Does the critic for the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement?

An Honourable Member: No.

The Chairperson: Excellent. We thank the member.

      During the con­sid­era­tion of a bill, the enacting clause and the title are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order.

      Clause 1–pass; clause 2–pass; clause 3–pass; clause 4–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.

Bill 33–The Public Health Amendment Act

(Continued)

The Chairperson: We will now proceed with Bill 33.

      Does the minister respon­si­ble for Bill 33 have an opening statement?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): No.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Minister.

      Does the critic of the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement?

An Honourable Member: No.

The Chairperson: Thank you.

      During the con­sid­era­tion of a bill, the preamble, the enacting clause and the title are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order.

      Also, if there is agree­ment from the com­mit­tee, the Chair will call clauses in blocks that conform to pages, with the under­standing that we will stop at any parti­cular clause or clauses where members may have com­ments, questions or amend­ments to propose.

      Is that agreed? [Agreed]

* (18:50)

      Clause 1–pass; clauses 2 through 4–pass; clauses 5 and 6–pass; clauses 7 through 10–pass; clauses 11 through 14–pass; clause 15–pass; clauses 16 and 17–pass; clauses 18 through 22–pass; preamble–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.

Bill 41–The Reporting of Supports for Child Survivors of Sexual Assault
(Trained Health Professionals and
Evidence Collection Kits) Amendment Act

(Continued)

The Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 41.

      Does the minister respon­si­ble for Bill 41 have an opening statement?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): No.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Minister.

      Does the critic for the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement?

An Honourable Member: No.

The Chairperson: Thank you, critic.

      During the consideration of a bill, the enacting clause and the title are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order.

      Clause 1–pass; clause 2–pass; clause 3–pass; clause 4–pass; clause 5–pass; clause 6–pass; clause 7–pass; clause 8–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.

      This concludes Bill 41.

      Now we will move on, in alphabetical order–[interjection]

Committee Substitution

The Chairperson: But before, I would like to inform the com­mit­tee that under our rule 84(2), the following member­ship substitutions have been made for the com­mit­tee, effective imme­diately: Hon­our­able Minister Naylor for Hon­our­able Minister Asagwara.

      Thank you.

Bill 34–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act
(Motor Carrier Enforcement)

The Chairperson: Does the minister respon­si­ble for Bill 34 have an opening statement?

Hon. Lisa Naylor (Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure): Good evening, Chairperson, members of the com­mit­tee. I am pleased to be here tonight to discuss Bill 34, The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Motor Carrier En­force­ment).

      This bill will ensure that motor carry en­force­ment officers who inspect heavy com­mercial vehicles on Manitoba's highways are able to do their jobs safely and effectively.

      The bill does this by defining motor carrier en­force­ment officers in legis­lation, provi­ding them with liability pro­tec­tion for fulfilling their duties and giving them the ability to arrest and deliver individuals found to be committing criminal activity to the police.

      It will also allow gov­ern­ment to make regula­tions to specify their training and equip­ment, similar to regula­­tions already in place for con­ser­va­tion officers.

      In addition, the bill will modernize existing ad­min­is­tra­tive monetary penal­ties for heavy vehicle safety infractions in legis­lation and in future regula­tions. These penal­ties provide a tool to sanction firms for non-compliance without having to go through a court process.

      Finally, the bill will require operators of heavy vehicles to report damage-only accidents over $2,000, which will better allow carrier safety records to be tracked and bring Manitoba into compliance with require­ments in the National Safety Code and already in place in other juris­dic­tions.

      I look forward to con­sid­era­tion of this im­por­tant legis­lation by this com­mit­tee, and I welcome and thank everyone partici­pating this evening.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Minister Naylor.

      Does the critic from the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement?

Mr. Konrad Narth (La Vérendrye): Thank you for the op­por­tun­ity to speak to Bill 34.

      I'm addressing this as we are seeing an ongoing and growing concern of safety around the operation of com­mercial vehicles, not only within Manitoba but across juris­dic­tions through­out our country.

      And although this legis­lation is aimed to strengthen the en­force­ment and safety measures, I do feel that it does add an admin­is­tra­tive burden to companies that are managing a fleet, and although that may be im­por­tant and necessary, I think that a lot more needs to be done and a lot more, spe­cific­ally around cross-juris­dic­tion alignment in safety measures.

      So as we're seeing juris­dic­tion jumping by com­mercial operators in this country, and Manitoba be­coming a haven, I think there's expansion around those admin­is­tra­tive additions that could be done in this legis­lation. But I welcome the changes that have been made.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Narth.

      During the con­sid­era­tion of a bill, the enacting clause and the title are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order.

