LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Thursday, May 28, 2026
The Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Ye–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.
We acknowledge we are gathered on Treaty 1 territory and that Manitoba is located on the treaty territories and ancestral lands of the Anishinaabeg, Anishininewuk, Dakota Oyate, Denesuline and Nehethowuk nations. We acknowledge Manitoba is located on the Homeland of the Red River Métis. We acknowledge northern Manitoba includes lands that were and are the ancestral lands of the Inuit. We respect the spirit and intent of treaties and treaty making and remain committed to working in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in the spirit of truth, reconciliation and collaboration.
Please be seated.
The Speaker: And I will advise the House that I have received a letter from the Opposition House Leader indicating that the question will be put for their–let's try that again.
I'm advising the House that I've received a letter from the government–from the Opposition House Leader, indicating that the opposition caucus has identified Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act, as their first selected bill for this session.
As a reminder to the House, rule 25 permits each recognized party to select up to three private members' bills per session to proceed to a second reading vote. I have therefore been advised that the question will be put on Bill 235 today at 10:55 a.m.
The Speaker: So now we will go to resumption of debate, second reading of Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable member for Kirkfield Park, who has eight minutes remaining.
Mr. Logan Oxenham (Kirkfield Park): It's really kind of strange to be back here so soon after we were yesterday, and I don't know about my colleagues, but I'm feeling a little bit out of order a little bit with the time–you know, not getting a lot of sleep. And I understand we're–there's a lot of talk with the time change and whatnot. And I can say that I don't want to turn back time to when we were here for about 31 hours.
So, moving forward, talking about this bill, Honourable Speaker, and fiscal responsibility. And I just think it's really insulting to Manitobans to think that we have such a short memory. The PCs seem to forget that we're not going to forget–how we seem to forget the PCs spent our tax dollars.
This bill–what this bill does is it limits government flexibility. It limits government flexibility, but it does not guarantee the public services and it doesn't guarantee better affordability. It doesn't guarantee any better results for Manitobans, Honourable Speaker.
I've seen from the inside of government, as a correctional officer and civil servant, what actually happens when you have a PC government that freezes funding. And these services that rely on government dollars in order to, you know, keep their heads above water, suddenly find themselves going to–having to go to the public and ask the public, hey, can you help us out? Because the government's not, you know. It's just ridiculous.
You know, what actually helps is proper staffing, functioning Crown corporations and fiscal flexibility, Honourable Speaker, that, you know, that fixes problems quickly. It's not performative taxpayer protection rules that tie government's hands when Manitobans need action. This bill does nothing to lower the cost of living or improve front-line services. It just punishes a future government for using legitimate tax tools while saying nothing about job cuts, privatization or service erosion.
Under the PCs, more than 900 positions were cut across Crown corporations, like Manitoba Hydro, Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries and MPI. They even floated another 700 layoffs during the pandemic, despite warnings that this could endanger public and worker safety, Honourable Speaker.
As someone who–now, I rely on these services. I rely on these very systems to serve my constituents in Kirkfield Park. And I just can't endorse a bill, Honourable Speaker, that locks in the same ideology that bled capacity out of the public service that I depend on as an MLA to do my job.
The former PC government repeatedly took money and security away from working families while enriching corporations and out-of-province property owners. They cut a $700 tax credit for renters. They allowed above-guideline rent increases. How is that saving people money? How is that thinking about people who are struggling? And now suddenly they're coming to the floor as champions for fiscal responsibility and wanting to help folks? Manitobans are smarter than that, Honourable Speaker.
They introduced this property tax rebate that sent large cheques to big corporations, billion-dollar retail chains and even out-of-province billionaires, including a $1-million cheque to Cadillac Fairview and hundreds and thousands to Loblaws.
Well, we know they need the money, right, Honourable Speaker? We know. Loblaws, they're hard up for cash. Every quarter, I think they're releasing record profits, if I'm not correct. And so, who are those profits on the backs of? I think they're on the backs of working families.
I mean, I don't think it's on the backs of the corporations at all. They're raking in the funds. At the same time, they sold off Manitoba Hydro's profitable 40 per cent stake in Teshmont.
* (10:10)
The Speaker: Order, please.
If I could just get the member to bring his comments back to Bill 235. I allow a certain amount of flexibility, but just bring it back every now and again, if you'd be so kind.
Mr. Oxenham: I appreciate your guidance.
You know, just given the record that we've seen from the previous governments, I can credibly say that this bill is not about protecting taxpayers in Kirkfield Park. It's about cementing a framework that makes it harder for any future government to ask the wealthy at large to pay their fair share while working families keep paying the price.
Working families keep paying the price. We have a history of a former failed government issuing cheques to corporations and taking money out of the pockets of working people, such as renters. Taking money away from renters.
We know that the price of rent is up, it keeps going up, and folks, you know, the per cent folks are paying for housing is just incredible, which takes away from spending on essentials, like food, too. And, you know, for folks in Manitoba to believe anything that comes out of the opposition's mouth, in terms of anything, really, it's really insulting to put something like this forward.
I'm insulted as somebody, again, who worked in the civil service, worked really hard with no resources, who saw staffing layoffs and who just really saw the effect of how, you know, the opposition, how they like to spend taxpayer dollars, how that actually impacted folks who really could use the relief. And so for them to come here today and present something that appears to be, you know, for everyone, like I said before, Honourable Speaker–Manitobans, they don't have a short memory. They remember.
And I appreciate your time.
Thank you.
Mr. Wayne Balcaen (Brandon West): It gives me great pleasure to rise once again in this House and speak to a fantastic bill that has been brought forward by the MLA for Midland. I think it's important to notice that we have two milestones to celebrate this morning, and No. 1 is this fantastic bill, Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act being brought forward, as I said, by the MLA for Midland, that will really give accountability.
But also, I think it's incredibly important to celebrate this morning, the MLA for Kirkfield Park, the first NDP MLA to stand up in this Legislature in 48 hours and put words on the record. So congratulations on that. [interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Balcaen: And I'm happy to celebrate here on our side for that major accomplishment. And so I'll move on now, Honourable Speaker.
As we talk about this bill–and the member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Oxenham) said that it does not–it removes the flexibility of government when it comes to this, but actually it's completely the opposite of that. It allows that flexibility of government, but what it does is it adds a layer of accountability; accountability for a government that has been known to bypass laws that are set up in our province and in our Legislature here to make sure that Manitobans are protected.
