LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Friday,
March 20, 1992
The House met at 10 a.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING
PETITIONS
Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis
(
TABLING OF
REPORTS
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I would
just like to table the Quarterly Report of the Manitoba Liquor Control
Commission, Nine Months, April to December 31, 1961; and
Also, in accordance with the provisions of
Rule 65(6.1): Sequence for the consideration of Estimates of the various government
departments.
Introduction
of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the
attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this morning,
from the Ste. Anne School, fifty Grades 5 and 6 students. They are under the direction of Margaret
Wyllie. This school is located in the
constituency of the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson).
On behalf of all honourable members, I
welcome you here this morning.
ORAL
QUESTION PERIOD
Economic
Growth
All-Party
Task Force
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, over the last eight days, we have
had an excellent debate in this Chamber with the 56 members participating on a
debate on the budget and the economy in the
There has also been a strong consensus in
the speeches across all parties, Mr. Speaker, on the crisis
In fact, even two days ago in this
Chamber, the member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld), a former member of the Treasury
Board, said and I quote: "We have
to start putting party politics to the side and start contributing in a much
more positive, unpolitical, apolitical fashion in terms of how we get Manitoba out
of this rut." It was an excellent
speech. I did not agree with many
things, but I do agree with some things in his speech, Mr. Speaker, but there
have been many speeches in this Chamber and many good ideas.
I would ask the Premier today whether he
will now agree to have an all‑party task force to deal with the economic
crisis
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): I am delighted to hear the helpful attitude
from the prince of darkness opposite, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable First Minister that
we refer to all honourable members as honourable members.
Mr. Filmon: Well, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is,
this is the ultimate all‑party committee.
We come here every day hoping to hear positive contributions. I am going to speak a little bit about that
in my contribution to the budget speech later this morning.
I am going to compare the attitude of the
Leader of the Opposition and his desire, his intense desire to paint everything
as black as possible, to put the worst possible cast on everything that is
going on day after day versus some of the positive contributions of members of
the Liberal Party. We will compare the
attitude and the approach. We will see
whether there is any real sincerity behind the comments that are made this morning
and the last day of debate after he has had an opportunity to make some
positive contributions and failed miserably, but in a death‑bed
conversion, comes this morning on the last day of debate on the budget with
some sort of new attitude.
We will talk about that a little later,
but I say to him, this is his opportunity every day. Make your positive suggestions. Make your positive contributions. We will welcome them and we will embrace
them.
* (1005)
Mr. Doer: I would note that we have been proposing this
idea for month after month after month as the economy slips down and down and
down, Mr. Speaker. Even members of his
own bench are talking about the economic crisis we are in.
I would ask the Premier in light of the
fact that many of the examples he uses in his own budget are from previous
governments, in terms of Unisys and other ideas‑‑and there is
nothing wrong with putting those in his own budget‑‑in light of the
fact that the government has rightfully, I believe, created a task force to deal
with the Constitution on two separate occasions, an all‑party task force
to work together, I would ask the Premier: Why is it more important, why is it
a higher priority to create an all‑party task force to deal with the
Constitution and not have an all‑party task force to deal with the
economic challenges we have in this province?
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, because in the conventional way
there is no all‑party mechanism on the Constitution normally, but in this
House we have an all‑party meeting daily.
On the Estimates everyday, we meet in party together in this
Assembly. Every new session, we have
eight days on the budget speech in which all members of this Legislature can
make their positive contributions.
Throughout the course of any session, we have 240 hours talking about
the priorities and the essential elements of government in this province. We are the only province in this country that
spends that amount of time that allows the opposition to make positive
contributions.
We wait for those positive
contributions. We wait for anything
other than negative gloom, doom, negative, negative, negative. That is all we get from the New Democratic
Party. That is the all‑party contribution we get from New Democrats, and we
await their positive contribution everyday that we come here.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we have suggested for months that
we create an all‑party committee dealing with the economy. We have suggested for years that the
government have an economic summit with business, labour and government. All these ideas are rejected by the Premier
(Mr. Filmon). The Premier likes to pretend
that everything is okay; he likes to pretend that everything is fine in this
province.