      Also, if there is agree­ment from the com­mit­tee, the Chair will call clauses in blocks that conform to pages, with the under­standing that we will stop at any parti­cular clause or clauses where members may have comments, questions or amend­ments to propose.

      Is that agreed? [Agreed]

      Clauses 1 and 2–pass; clauses 3 and 4–pass; clause 5–pass; clause 6–pass; clauses 7 and 8–pass; clauses 9 and 10–pass; clause 11–pass; clause 12–pass; clause 13–pass; clause 14–pass; clause 15–pass; clauses 16 and 17–pass.

      Moving on to page four–schedule–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.

Bill 38–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act
(Traffic Safety Measures)

(Continued)

The Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 38.

      Does the minister respon­si­ble for Bill 38 have an opening statement?

Hon. Lisa Naylor (Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure): Yes, she does.

The Chairperson: Minister Naylor, the floor is yours.

MLA Naylor: Again, thank you, Chairperson, members of the com­mit­tee and registered presenters for being here tonight.

      I am very pleased to discuss Bill 38, The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures). This bill amends three different aspects of The Highway Traffic Act to increase the safety of all road users. This bill considers those who travel on our roads and those where the highway is their work­place.

      Bill 38 creates rules for drivers around snow­plows and cyclists and gives tow truck drivers the ability to create a safe work zone while working in traffic. By requiring drivers to give space when sharing the road, this bill will ensure that more Manitobans can return home safely at the end of the day.

      I would like to take this op­por­tun­ity to thank all of those who provided input and support for this bill. I look forward to con­sid­era­tion of this im­por­tant legis­lation by this committee and welcome and thank all the parti­ci­pants who came out tonight to participate in the committee process.

      Thank you.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Minister Naylor.

      Does the critic of–from the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement?

* (19:00)

Mr. Konrad Narth (La Vérendrye): Thank you for the op­por­tun­ity to speak to Bill 38.

      I do support changes that are made within this legis­lation, spe­cific­ally speaking to the addition of traffic control devices for tow trucks. The only com­ment that I would make on the addition of the use of traffic control devices for tow trucks is that, through­out regula­tion, or future amend­ments to legis­lation, that there's a standardization of the devices that are used for either different scenarios or types of operators.

      Well, existing in The Highway Traffic Act, there is standardization of traffic control lighting on emer­gency vehicles including tow trucks, and that's already outlined in The Highway Traffic Act. So I think it would set clari­fi­ca­tion to have a standardization of the control devices for tow trucks' use.

      Moving on, then, to the changes around setbacks for passing winter maintenance vehicles, I think it's an im­por­tant step forward, so I commend the minister for bringing forward those changes.

      The only concern that I would have is some of the ambiguous language within the legis­lation stating passing when safe; that's left to the discretion of either law en­force­ment or potentially the driver who had misinterpreted what safe passage of winter main­tenance vehicle.

      And then the other part, like we–the minister had mentioned there's three sections. So the third is the safe passing of cyclists together with motorists on shared roadway. I would've liked to see that there's an obligation and a respon­si­bility shared. The minister has done a good job at exemplifying that it is only when a vehicle is passing the cyclist, and we heard that tonight, but I think it's quite vague in legis­lation.

      And I think motorists, together with cyclists, would like to see it more clearly outlined; that there's a shared respon­si­bility on both the cyclist and the motorists.

      Those are my comments.

The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Narth.

      During the con­sid­era­tion of the bill, the enacting clause and the title are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order.

      Also, if there is agree­ment from the com­mit­tee, the Chair will call clauses and blocks that conform to pages, with the under­standing that we will stop at any parti­cular clause or clauses where members may have comments, questions or amend­ments to propose.

      Is that agreed? [Agreed]

      Clauses 1 through 3–pass; clause 4–pass; clause 5–pass; clauses 6 through 10–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.

      The hour being 7:04 p.m., what is the will of the com­mit­tee?

Some Honourable Members: Com­mit­tee rise.

The Chairperson: Com­mit­tee rise.

COMMITTEE ROSE AT: 7:04 p.m

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Re: Bill 34

The Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union (MGEU) represents thousands of public sector workers across Manitoba, including Motor Carrier Enforcement Officers (MCEOs), who play a vital role in ensuring road safety and compliance with provincial transportation laws.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide our views on Bill 34 – The Highway Traffic Amendment Act, which proposes to expand the authority of MCEOs by classifying them as peace officers and granting them additional powers, including the power to arrest and detain individuals for the purpose of delivering them to law enforcement.

While we recognize the intent behind this legislation (to enhance enforcement capabilities and improve road safety) we must also express our concern regarding the implications for the safety and preparedness of the MCEOs we represent.

Bill 34 shifts the role of MCEOs by designating them as peace officers, thus placing them in a category typically reserved for professionals with broader arrest powers and more direct public safety responsibilities. This shift increases the risk to MCEOs, who may encounter situations involving individuals who in some circumstances may be armed or may act violently in response to arrest.