That's what we want to do. We want to make sure that Manitobans are protected and that individuals across this province know that when it comes to fiscal responsibility and taxpayer protection, that we're here making sure that it will be followed.
And so when we look at what's–what this bill brings forward, Honourable Speaker, is that accountability piece. And, you know, we know that in 2013, although a full campaign was run by the NDP, and on that campaign it was: We will not raise taxes. That was what was promised. And promises made, but promises broken, because we know that Greg Selinger then raised your PST from 7 per cent to 8 per cent when they were told that this would never happen.
But it gets a little bit better than that, Honourable Speaker–is that this Premier (Mr. Kinew) was listening to Greg Selinger. He was mentored by Greg Selinger, and he idolized Greg Selinger.
And so, again, let's go back 10 years later–2023–when this Premier and this NDP government campaigned on not raising taxes. But what happened? We can see when we look across our budgets that taxes have gone up in almost every single area that this NDP government could find a way to raise them. Education property taxes are hitting mailboxes right now, and we are seeing double digits that have never been seen before on education property taxes, and there was a promise not to raise.
And over $400 million more is being taken out of the pockets of Manitobans to really look at lining their budget and making sure that they have that extra money coming in, as they spend willy-nilly on one side with no results and keep digging a deficit further and further that we've said our children and our grandchildren will be paying for.
And, you know, bill 30–Bill 235 ensures that Manitobans are never put in that position again. It strengthens the framework so governments cannot simply bypass taxpayer protections without consequences. It is all about restoring confidence that the rules will actually be followed. And we know that this government is a government that does not like to follow rules.
The legislation is about protecting Manitoba's finances at a time when affordability is already a major concern. We just spent the past two days debating BITSA because there was concern about affordability, and we know that the government will try to impose new tax burdens without accountability whenever they can.
But Bill 235 puts that–pardon me–puts that protection in place and ensures that Manitobans are protected. But what it does is it puts a financial burden on individuals in government to make sure that the rules are followed, and sometimes that financial burden is the only way that people will understand and get the message.
And we see that many times, is that if somebody has to pay, then they think twice about breaking the rules. And that's kind of the system that our whole justice system is based on. The NDP have shown that, when given the opportunity, they will change the rules to raise taxes, and that's exactly what happened in 2013, and Manitobans certainly have not forgotten that.
* (10:20)
This bill will ensure that that kind of decision comes with real consequences, consequences that Manitobans expect from each and every one of us. Our constituents vote to place us in here and to represent them and to actually follow the laws that are in place, and that's why this bill is so important.
Growing our economy means more–means keeping more money in the pockets of Manitobans and not taking more from them. When governments respect taxpayers, it creates the conditions for investment, for growth and for opportunity.
And this bill supports such an approach, because people will have confidence in our economy, in investing in our province knowing that the rules that are in place when they invest in our province are going to remain in place; that they're not going to be followed through a back-door approach where promises are made and then promises are broken–which has happened in 2013, when the PST was raised after campaigning on not doing it. And, again, promises broken in 2013 when this very NDP government promised not to raise taxes and support affordability, and yet has raised taxes every single chance that they have a chance.
Manitobans deserve a government focused on affordability and economic growth, not higher taxes. And respecting taxpayers is a fundamental part of that approach. As we said, Bill 235 reinforces that commitment.
And I'm so very proud to work with an MLA, the MLA from Midland, that really understands the financial burdens that this province is under, the financial stresses that this province is under, and puts forward such meaningful legislation for us, an opportunity that we will get to vote on today and to support, to really show that we care about Manitobans and that we care about the rules of this province.
Thank you very much, Honourable Speaker.
Hon. Glen Simard (Minister of Municipal and Northern Relations): You know, they're the past; that's why they keep talking about. We're the future for this great province.
I don't know if you recall, not that long ago, Honourable Speaker, where I talked about how the opposition over there likes to paint a picture with black and dark colours, and you know, use fear. Well, as Yoda said: Fear leads to hate; hate leads to anger. And that's the path to the dark side. So we kind of understand what's going on here.
We're a government that cares about Manitoba's future, about building a Manitoba together, about building a Manitoba that not only respects everyone, but works for everyone. And I'm really proud to be a part of a team that has its focus on making life better for Manitobans because that's what we're here, that's what we're elected to do. We're elected here not to just take out those dark colours, but to carry a message of hope, carry a message about what the future of Manitoba can be, what we can do together. And that's why we have a proven record of bing people together, of going to where people are and about accepting that we are honouring our position here as MLAs to work for you, Manitobans.
And I'd like to speak about this bill and speak directly about what Manitobans expect from the Leg.: real solutions; not symbolic politics and not legislation that looks tough on paper, you know, but fails to deliver anything meaningful. While members opposite continue to focus on procedural distractions and political messaging, Manitobans are focused on affordability.
You know, prior to the–whatever Monday was–we were sitting here day after day as people took little sips from their water, stopping for every comma, every period, clearing their throats about 300 times–I'm not going to comment whether or not they had a cold or not, but I think it was pretty obvious they were just wasting time. Read the petition, get signatures, let's go on, right?
And, you know, that's what we're doing here. And so when you get up and say, oh, they don't want to engage, et cetera, we know what this is about: it's a political distraction. Because we're focused.
This bill attempts to frame itself as accountability legislation, but Bill 235 is fundamentally weak in achieving what it claims to do. It does not reduce costs for families. It does not improve affordability. It does not provide any meaningful fiscal relief. Instead, it adds layers of procedural constraint that risk tying the hands of future governments without delivering a single dollar of savings to Manitobans, just like they didn't deliver one single megawatt, right? That's what they're about, that's their record.
They want to talk about the past. We'll talk about their past seven and a half years. Manitobans remember–Manitobans remember. And they want to call for a referendum. Well, we have referendums; they're called elections, and we know what the result of the last elections were. We know about what–the results of the last elections, the by-elections. We remember what they were.