The member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld) also
said that we must work together, we should work together in this deteriorating economy. It is very serious, and all members in this
Chamber, notwithstanding our rhetoric, acknowledge the fact that there is a
very serious situation in this province.
I again offer to the Premier an opportunity beyond just the question‑and‑answer
period which he knows is an adversarial forum.
I would ask the Premier: Why is he afraid to have an all‑party
committee when his own budget had many economic examples which had come out of
many previous governments as examples of excellence in our economy? Unisys and other projects were examples of
excellence for
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that
this government has been very open in ensuring that all elements of the
community were represented in some of the major economic initiatives, ones that
the members opposite are criticizing.
The Economic Innovation and Technology
Council, a bill which is before this Assembly, has representatives from
organized labour as part of that whole solution, has representatives from all
elements of the community, from the rural community, from the farm community,
from small business, from high technology, from resource extraction areas, from
processing, manufacturing, all of those areas included in that. The round table has representation from
labour, from environmental groups, from resource groups, from so many groups.
An Honourable Member: Save it for your speech.
Mr. Filmon: There you are, you see. They ask a question and then they become
insulting when an answer is given. The
fact of the matter is that this partisan group‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Point of
Order
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point
of order. The rules are very clear that
answers should relate to matters raised.
I know the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is anxious to get into his speech later
on the budget, but he was asked a very specific question about our proposal for
an all‑party committee. I would
ask that you remind him of that and ask him to bring his comments to order.
Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised, I remind the honourable
First Minister to deal with the question raised.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that I
have responded and members opposite refuse to hear.
* (1010)
We have an all‑party committee that
sits every day in this Chamber, 57 members from three different parties that
devote 240 hours to the debate of the priorities of this government, economic
and every other priority, that sits every year and debates for eight straight
days the budget of this government, all of the economic priorities, an
opportunity for positive contribution by all members opposite.
We have not seen any positive
contribution. We have seen negativism;
we have seen doom and gloom, and that is all we get from members opposite. If they cannot contribute any more than that,
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, their words are empty.
Health
Care System
Bed
Closures
Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis
(
Patients are worried; hospital workers are
anxious; and now the doctors of
The Manitoba Medical Association has documented
6,000 to 7,000 Manitobans waiting for surgery, eye surgery, cardiovascular surgery,
orthopedic surgery, and in a letter sent yesterday to the Minister of Health,
the Manitoba Medical Association has also indicated that patients are forced to
wait months for CAT scans, MRIs and ultrasound diagnostic imaging.
I want to ask the minister in the
interests of uncertainty among patients and alarm being expressed by the
doctors: Will the minister finally
inform this House and all Manitobans about the total number of beds being cut,
the jobs being lost, services being reduced as a result of this government's‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, of course,
I cannot give my honourable friend that answer because that is a process that
the Urban Hospital Council, other informed groups, are participating in to
change fundamentally our health care system.
But one thing I can guarantee my honourable friend, it will not be 2,000
to 3,000 beds, as it is in
Mr. Speaker, I recognize that we are going
to have individual groups, including the MMA, the union representing the
doctors, offering advice and critique of how we approach, but I simply want to
remind my honourable friend that the recent spate of letters from that source on
waiting lists is at the same time before the arbitration board, where their
demands are beyond belief, and maybe there is an attachment.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I would like to table this letter from the MMA,
since they have asked to be consulted by this government, and this minister has
refused to listen, to consult‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Question, please.
Health
Sciences Centre
Operating
Budget
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis
(St. Johns): How much, Mr. Speaker, is the Health Sciences
Centre‑‑which has just spent two days trying to address the
uncertainty and cutback directives from this government without thorough
briefing material and consultation by this government and this minister‑‑receiving
from this government? Is it 5 percent,
or is it less?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the overall increase to health
care is 5.7 percent. The increase is $101
million year over year; $53 million of that is an increase to the hospitals
alone. Of that $53 million, there will
be increases approximating 4 percent to 5 percent at each of our hospitals in
addition to the access those hospitals have to other innovative funds to allow
them to reshape their programs internally.