In the course of their duties, MCEOs may encounter commercial or private vehicle operators who are under extreme stress or attempting to evade justice. It is not unheard of for such individuals to carry weapons, sometimes to protect themselves from crime during long-distance hauls or while parked overnight in remote areas. Empowering MCEOs to arrest and detain such individuals without adequate protective tools or training increases the risk to their personal safety.

Other peace officers with arrest authority, such as police officers, are typically equipped with tools such as firearms, tasers, handcuffs, and body armor. MCEOs, under current operating conditions, do not have access to this full range of protective equipment. If they are to perform arrest and detention duties, there must be a thorough evaluation of the appropriate and proportionate tools needed to ensure their safety and the safety of the public.

The expanded responsibilities proposed under Bill 34 necessitate a robust and comprehensive training program. MCEOs must receive the same level of training in arrest procedures, use of force, de-escalation techniques, and mental health and trauma-informed practices as other peace officers. Without this, the potential for harm, to both officers and members of the public, increases substantially.

MGEU is requesting that government ensures a full risk assessment be conducted involving public safety experts and frontline MCEOs. Also, that there be full consultation with MGEU and its members on training, equipment needs, and operational changes. And, that a clear framework for ongoing oversight and review of the expanded powers be put in place, including incident reporting, accountability mechanisms, and mental health supports.

The MGEU supports legislation that improves public safety and strengthens enforcement, but such changes must not come at the cost of the safety and well-being of our members. Expanding the authority of MCEOs without equipping them with the tools, training, and protections necessary for those expanded responsibilities is a dangerous proposition.

Thank you for your consideration.

Kyle Ross
Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union (MGEU)

____________

Re: Bill 38

As a cycling advocate and educator I would like to offer my support for the proposed Highway Traffic Act (HTA) amendment to include "A driver must keep a distance of at least one metre when passing a bicycle or power-assisted bicycle." In my opinion this should also be viewed as a good start and not the end goal for keeping cyclists safe. It does help to define the distance for passing a person of a bicycle which the current "safe distance" does not. It also needs to be combined with a robust public education program to ensure that drivers understand the rule, the consequences and the significant risk that they represent when passing people on bikes. We cannot rely on enforcement to ensure that rules are followed and while education will not ensure every driver will follow the rule, I believe that most drivers respect other road users and given the facts, will respect the law.

I would also like to provide from a cycling educator perspective my suggestions for other measures that the HTA should consider if the goal is in fact to keep cyclists safer on the road.

A one meter passing distance is as I have stated a good first step, however speed matters. A much safer approach would be to base the passing distance on the posted speed of the passing vehicle. A one meter passing distance is reasonable at speeds of 50 kph and lower, however at speeds exceeding 5 kph the passing distance should be 1.5 meters minimum with a recommendation to change lanes where possible.

Another aspect of the HTA that needs better definition is a cyclists distance from the curb or edge of the road. Currently the HTA defines this as "close as practicable." Years ago this was defined as "close as possible" and many drivers still believe that to be the rule. This not only creates conflict between cyclists and drivers, it also provides no clear guideline for people on bikes to follow. Best practice, based not only on CAN-Bike but many other cycling education programs around the world, recommends a minimum distance as 1 meter. There are numerous reasons for this which I would be happy to clarify at any time. The bottom line is that a one meter distance is required for cyclists to stay clear of the debris and other potential hazards in the gutter, provide themselves with room to maneuver in the event of an issue while at the same time maintaining a consistent, straight line. Setting a minimum distance does not preclude cyclists from taking more space when needed (construction, road hazards etc) but clarifies for both cyclists and drivers what is not only expected, but safe.

I would also like to address the Idaho Stop which would allow people on bikes to treat stop signs as yields. Last summer this made the news and while at this point has faded from top of mind safety issues, I feel that it should be at the very least studied. As Janice Lukes said in her comments at the time, this could be an important change to help grow active transportation, but more importantly it does offer a level of safety for people on bike. When cyclists come to a full stop they take time to start up and get momentum which leaves them in the intersection for a longer period of time. Intersections are the most dangerous place for vulnerable road users because of the complexity and number of possible traffic movements. Another aspect of this is that impatient drivers, stuck behind a cyclist will sometimes try to skirt around them at the intersection so that they can accelerate past them quickly after the intersection to get ahead of them. This is a dangerous practice and one that puts cyclists at serious risk.

I realize that you have to look at this as well from the driver's standpoint and the potential kickback when drivers feel that cyclists are getting a benefit they do not get. But let's be perfectly honest, the vast majority of drivers do not come to a full stop at stop signs, which is also a good reason for bikes to clear the intersection more quickly.