Manitobans are choosing hope. They're not choosing darkness. They're choosing a government that believes in them, that'll welcome them in; you've heard me say that multiple times in this Chamber. It fails–Bill 235–on clarity and practicality. It introduces mechanisms that are more symbolic than enforceable and it risks creating confusion around fiscal decision making rather than strengthening transparency in any meaningful way. Manitobans do not need more symbolic triggers or political theatre in legislation. They need policies that actually lower costs. This bill does not do that.
French spoken
La réalité, c'est que ce projet de loi ne fait absolument rien pour réduire le coût de la vie. Il ne réduit pas les prix des aliments. Il ne baisse pas les factures d'électricité. Il ne soutient pas les familles qui font face à la hausse des coûts du logement. Il n'offre aucun allègement réel à la pompe.
Le Projet de loi 235 est faible sur le fond, parce qu'il se concentre sur les mécanismes procéduraux au lieu des résultats concrets.
Translation
The reality is that this bill does absolutely nothing to lower the cost of living. It does not lower food prices. It does not reduce electricity bills. It does not support families facing rising housing costs. It offers no real relief at the pump.
Bill 235 is weak in substance because it focuses on procedural mechanisms rather than concrete results.
English
The reality is that this bill does absolutely nothing to reduce the cost of living. It does not reduce the cost of food prices. It does not lower electricity bills. It does not support families facing rising housing costs. It provides no real relief at the pump.
Bill 235 is weak in substance because it focuses on procedural mechanisms instead of concrete results. Manitobans are not asking for symbolic rules. They're asking for real solution to the cost-of-living crisis. They're looking for hope and that's what our budget is delivering.
That's why our government has chosen a different path. We permanently cut the provincial gas tax by 10 per cent, putting real money back into the pockets of Manitobans every time they filled up. That's not theoretical, that's not made up; that's actually the relief that we are giving to Manitobans. It's immediate.
And when we pass BITSA, we will have removed the PST on groceries to help families manage rising food costs. And we introduced and expanded the Homeowners Affordability Tax Credit, bringing savings on 90 per cent of homes, $1,700. Yes. And we froze hydro rates after years of increases under the previous government.
Honourable Speaker, after seven and a half years of PC inaction, Manitobans expect results, not bills like 235 that create the appearance of accountability without delivering meaningful change. Members opposite had every opportunity to act when they were in government–every opportunity. And what did they do? Nothing.
* (10:30)
They sowed divisions, they had public service workers on strike, they blocked people out and they meddled in collective bargaining making your life more affordable. Shipping our capacity in health care to across the borders while decimating our health-care system. 'Zears' of zeros to municipalities, shutting the door.
And now they're here with Bill 235, we're going to hold them accountable. They're not getting up and speak. They don't like when we get up and speak because they don't like what we have to say, that we are working for Manitobans. That we are paying attention to Manitobans. That we are a government that they identify with and like to work with. That we are a beacon of hope for Canada. That we are messaging unity. We are yet–messaging togetherness. That's what we are doing.
We haven't come in here and slighted our partners across Manitoba. We've come in here and said we will work on drastically reducing the crime rate. Lots more to do, but we had a lot accomplished. And that's what our government's going to continue to focus on.
We weakened–they weakened Manitoba Hydro. They sold off parts of Manitoba Hydro, and we've been spending years trying to rebuild that capacity. And when we come in here and say, hey, we want to talk about the past; we'll talk about the past. We want to bring up, oh, those really dark days back–no, they weren't. It's when we built schools, we built this province year over year over year over year of balanced budgets. That's our record. [interjection]
What? True or not? True or not? When the–it's true. You don't like the truth. If the member from Elmwood were here, he would tell you. He would tell you the consecutive–
The Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Order, please.
Speaker is standing. That means other people quit talking.
So it's a long-standing rule that we're not allowed to indicate whether members are present or not. So the honourable member would withdraw that part, please.
Mr. Simard: The member from Elmwood would tell you, consecutive years, I think it was 12 or 11, of balanced budgets. It's the truth–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Simard: You know, you want us to stand up, you want us to debate, and we put the things on the record that actually happened, and then you cower in your corners, head for the hills, back to the PC pasture where you do nothing.
The Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Order, please.
I did ask the honourable minister to withdraw the part of his comments. So if he'd withdraw that, that would be helpful.
Mr. Simard: Honourable Speaker, I withdraw and apologize.
Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): Maybe the member from Kildonan East is going to get up and say a few words here.
Honourable Speaker, I want to tell the members opposite what Manitobans are looking for right now, and what the Manitobans really want. They want to be heard. Manitobans want an opportunity to speak to this BITSA. This NDP government didn't allow that to go to committee, and that would have been an opportunity for Manitobans to be heard. That's what Manitobans are looking for.
And Manitobans are looking for relief in this affordability crisis that we are all living in right now. That's what Manitobans want, real solutions with real relief, not a junk food tax that this government has put out there, this Cracker Jack tax. It's not providing savings for Manitobans. That is not real solutions for Manitobans.
I am pleased to rise in the Chamber today to speak to Bill 235, the–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order, please.
If I could get members to quit hollering back and forth I might be able to hear the member who actually has the floor.
Ms. Byram: Again, I am happy to stand in this Chamber today and speak to Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act. Manitobans deserve a government that understands a simple, simple principle: the money they are spending is not theirs; it belongs to hard-working Manitobans in every corner of our beautiful province.
And I want to thank my colleague from Midland for bringing forward this legislation, and I want to say thank you to the many Manitobans who demand greater accountability from all of us here in this Legislature and to those people in which this bill is for, and that's for all of us here in Manitoba. That's for every hard-working Manitoban who's raising a family and doing the best that we can to pay our bills and contribute to our province.
As we are here in a cost-of-living crisis that we are all facing, every affordability and accountability measure is important, and Bill 235 delivers on that because it signals to Manitobans that we as legislatures will put a–will not pull a fast one on them like the NDP governments have a tendency to do.
And let's go back a number of years ago to 2013. I'm sure many Manitobans will remember what happened then, and I know I have a good memory of what happened then. I was working with the MLA at the time when the NDP raised the PST to 8 per cent without a referendum, despite a clear expectation that the public would have a say. They changed the law to get around the requirement instead of respecting it and that decision showed Manitobans exactly why stronger protections are needed.