Mr. Speaker, I simply want to remind my
honourable friend the New Democratic Party Health critic that in
* (1015)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr. Speaker, I am asking a straightforward question. I think we deserve clear answers to‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Question, please.
Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis:
Specifically, how much, what percentage increase
in their budget is the Health Sciences Centre receiving from this
government? How many beds are they being
asked to cut? How many jobs will be lost
at our largest hospital in the
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, government is not asking the
Health Sciences Centre to respond to any of those specific questions. The
government is asking the Health Sciences Centre, as we have asked every hospital,
to adhere to the policy put in place in 1987 by the New Democrats, this Health
critic around cabinet, which said when they cut 119 beds unilaterally out of
the system, I might remind you, that they shall operate within budget, that they
shall not have a deficit.
Each year hospitals ask for an
increase. Each year government provides
them with an increase. The Health
Sciences Centre will receive the lion's share of the $53‑million increase
to hospitals. It is less than what they
have asked for and that is why the Health Sciences Centre, as they have done
every year, will determine what they do to operate within that NDP policy of no
deficit with a funding of approximately $270 million.
Point of
Order
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, it seems
that Fridays are becoming something of a tradition in this Chamber, and certain
members of government become particularly sensitive on Fridays. I just heard the Minister of Health call the
member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), across the floor, a coward, which
is unparliamentary, Mr. Speaker.
Beyond that, I am wondering if we might
ask that we have some order in the House and we not stoop to that kind of
personal insult, Mr. Speaker, that we just heard from the Minister of Health.
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I apologize to the member for
Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable Minister
of Health.
Mr. Orchard: . . . in referring to his absence of public presence
in 1987‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Point of
Order
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): On a point of order, the minister is making
allegations that are totally without foundation in fact. He has no information. I asked him‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
On the first point of order raised, the
honourable Minister of Health has withdrawn those remarks.
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, to the same point of order
brought forward by my honourable friend, the senior cabinet minister in 1987,
when 29 beds were unilaterally cut from the
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. On that, there was no point of order.
Point of
Order
Mr. Ashton: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the word "cowardly"
does appear on our list in Beauchesne as having caused intervention in the past. If the minister was going to withdraw that
comment, it should be an unconditional withdrawal, as has been demanded of other
members; in fact, as the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) withdrew last
week. I would like to ask you, Mr.
Speaker, to rule on whether in fact the minister has withdrawn that, so we can
get back to the proper business of this House, not cheap personal insults.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. On that point of order raised, I had already ruled
that the honourable Minister of Health had withdrawn that remark. On that point of order, I had ruled that that
point of order had been looked after.
On the second point of order, I had ruled
that the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) did not have a
point of order.
Now, on with Question Period.
* (1020)
RCMP
Uniform
Government
Position
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker,
when I got to my office this morning, I received an electronic message from the
Premier, for which I thank him. In that,
he said: "I invite you to join us
in observing this significant day," and he was referring to the
celebration of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination tomorrow, "which serves to rekindle an awareness of our
rights and responsibilities as members of society."
I am pleased to see the members of the
government are wearing pins, as are most members on the other side as well.
My question is to the Premier. Both the Premier and the Minister of Justice
(Mr. McCrae) are on the record, not in this House but at public meetings and in
public statements, as stating that the wearing of turbans in the RCMP is a mark
of respect for the religious observances of the Sikhs.
Can the Premier tell this House how he
reconciles that belief with that of one of his backbenchers, the member for
Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld), who stated in this House on Tuesday, March 17, that
such a position compromised the RCMP for the sake of a few votes?
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, above
all, under the freedom of speech in this country that is awarded to each of us
by virtue of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we are entitled to our own
opinions and our own views.
If the member has a desire to take issue
with the individual opinions of any member of this Chamber on either side, she
is entitled to do that. I am responsible
for my opinion. My government sets its
policy, and we abide by those things. It
is very simple.
Mrs. Carstairs: I thank the Premier for that statement.
Charter of
Rights and Freedoms
Government
Support
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): The Premier
is entering very delicate negotiations which will indeed impact on the
definition of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which guarantees the right to
practise your religious faith and was the basis for the decision by the RCMP to
change their uniforms.