To understand why cyclists (drivers too) don't stop fully, all one has to do is look at the huge number of intersections that are 4 way stops. Cyclists like to avoid main roadways and when they use alternative/parallel routes, they are now faced with stopping almost at every single intersection. In some cases that drives them to take main roadways which are more dangerous due to traffic volumes and speed.

I realize that much of this is not directly related to proposed changes to the HTA, however all of these represent key changes that are necessary if we want to encourage more people to adopt active transportation while at the same time keeping them safe on the road. I hope that you will keep these in mind as we navigate the road to a future where motor vehicles are not the only transportation option.

As indicated above, I would be happy to meet to discuss and/or clarify the points above.

Dave Elmore

____________

Re: Bill 38

Good Evening Committee Members,

On behalf of the Heavy Equipment Aggregate Truckers Association of Manitoba (H.E.A.T. MB), which represents approximately 250 members, we are writing to express our full support for Bill 38 currently before the Manitoba Legislature.

Our association is the primary voice in Manitoba for companies that provide snow clearing services and operate heavy equipment used for snow removal on highways, roads, streets, and back lanes across the province. Our work is carried out, in most cases, immediately following – and at times during – a snow event. These operations are complex and involve multiple types of equipment working simultaneously in often confined and challenging environments. This includes loaders, graders, plow trucks, tandem trucks, and semi-trailers.

In recent years, H.E.A.T. MB has been proactive in advocating for the changes proposed in this legislation. Unfortunately, the need for action has become even more urgent due to two tragic incidents in the past 30 months. The first occurred on the Disraeli Bridge, where a vehicle attempting to overtake snow clearing equipment collided with a machine, resulting in a fatality. The second incident involved a cyclist attempting to pass a snow clearing loader late at night, also ending in tragedy.

We strongly believe that these types of preventable collisions can be avoided through the legislative measures outlined in Bill 38.

Snow clearing operations are essential to a province like Manitoba, where frequent snowfalls can create hazardous conditions. Keeping our highways and roads clear ensures the province's economy can function safely and efficiently – allowing Manitobans to get where they need to go. At the same time, our operators face dangerous working conditions that place their safety and livelihoods at risk. A single collision could cost an operator their driver's licence, putting their career in jeopardy. Recruitment and retention of qualified operators is already a challenge; the lack of legislated protections only makes it more difficult.

We are proud to have the support of all provincial parties, the CAA, MPI, Manitoba Heavy Construction Association, Manitoba municipalities, and the City of Winnipeg. The overwhelming support for this legislation underscores the importance of creating safer streets and highways for all Manitobans.

We strongly encourage all members of the committee to support Bill 38 as presented.

Thank you,

Bruce Henley
Stakeholder Relations Manager
Heavy Equipment Aggregate Truckers Association of Manitoba.


 

 

Social and Economic Development Vol. 2

TIME – 6 p.m.

LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba

CHAIRPERSON –
MLA Robert Loiselle
(St. Boniface)

VICE-CHAIRPERSON –
MLA Shannon Corbett
(Transcona)

ATTENDANCE – 6 —
QUORUM – 4

Members of the committee present:

Hon. Min. Asagwara

Mrs. Cook,
MLAs Corbett, Loiselle, Maloway,
Mr. Narth

Substitutions:

Hon. Min. Naylor for
Hon. Min. Asagwara
at 6:52 p.m.

APPEARING:

Hon. Lisa Naylor,
MLA for Wolseley

PUBLIC PRESENTERS:

Bill 33 – The Public Health Amend­ment Act

David Grant, private citizen

Bill 38 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures)

Ewald Friesen, Canadian Automobile Association–Manitoba

David Grant, private citizen

Rick Rennie, Manitoba Federation of Labour

Bill 41 – The Reporting of Supports for Child Survivors of Sexual Assault (Trained Health Pro­fes­sionals and Evidence Collection Kits) Amend­ment Act

Fernanda Vallejo, Latinas Manitoba Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:

Bill 34 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Motor Carrier En­force­ment)

Kyle Ross, Manitoba Gov­ern­ment and General Employees' Union

Bill 38 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures)

Dave Elmore, private citizen

Bruce Henley, Heavy Equip­ment and Aggregate Truckers Association of Manitoba

MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:

Bill 7 – The Human Tissue Gift Amend­ment Act

Bill 33 – The Public Health Amend­ment Act

Bill 34 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Motor Carrier En­force­ment)

Bill 38 – The Highway Traffic Amend­ment Act (Traffic Safety Measures)

Bill 41 – The Reporting of Supports for Child Survivors of Sexual Assault (Trained Health Pro­fes­sionals and Evidence Collection Kits) Amend­ment Act

* * *