And we see that again here today in the Legislature, where this NDP government has no desire to really listen to the voice of all Manitobans. It's selective hearing in that. And that's exactly what Bill 235 seeks out to do. It protects Manitobans from the overreach of the NDP government, and we've seen it time and time again; and I'm sure, Honourable Speaker, we will continue to see that with this NDP government. They spend without restraint; they raise taxes on Manitobans.
And of course, not all spending of all governments is reckless, but we cannot spend record rates with no consequences when Manitoban families are faced to force–are forced to make tough choices about how to spend and save their money each month.
Bill 235 is not just about accountability in government. It is fundamentally about affordability for Manitoba families. And, again, at a time when cost of living continues, Manitobans can't afford a government that treats taxpayers as an unlimited source of revenue. Every decision made by government to raise taxes increases fees or expands spending, has–and its expanded spending has a direct impact on a family trying to pay their mortgage, buy groceries, fill their vehicles with gas and save for their future.
Manitobans are already facing rising property taxes, higher utility bills, persistent food inflation, while many households are living paycheque to paycheque. Manitobans are already paying some of the highest provincial income taxes west of the Maritimes. Manitobans are paying the highest education property taxes in Canada. For homeowners, that has meant a 43 per cent increase in property taxes since this NDP government took power. Over 50 per cent of Manitobans are reporting that they're within $200 of insolvency.
When government raises broad-based taxes such as income tax, the retail sales tax, or payroll taxes, the effects are felt directly in farm operations, in small towns, in local businesses that are already facing higher operation costs. Under this Kinew government, we have seen–not seen a single meaningful affordability measure.
* (10:40)
Instead, the overall trend has been continued government spending growth, increased reliance on existing revenue streams, fiscal decisions that have placed additional pressure on households rather than reducing it. There's been no comprehensive province-wide affordability package that meaningfully reduces taxes or offsets the cost pressures family are facing in their daily lives and this lack of action has led many Manitobans to conclude that affordability is only being discussed and is a talking point that delivers no real resolution or policy outcome.
That is why a different approach is needed. When the PCs are in government, we will commit to reserving the direction by prioritizing affordability through tax relief rather than tax increase. That means putting more money back in the pockets of families of hard-working Manitobans. That's why our PC team has been offering to work with the NDP government to raise the basic personal exemption, a measure that would put hundreds of dollars back into the pockets of working Manitobans, dollars back on the kitchen table for families here across our province.
A PC government will take a fundamentally different approach by cutting taxes where possible, restoring fairness in the tax system and ensuring that hard-working Manitobans are not punished for earning more and trying to get ahead and save for their future.
Bill 235 recognizes that affordability starts with government discipline. When governments know there are real consequences attached to bypassing taxpayer protections, they're more likely to control spending. This legislation creates a stronger incentive for government to live within its means rather than automatically turning to the taxpayer. It also gives Manitobans confidence that major tax increases cannot happen quietly or without public scrutiny and input.
Families deserve stability and predictability when it comes to their finances. And that's what Bill 235 does, Honourable Speaker. It protects them from sudden tax hikes that make life less affordable. And the bill sends a message that government must be accountable not only for how it spends money, but also how those decisions affect every Manitoba across our province. Affordability is about allowing families to keep more of the money that they work hard to–that they work to earn and Bill 235 helps put that principle back at the centre of government decision making.
The referendum requirement already recognizes that major increases to the payroll tax, provincial income tax and retail sales tax are significant decisions that deserve direct public input. The public have a right to contribute to that and want to be heard in doing so.
So, I see my time is running out here, Honourable Speaker, so I do want to take a moment to thank the thousands of Manitobans who are asking for strengthened legislation, for accountability and transparency. And I just want them to know that Bill 235 would deliver on that and I look forward to the NDP passing this here in this Legislature this morning.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
MLA David Pankratz (Waverley): Honourable Speaker, where to start this morning? Actually, you know what? I'm going to start here: I do want to very quickly wish members in Waverley, our constituents in Waverley and all across Manitoba, a very happy Eid al-Adha–such a wonderful time for families and friends, community members, to get together, and just thank so many folks in the Muslim community, particularly in Waverley, for all of the support and the incredible things that you do in the community every single day here in Manitoba.
So, yesterday, after we got out of here after 31 hours of whatever it was that the opposition was doing, and the member from Gimli is already heckling, you know, and after stumbling through the wilderness for 31 hours, I know he's feeling–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order. Order, please.
Mr. Derek Johnson (Official Opposition House Leader): On a point of order.
Point of Order
The Speaker: The honourable member for Interlake-Gimli, on a point of order.
Mr. Johnson: Yes. It's a long‑standing tradition in here that we call people by their actual constituency name, which is Interlake‑Gimli. The member needs to retract his statement and put the correct words on the record.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): On the same point of order on that point, Honourable Speaker.
The Speaker: On the same point of order, the honourable Government House Leader.
MLA Fontaine: I know that the member is tired. He's tired today so he's a little bit cranky, but I think that we support our colleague, our esteemed colleague here, and the important words that he puts on the record. I would suggest that folks need to get a little bit more rest and that it wasn't a point of order.
Miigwech.
The Speaker: Order, please.
I do have to rule that the honourable member for Interlake-Gimli (Mr. Johnson) does have a point of order, that that's a long-standing tradition and rule–[interjection]
Order. Order. Speaker's still standing, so I would ask the honourable member for Waverley (MLA Pankratz) to correct that.
* * *
MLA Pankratz: You know, as a person who–you know, my grandmother actually lived nearby Gimli for a number of years. I love the community, so I will correct Interlake-Gimli, rather than Gimli-Interlake as I incorrectly stated before. And, again, I know that the member for Interlake-Gimli is a little touchy right now after those 31 hours of just stumbling through the wilderness with his caucus.
I've got to say, so last night I was really buoyed by the efforts of our caucus and our great House leader and Premier (Mr. Kinew) here over that time, and I've worked a lot of night shifts. I was fine to stay here. I'd do it again if they want to; that's great; it's all good. But what I would say is, I was really thrilled I got to go and see my son, who is in grade 9. He was performing in a concert. It was a really uplifting moment after a very, very long, long couple of days listening to some of what was said opposite.
And as I was standing in the back listening to this concert, I have never been approached–and this should be important for the PCs right now–I have never been approached by more people who had actually tuned into what was going on and said, what was happening? What were they talking about? What were they talking about?