What assurance do we have from the Premier
that he will engage in a defence of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as per the
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, I would say to this that the member
knows that I am on the record and always have been on the record saying that we
support and defend totally the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Absolutely no question about it. That is the position of this First Minister;
that is the position of this government.
It has never varied, and it will not vary in any negotiations,
discussions that we have on the Constitution or anything else.
That is the assurance that I give her, and
that is the assurance that she can see by virtue of the actions of this government
and this First Minister.
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, my final question to the First Minister: Can the First Minister tell this House that
if the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) should choose to wear a turban on the
celebration of a religious holiday or, for that matter, for any day in this
House, such an action would not meet with disapproval with members of his back
bench?
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the matter is a totally
hypothetical question, and I would assume that that matter is not in order in this
Chamber.
Judicial
System
Circuit
Court
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): Mr. Speaker, the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry
report that this government has been in possession of now for many months says
that the situation involving aboriginal people in the justice system has deteriorated
rather than improved in the recent past.
It goes on to say that the delivery of justice to aboriginal people in aboriginal
communities through the provincial circuit court system is inequitable and inadequate. It is a system characterized by delay in an
era of colonialism.
One could only categorize the Minister of
Justice's (Mr. McCrae) response to my colleague the member for Rupertsland (Mr.
Harper) as paternalistic, as condescending, yesterday, when the member for
Rupertsland asked the minister to categorically deny that this government had
any intention of creating a two‑tiered system which would relegate
northern Manitobans to second‑class status when it comes to delivery of
justice.
Will the minister stand up in this House
today and categorically deny that that is the government's intention?
Hon. James McCrae
(Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Yes, indeed, Mr. Speaker.
* (1025)
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, in October and again in
February, I wrote to the Minister of Justice.
Can the Minister of Justice explain why the circuit court system was
suspended for four months to the communities of Leaf Rapids and
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, in his first question, the
honourable member referred to aspects of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry which
identified shortcomings in the justice system in remote areas of
I am hopeful to be bringing forward soon
major improvements to the justice system in remote areas as well as in other
areas of
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Justice
explain why a court party attending in
Mr. McCrae: The type of system that will be created has
not been finally determined, because we have not had the opportunity to include
in discussions about that the leadership of the aboriginal community.
There have been improvements made in the
justice system thus far since this government came to office. I remind the honourable member that out of
the many, many years that he and his colleagues were in office in this
province, it was during those years, to a large extent, some of these
difficulties arose. This government does
not want to be part of the problem as the previous government was. This government wants to make improvements. We desperately want to make improvements to
the justice system where improvements are required. We acknowledge that.
The honourable member is attempting, I
assume, to be helpful here. He can be
helpful by attempting to persuade aboriginal leadership to join us in solving
these problems.
Independent
Schools
Funding
Formula
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Education.
Yesterday, the minister said I would be
interested in funding for the independent school in my constituency. I am interested in funding for all schools in
all constituencies, even St. John's‑Ravenscourt located in the minister's
constituency that is going to get 9 percent this year while public schools are
laying off teachers in her constituency.
Mr. Speaker, will the minister not
reconsider her position, given its inherent unfairness?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker,
this government is interested in quality education for all students in
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, can the minister indicate whether
she will be breaking the agreement signed by this government with the independent
schools with respect to the increase that is automatically going to be given
and that the independent schools' chairperson agrees is going to be 9 percent
this year?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, the agreement which the member
refers to, which yesterday he claimed was confidential, in fact has never been
a confidential agreement and has been spoken about in the time since it was
signed, but that letter of agreement is in fact an agreement between this
government and the Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools.
Now, the effect of breaking that agreement
would be very serious to the taxpayers of this province because it is a phased‑in
funding amount, and it is only funding relating to operating costs.
Mr. Chomiak: My final supplementary to the same
minister: Will the minister consider in
her talks with the private schools that she says she is going to have, that she
tells them about the financial situation of the government and that they
consider taking the same increase in funding that the public school system has
been forced to take this year by this government?
* (1030)
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I have met with the independent schools,
as I have met with school divisions across this province, in the range of
almost 20 school divisions, to examine their particular issues as it relates to
our new funding formula, but in our opinion, this is an agreement.
Health
Care System
Bed
Closures
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Health.
Recent news stories on the proposed
closure and realignment of hospital beds in
Can the minister today at least give us a
time frame when he will make the announcement about these proposed bed
closures?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, what we have
this year is no different than any other year where budget requests are made of
the hospitals and government through the process of deciding where our
priorities are in spending, makes decisions on the funding increase to
respective departments. This year, the government again decided to provide
health care in hospitals, in particular, with a much more significant increase than
other departments of government.
We did that because (a) we did not raise
taxes for the fifth budget in a row; (b) we do not believe, as others believe
and other political philosophies particularly the New Democrats', that you can
pave your way to future prosperity by borrowing against tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, what is going on this year is
an exercise that with an approximate 5 percent increase to hospitals, how they will
arrange their programming. Some of the
programming will not be in the hospital environment as happened in
I suspect that as hospitals deal with
their budgets, liaise with an increased home‑care budget to provide more
community services, an increased personal care home budget to provide more long‑term
care, that there will be changes in the hospital program. The patient will be provided with budget for
care in the most appropriate location, and that is the exercise hospitals right
now are going through‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Community-Based
Health Care
Government
Initiatives
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Can the minister tell us what other
alternative methods of community care are being considered other than the home
care services, because as the news media is telling us, 300 beds are going to
be closed? Patients want to know how
they are going to be served in the long run.
It is a major issue, Mr. Speaker.
We are asking for simple information.
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): With all due respect,
the media is speculating on rumours brought to this House by honourable members
in the opposition.
Mr. Speaker, as I explained in
Health
Care System
Labour
Adjustment Strategy
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): Mr. Speaker, we were simply asking for
information. Can the minister tell us in
view of all these reports and the health care reform, what kind of planning does
he have for the health care workers who are going to be displaced by some of
the major changes? What kind of labour planning
does he have to retrain them so that they can work in the community level?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, let me deal with that issue
exactly as it is being dealt with in
What I can tell my honourable friend is
that in the circumstance of
GRIP
Program
Notification
Deadline
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, clearly this Minister of
Agriculture has missed the deadline for informing farmers of changes to
GRIP. Clause 37 is explicit, and I
quote: Changes must be mailed to the
farmers by March 15 prior to the contract year for which the changes are first
to come into effect.
This violation or this breaking of the
contract by the Minister of Agriculture, breaking of an agreement, is a fundamental
breach, Mr. Speaker, of the contract by government, and therefore removes any
obligation on the part of the farmer to remain in the program if coverage
levels or premium levels are altered in a detrimental way to the farmers.
Can this Minister of Agriculture explain
to this House on what legal basis he and his spokespersons in Crop Insurance
are going around saying that the government has no obligation to announce
changes by March 15 even though it is in the contract?
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I want to
inform the member that the Crop Insurance Corporation, on March 12 of 1992,
sent to farmers amendments to the contract for revenue insurance. That is prior to March 15.
Legal
Opinion Request
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, this has not been sent to the
farmers by March 15.
Will the minister table a legal opinion,
instead of trying to alter history here today because his spokespersons have
said the opposite, that either confirms his statements or rejects them? Do we
have a fundamental breach or do we not?
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, this program
has undergone a fair level of evolution.
As I told the member a few days ago, particularly
I can tell the member that neither
Mr. Speaker, I want to remind you that
amendments were mailed to the producers in a letter of March 12, 1992.
Premium
Levels
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, revision is history from this
minister.
Will this minister now announce today, to
remove the uncertainty, that there will be no reduction in coverage levels and
no increase in premiums for the coming year, or does he believe that contracts
are only for farmers and not for arrogant governments?
Hon. Glen Findlay
(Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, the attempt
in
As I told the member the other day,
Mr. Speaker, that is the condition under
which farmers need protection, if they have a poor crop. I can guarantee him that
Highway
Maintenance
Responsibility
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Last year we saw devastating cuts to the Highways
budget, cuts of $9 million. The bridge
program was cut, a tremendous offloading onto municipalities.