So I had one person come up and say, so, I heard–I listened to one speech and they talked about their disdain for front-line workers and that we need to pay them less and to do less for them and to hire less of them because that would be a good thing for our budget.
I had another person come up to me and just say thank you for actually being the adults in the room and coming up with strategies that have long-term effects for the province. Because people are smart. Manitobans are smart. They know that when members opposite come forward with half-baked ideas that aren't costed out, that they haven't actually figured out themselves–in fact, Tom Brodbeck even said in the Free Press, you know, this was an idea–I know, Tom Brodbeck, of all people, brought up the fact that they had not thought about what this would do to the budget.
And so–sorry–I'm going down a rabbit hole here that I really want to talk more specifically about this–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
MLA Pankratz: –but it's just been–it has been incredibly rich hearing some of what we've already heard just this morning and over the last couple of days.
You know, the member for Brandon West (Mr. Balcaen) said it's really important that we have the threat of financial penalty for some of these decisions, and coming from a PC caucus after what happened with the caretaker convention during the October 2023 election, it is very clear that those financial penalties had zero effect on the people that decided to break the law here in Manitoba and were fined as such.
So it's a little bit hypocritical and rich for me to hear from this caucus that they think this will help. And, you know, I'm not against the idea completely. I get that we need to have penalties and if you are misbehaving or if you're not following the rules there should be measures in place to make sure that there's accountability.
* (10:50)
And so, you know, the other piece that I did want to talk about here is we got elected in 2023 for a variety of reasons. Folks wanted better health care. They were frustrated with the cuts that they had seen under the former government. They wanted affordability.
But then they also, again–and this speaks to some of the comments I heard last night at the concert that I was able to attend in the community. They wanted someone who actually brought forward real, considered, thought‑out strategies to try to make things more affordable but while also being careful with the public purse. Because it's incredibly important. And it was obviously something that was completely missed by the former PC government because going into that election, they blew the bank. Like, they went absolutely wild, and when we came in, there was a $2‑billion deficit.
And since that time, our Minister of Finance (MLA Sala), who is one of the finest ministers of Finance around–perhaps the finest in Canada–has done his due diligence, has very carefully planned. And, again, speaking to the comments about trying to be the adults in the room here and actually strategizing effectively for the future of all Manitobans. And we've been able to reduce that deficit. We're not at the finish line by any means. We're going to keep on working, but we are being careful. Our lending rate has come down; that is incredibly important for our fiscal picture here in Manitoba.
But, you know, this bill ultimately is about accountability, and then that specifically has an effect on affordability for Manitobans. So what we're talking about here, writ large, is affordability for Manitobans. I do want to just pull up this great budget, perhaps the finest budget that has ever been created in Manitoba, by our Minister of Finance. And on page 144–and this is sort of this unfortunate narrative that keeps being brought forward by members opposite, which is that they want to suggest that there are tax increases happening here from our government.
We've reduced taxes for Manitobans–and this is shown clearly on page 144, Budget 2026–by $50.7 million. That is really meaningful. So when we break that down, when we talk about affordability measures like taking the PST off all groceries, a home affordability tax credit being increased to $1,700, renters tax credit that is now increased to $675. And there's actually a 55+ seniors top-up for the folks who need it the most that brings that over $1,000, which is really remarkable.
So we're really doing work on so many different levels in so many different sectors to make sure that Manitobans across the board are getting the services that they need, whether it's health care or education or in infrastructure, we're making sure that we're making those investments.
And, you know, another piece–I see the minister of jobs, mining, economic development and trade, who is here, and the amazing work that he's done in stimulating our economy. We've seen a huge increase in jobs here in Manitoba. You know–
Point of Order
The Speaker: Order, please.
The honourable member for Interlake-Gimli (Mr. Johnson).
Mr. Johnson: Yes, the member's referencing whether somebody's in the Chamber, and he referenced that the minister was here. And I think it's very important that we adhere to the rules in the Chamber, where you can't reference whether somebody is here or not.
The Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader.
MLA Fontaine: On the same point of order.
The Speaker: On the same point of order.
MLA Fontaine: Again, I'll just put out there that I think the Opposition House Leader is very touchy today. He's a little bit cranky after 31 hours. Again, he seems to be obsessed with our good colleague here, the MLA for Waverley. Again, let our colleague speak and–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
MLA Fontaine: –and finish his words that he wants to put on the record. And actually, it was a compliment. So, again, I know that the member's tired. I would encourage him to get some rest.
And that's not a point of order.
The Speaker: I would indicate that, once again, we're not allowed to indicate whether members are present or not present, so it is–[interjection]
Obviously, the Speaker is still standing.
So it was a point of order.
* * *
The Speaker: The honourable member for Waverley (MLA Pankratz). [interjection]
Order, please.
In accordance with rule 25, and as previously announced, I'm interrupting debate to put the question on second reading of Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agree.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
The Speaker: All those in favour, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
The Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
The Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it.
Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): On a recorded vote, please.
The Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, so in accordance with our rules, the recorded vote will take place at 11:55 this morning.
* * *
The Speaker: Now it's time for–[interjection]
The honourable member for Waverley (MLA Pankratz).
MLA Pankratz: Can I keep giving a speech, or what's going on?
The Speaker: The honourable member for Agassiz, on House business.
Ms. Byram: Resume debate on Bill 211.
The Speaker: So the–[interjection]
So it has been announced that we will–[interjection]
Order. Order, please. Order, please. Order, please.
I shouldn't have to ask for order three times when the Speaker stands up.
The Speaker: So it has been announced that we will now resume debate on Bill 211, The Budget Bill Public Accountability Act, and it is standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Public Service Delivery.
The honourable Minister of Public Service Delivery has eight minutes remaining.
Hon. Mintu Sandhu (Minister of Public Service Delivery): It is an honour to rise today to speak to Bill 211. It's always good to rise in this Chamber and to put a few words on the record.
Honourable Speaker, Manitobans expect accountability and transparency in how their government manages public finance. Bill 211 claimed to deliver that by mandating committee hearings for every budget implementation bill.
But let's be clear: Accountability comes from meaningful engagement and timely action. This bill risks slowing down urgent measures and duplicating processes that already exist. Honourable Speaker–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Order, please. Order.
I'm not sure what's taking place in this Chamber this morning but it needs to stop. The honourable Minister of Public Service Delivery has the floor.
MLA Sandhu: First, Bill 211 is redundant. Our government already engaged Manitobans extensively before the budget is introduced. We held pre-budget consultation across the province, giving thousands of Manitobans a voice in shaping Budget 2026.
Manitobans were also invited to share their priorities through an online Budget 2026 survey, making participation easier and more accessible–
* (11:00)
The Speaker: Order, please.
When this member's–or this matter is again before the House, the honourable minister will have six minutes remaining.
The hour being 11 o'clock, it's now time for private members' business.
The Speaker: The private member's resolution before us this morning is resolution No. 5, Calling on the Provincial Government to Increase Personal Tax Exemption. And it is standing in the name of the honourable member for Kildonan-River East (Mrs. Schott), who has seven minutes remaining.
Is the honourable member for Kildonan–
An Honourable Member: Question.
The Speaker: Is the honourable member for Kildonan-River East declining her time to speak?
An Honourable Member: Yes.
The Speaker: Okay. The floor is then open.
Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): Good morning and thank you, Honourable Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to rise in the House and speak about real affordability measures for Manitobans. It's unfortunate that the member from Kildonan-River East didn't want to stand up for 10 seconds–five minutes–the seven minutes that she was allowed to talk–stand to talk up about how she believes–or the NDP believe–they want to make life more affordable for Manitobans. And she gave up her time.
It clearly sends a message to Manitoba that they don't want to, that they don't want to make life more affordable for Manitobans. Why else would you give up your time in the Chamber to advocate for Manitobans, to try to bring a message forward to help Manitobans? And they refuse to do it.
On this side of the House, we will continue to listen, to work for Manitobans, to bring motions and resolutions forward to make your life more affordable. And if that means we have to sit for 30-plus hours and use the member's time, which they don't want to use to put words on the record in support of making your life more affordable, it really tells you where this government is at.
Our resolution is common sense; our resolution makes sense. Our resolution is simple enough for even the member for Kildonan-River East (Mrs. Schott) to understand what we're asking for–and the NDP government. It is simply saying that the more money you make, the more money you should keep. And members on our side of the House believe that. Manitobans believe that–that if you are working hard for your money, you should keep that money, not have the NDP go into your back pocket and take that money from you.
Our resolution is simple: It says that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba be urged to call on the provincial government–this NDP government–to raise the basic personal amount for provincial income tax to $30,000. Pretty simple.
But I'll break it down more for the members opposite in case they don't understand. And maybe that's what the problem–maybe 30-plus hours of us advocating to help give Manitobans more money, for us explaining, time and time again, on how we believe this will give Manitobans more money, how the Canadian Taxpayers Federation believes we'll get more money, how local businesses and restaurants believe it will help them, how Manitobans sitting at home around the kitchen table who can barely afford to buy groceries believe this will help them.
Right now, up to about $15,000 and change, you are being taxed by this provincial government. We're saying, let's increase that threshold to $30,000. The first $30,000 you make will not have provincial income tax taken off of it, putting up to $3,000 in your pocket, putting up to $3,000 for your family–$250 a month. And they won't listen. They won't budge. They won't stand up and even talk about that.
Right now Manitoba is at one of the lowest thresholds, if not the lowest threshold, in Canada for basic personal income tax. And yet we know that Manitobans are struggling right now.
But this government won't listen. They won't talk about why they disagree with this measure. They won't compromise. They won't move. Why? Because this government, this Premier (Mr. Kinew), this minister, ministers across the way, the member from Kildonan-River East, refuse to listen to Manitobans.
This is something simple. It's practical and it's important to help every Manitoban. This will help Manitobans. And if we really think about it, it's up to $30,000. Poverty line in Manitoba is about $25,000 right now, and you get taxed at $15,000 under this NDP government. That means that if you are living on the poverty line or below it, they still believe that that $10,000, you make–they want to tax it. That's wrong. It's wrong. There's rights and there's wrongs, and that is just simply wrong.
At a time where gas is at historic highs, at a time when groceries are at historic highs, a time when inflation in Canada is the highest in all–in Manitoba–sorry–is the highest in Canada at 4.3 per cent. When food inflation is the highest in Canada at 4.9 per cent, this government won't increase the amount of money that you're allowed to take home, that you've worked hard for. You're not asking for handouts. You're simply saying, hey, I worked for this money. I got up at 4 a.m. I put my boots on, I went to work. I grinded all day long. I've come home at the end of the evening. I should be able to keep more of my money. And we agree with that statement.
On that side of the House, they won't even speak why they don't. But they want to run on a junk food tax, on a junk food tax that will save Manitobans pennies. On a tax, when you look at what the surface of what it is, is actually going to make Manitoba worse off, because you are pushing people to buy junk food. You are pushing Manitobans–you're incentivizing habits of buying unhealthy food, of Slurpees, of chips, of pop, of Cracker Jacks, of Cheezies. Where our resolution, we want to give you back $250 a month, your family.
And with that money you make the choice to buy fruits and vegetables for your family, to buy a healthy, nourishing meal for your kids so when they go to bed at night they wake up and they feel good and they want to go to school and they want to succeed and then they want to get a good job and they want to go out and earn money as they get older.
But under this NDP government, that's not the case because those kids are learning right now that the harder you work the more this NDP government will take money from your back pocket, and that is wrong. That is wrong, Honourable Speaker. Manitobans say that's wrong. [interjection]
Members opposite want to heckle right now. They want to shout me down. They can shout as much as they want, and that's what they've been doing for the last two and a half years. But they won't intimidate us and they won't get us to stop our message, and our message is plain and simple: We on this side of the House are here to make your life more affordable, and that's the truth.
This is real savings for families. This is real savings for families. This is real savings for students, for minimum wage earners, for that single mom or dad that are grinding to put food on the table and pay their bills. This is real–[interjection] And they're saying–they're heckling, we don't care. The irony is they don't care. The irony is that they won't even stand up and put words on the record. The member from Assiniboia, the minister of culture and heritage, wants to shout these things down, and yet that minister is too lazy to stand up herself and put her words on the record.
So the question, then, becomes–
An Honourable Member: Don't talk about the women in my caucus.
Mr. Khan: Again, the Minister of Families (MLA Fontaine)–well, we'll talk about the member from Waverley. Let's talk about the member from–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
The honourable Minister of Families (MLA Fontaine) needs to come to order.
Mr. Khan: Honourable Speaker, the fundamental difference is, on this side of the House we want to help Manitobans.
On that side of the House they want to divide. They want to shout us down.
Doesn't matter where the member's from. Doesn't matter what their race, their ethnicity, what their gender is. What matters is these are real measures to help Manitobans.
So whether it be the member from Waverley, St. Vital, McPhillips, Tuxedo, Kirkfield Park, Riel, all of them have voted against this. All of the members on that side of the House believe that they should have more money in their government's pockets–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Khan: –than they should have in Manitobans' pockets. And that is a real concern. That sums up this government for you right there. Not a listening government. Health care is worse. People are dying in ERs. [interjection]
* (11:10)
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Khan: The heckling continues. The name-calling continues. The threats and the barking can continue all they want, but they will not intimidate members on this side of the House. They will not stop us from standing up and working for Manitobans. They will not stop us from doing the right thing. The right thing is helping you. The right thing is listening to you. The right thing is moving this province forward in a prosperous way for all Manitobans. None of that stuff that they're heckling and yelling matters; what matters is you.
We have that focus in mind. That's why when we brought this proposal forward, it was not a partisan way; it was let's work together. We are elected for all Manitobans to work together; that's what this resolution dues. This resolution calls to make life more affordable for Manitobans by putting more money in your pocket.
Simple question for all Manitobans is: Why is the NDP stopping us–stopping you from making your life more prosperous in the province of Manitoba?
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Minister of Families): I want to put a couple of words on the record in respect of this resolution brought forward this morning.
I do want to start my comments, though, by acknowledging our colleague, the member for Kildonan-River East (Mrs. Schott), who, every day, has to sit next to the men in the PC caucus and hear some of the really grotesque heckling that comes from the men's mouth, and again, once again, supported by the women in their caucus, who, once again, carry the water for patriarchy and are faithful foot soldiers of patriarchy.
It's unfortunate that, again, this morning, the MLA for Kildonan-River East had to hear the MLA for Red River North, while I was getting up on my point of order, and yell across, like, what's wrong with you, are you pregnant?
And I'm assuming that the MLA for Red River is once again–because this is what those members do–you know, say that they didn't say that. Then, of course, it's going to be proven because, of course, we'll get the recordings, and it will be proven that he said that.
It's so unfortunate–and, again, you know, the Leader of the Opposition got up–he's gotten up a couple of times in the last little–couple of days–and, again, every single time the Leader of the Opposition, the MLA for Fort Whyte, gets up, he targets and attacks the women on this side of the Chamber. And it's really unfortunate that the men in the PC caucus, once again, are so emotional and so hysterical in the way that they understand and perceive women that they routinely try to intimidate and bully and target the women and gender-diverse folks on this side of the House.
It is unfortunate that, you know, the men on that side of the Chamber–and again, once again, supported by the women–don't understand the responsibility that they have as elected officials and the privilege that they have as elected officials to sit in this Chamber and represent everyone, including women, including gender-diverse folks, including trans Manitobans, including trans children.
Routinely, we have members on the PC caucus who, you know, don't stand for member statements or ministerial statements that are given in support of 2SLGBTQ2I communities, and so they expect Manitobans to believe–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order, please. Order, please.
Point of Order
Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): I believe we are here to debate a private member's resolution. And the member from St. Johns got up to speak on a private member's resolution. I don't see what her–what she's referencing here today is on a private member's resolution. There is no relevance to what she is speaking about directing it back to this resolution here.
So if she continues to speak, I would ask that there'd be some guidance on the direction and the resolution that she is speaking to, Honourable Speaker.
Thank you.
The Speaker: No one else wishing to speak to the point of order?
Then I would say that, yes, comments should be directed to the resolution that we're here discussing. In the past, I have allowed members quite a bit of latitude and let them go on for quite a while before I, as the Speaker, decide when it's time for them to draw it back.
* * *
MLA Fontaine: And I know that it's impossible for the Manitoba PCs to understand why I would say what I said just previously and why I would put that on the official record. And it is connected to this resolution because it's important that Manitobans see who they elect and what they do in this Chamber. And so right now, we're debating a resolution in which the Manitoba PCs want to take $1 billion out of Manitoba revenue, as if money just grows on trees here in Manitoba.
But this is what happens when you elect individuals like the members opposite, when you elect men that, you know, don't know if they're coming or going, don't even know their jobs, can't get control of their emotions and are hysterical in their responses and their heckling. And when you elect women that carry the water for patriarchy and continue to support the men in their caucus who routinely, every single day, get up in the Chamber and target women and gender-diverse folks on this side of the Chamber. That's what happens when you elect people like that.
When you elect people like us on this side of the Chamber, you get good–
The Speaker: Order, please.
I would ask the honourable member to bring her comments back to the resolution.
MLA Fontaine: It's important for Manitobans to elect individuals that have the best interest of Manitobans, that do the work, that know how to do the work, that know how to string two sentences together, that understand budgets, understand what Manitobans need.
I encourage Manitobans to vote for those folks that have the best interest of Manitobans, and it's not them.
The Speaker: So, pursuant to our rules, rule 34(5), this private member's resolution has been debated for 180 minutes.
I will now put the question to the House.
All those in–shall the resolution pass?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
The Speaker: All those in favour of it passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
The Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
The Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it.
Ms. Byram: A recorded vote, please.
The Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested.
This recorded vote will take place after the previous recorded vote that's scheduled to be held at 11:55.
* * *
MLA Fontaine: We're canvassing the House to seek leave for both recorded votes to happen immediately following the voice vote, which we just did, and see the clock as noon once both the votes have been completed.
The Speaker: Is there leave to conduct both votes immediately and then see the clock as noon once that's completed?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: I hear a no. The–leave has been denied.
House Business
Ms. Byram: House business.
The Speaker: On House business.
* (11:20)
Ms. Byram: Honourable Speaker, pursuant to rule 34(8), I'm announcing that the private member's resolution to be considered on the next Thursday of private members' business will be the one previously put forward by the honourable member for Borderland (Mr. Guenter). The title of the resolution is Right to Defend Your Home and Family.
The Speaker: Pursuant to rule 34(8), it has been announced that the private member's resolution to be considered on the next Thursday of private members' business will be the one previously put forward by the honourable member for Borderland. The title of the resolution is Right to Defend Your Home and Family. [interjection]
I will remind members that we are still in session and as we have no business, you'll sit quietly.
Thank you.
* * *
Ms. Byram: Can we seek leave to resume debate on PMR 9?
The Speaker: There's been a request to resume debate on PMR 9.
Is there leave?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: Leave has been denied. [interjection]
Order. Order. Order.
Ms. Byram: Can we call to resume debate on bill 8–or sorry, resolution 8?
The Speaker: Is there leave to resume debate on resolution 8?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: I hear no.
Leave has been denied.
Ms. Byram: Resume debate on private resolution 10?
The Speaker: Is there leave to resume debate on resolution No. 10?
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: Leave has been denied.
Ms. Byram: I seek leave to resume debate on resolution No. 1, Affordability and the Economy.
The Speaker: Is there leave to resume debate on resolution No. 1?
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: Leave has been denied.
Ms. Byram: I seek leave to resume debate on private member's resolution No. 3, Calling on Provincial Government to Launch Public Inquiry on Deaths in Emergency Rooms.
The Speaker: Is there leave to resume debate on–
Some Honourable Members: Yes.
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: Leave has been denied.
* (11:30)
Introduction of Guests
The Speaker: Order, please.
If I could get everyone's attention. We have some guests in the gallery. We have Marian Jaworski, president of Sokol Winnipeg; Damian Malecki, international Sokol president, who's here from Poland; Richard Kapala, honourary president of Sokol, also from Poland.
And we welcome you here today.
An Honourable Member: Point of order.
Point of Order
The Speaker: The honourable member for Springfield-Ritchot, on a point of order.
Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield-Ritchot): Mr. Speaker, somewhere in Beauchesne there will be a rule that will lay this out very clearly, that we have guests in the gallery from Poland who have travelled here.
* (11:40)
Polish Sokol Hall, as we know, is an international organization across the world, and they do amazing stuff. They're known for their dance, food–which I can attest to–and they are an amazing contribution to wherever they are, whether it's here in our great city of Winnipeg or across the country. And as the MLA for Springfield-Ritchot, I welcome you here today.
The Speaker: Order, please. Order, please.
I'll just point out that it is not a point of order.
* * *
The Speaker: And I would also remind members that the correct pronoun for the Speaker is Honourable Speaker.
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): Honourable Speaker, is it–is there leave of the House to call it 11:55 to have both the vote on the PMB and the PMR?
The Speaker: Is there leave to call it 11:55 to proceed to the votes on the two things before us? [Agreed]
Leave has been granted.
So the hour being 11:55, we will now proceed to the votes from earlier today.
Bill 235–The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act
Recorded Vote
The Speaker: First is the recorded vote required for Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act.
All those in the House in favour, please rise–call in the members.
Order, please.
The five minutes for the ringing of the bells has expired, therefore I'm requesting that the division bells be turned off and the House proceed to the vote.
So the question before us is second reading of Bill 235, The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act.
* (11:50)
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Ayes
Balcaen, Bereza, Byram, Cook, Ewasko, Goertzen, Guenter, Hiebert, Johnson, Khan, King, Narth, Nesbitt, Piwniuk, Schuler, Stone, Wharton, Wowchuk.
Nays
Blashko, Brar, Bushie, Cable, Chen, Compton, Corbett, Cross, Dela Cruz, Devgan, Fontaine, Kennedy, Kostyshyn, Loiselle, Maloway, Marcelino, Moses, Moyes, Naylor, Oxenham, Pankratz, Redhead, Sala, Sandhu, Schmidt, Simard, Smith, Wiebe.
Deputy Clerk (Mr. Tim Abbott): Ayes 18, Nays 28.
The Speaker: The motion is accordingly defeated.
Res. 5–Calling on the Provincial Government to Increase the Personal Tax Exemption
Recorded Vote
The Speaker: As previously announced, we will now go to the vote on private member's resolution 5, calling on the provincial government to increase personal tax exemption.
Call in the members, please.
Order, please.
Question before the House is resolution No. 5, Calling on the Provincial Government to Increase the Personal Tax Exemption.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Ayes
Balcaen, Bereza, Byram, Cook, Ewasko, Goertzen, Guenter, Hiebert, Johnson, Khan, King, Narth, Nesbitt, Piwniuk, Schuler, Stone, Wharton, Wowchuk.
Nays
Blashko, Brar, Bushie, Cable, Chen, Compton, Corbett, Cross, Dela Cruz, Devgan, Fontaine, Kennedy, Kostyshyn, Loiselle, Maloway, Marcelino, Moses, Moyes, Naylor, Oxenham, Pankratz, Redhead, Sala, Sandhu, Schmidt, Simard, Smith, Wiebe.
Deputy Clerk (Mr. Tim Abbott): Ayes 18, Nays 28.
The Speaker: The motion is accordingly defeated.
* * *
Mr. Derek Johnson (Official Opposition House Leader): Yes, I seek leave to return to resolution debate with the resolution standing in the name of the MLA for La Vérendrye on Affordability and the Economy, resolution 1.
The Speaker: Is there leave to return to debate–
Some Honourable Members: No.
The Speaker: I hear a no. The leave is accordingly denied.
The honourable Opposition House Leader. [interjection]
Order.
Mr. Johnson: Yes, Honourable Speaker, I seek leave to return to resolution debate, resolution 6, standing–brought forward by the MLA for Interlake-Gimli, and it's Calling on the Provincial Government to Prioritize the Struggles Facing Manitobans.
The Speaker: Is there leave–[interjection]
Order, please.
There apparently is no resolution 6, so–[interjection]
Order, please. Order, please. The Speaker is standing.
The hour being 12 o'clock, this House is recessed and stands recessed until 1:30 today.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Thursday, May 28, 2026
CONTENTS
Debate on Second Readings– Public Bills
Bill 235–The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act
Bill 211–The Budget Bill Public Accountability Act
Res. 5–Calling on the Provincial Government to Increase the Personal Tax Exemption
Debate on Second Readings– Public Bills
Bill 235–The Fiscal Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Amendment Act
Res. 5–Calling on the Provincial Government to Increase the Personal Tax Exemption