How can the minister support an additional
cut this year of a million dollars to the highways maintenance which will
impact again on municipalities, and they are going to have to pick up extra
costs‑‑more offloading onto municipalities?
* (1040)
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I was not quite sure whether
I caught the total question. I want to
indicate that if the member wants to take the time to look at what happened in
my budget for this year, I think the rural people are going to be well served.
The bridge program has been returned. There has been an increase in the grant‑in‑aid
programs that I have with the local municipalities. My capital program is $103 million for this year. I do not know where she gets the idea that
there is further offloading, Mr. Speaker.
We are trying to recover from that.
Regional
Development Corporations
Funding
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question.
Hon. Leonard Derkach
(Minister of Rural Development): Mr. Speaker,
I guess I am happy to say that over the last year, there have been several
initiatives introduced by this government to indeed help rural communities to
not only survive, but to revitalize rural communities.
Mr. Speaker, I point to a program like the
rural Grow Bonds Program, which has been introduced some months ago, has been taken
up by many communities. In addressing
some of the municipal functions and attending some of the local meetings in rural
communities, I have to tell you that Manitobans are very excited about the
rural Grow Bonds Program and the fact that it could be a very key instrument in
revitalizing our rural economy.
In the next short while, we will be
announcing other programs which will generate other forms of assistance to
rural communities to help them grow and prosper in this province.
Mrs. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I wish the people in rural Grow
Bonds every bit of success.
Mr. Speaker: Question, please.
Rural
Development
Government
Initiatives
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Hon. Leonard Derkach
(Minister of Rural Development): Mr. Speaker,
I have to tell you that Manitobans, and especially rural Manitobans, are
getting somewhat tired of the gloom‑and‑doom philosophy of the NDP.
Mr. Speaker, when we talk about programs
like the Grow Bonds Program, the program that is going to be announced with
regard to revenues from Video Lottery Terminals, when we look at what we have
done for the rural economy in terms of the support we have given through the
GRIP program, Manitobans indeed are looking positively toward renewed growth in
our rural economy. The negativism that
we are hearing from the other side is just not accepted in rural
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
Nonpolitical Statements
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for
Mr. Lamoureux: I stand in recognition of the day that has
been set aside. As we all know inside
the Chamber, the United Nations declared March 21 the International Day for the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
Mr. Speaker, I think that all members of
this Chamber are glad to have seen a resolution of this nature because we all recognize
the importance of doing what we can to combat racism. It has now been close to
two years in which I was appointed as the critic for Culture, Heritage and
Citizenship, and the minister with that portfolio for a number of years in the
NDP has been the critic likewise as long as I have.
One of the benefits I find, Mr. Speaker,
is that we as critics and the minister get many invitations to go out to different
groups. It gives us greater insights in
terms of a better understanding, a better appreciation in terms of all the different
ethnic communities throughout the
I have often argued that if every member
of this Chamber had the same opportunity as I have, as the minister and the NDP
critic have had, I think we would all learn and benefit a great deal from
it. I really and truly believe that when
it comes to fighting racism that it is really a question of education and the more
the community as a whole finds out and becomes more educated in terms of
combating racism, I believe personally, as the Liberal Party and all parties in
this Chamber no doubt believe, that
I did want to stand up and put those few
words on the record and I thank the House for giving me the leave.
Committee
Changes
Mr. Edward Helwer
(Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), that the composition of the Standing Committee on
Municipal Affairs be amended as follows: The member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld)
for the member for Assiniboia (Mrs. McIntosh); the member for Emerson (Mr.
Penner) for the member for
Mr. Speaker: Agreed?
Agreed.
* * *
Ms. Marianne Cerilli
(Radisson): May I make a nonpolitical statement?
Mr. Speaker: Does the member for Radisson have leave to
make a nonpolitical statement?
Leave? It is agreed.
Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Speaker, I think it would be remiss to
not take the opportunity to recognize that tomorrow will be the day to eliminate
racism. I would just like to take the
opportunity to briefly recommend to the government that they take out the Manitoba
Intercultural Council's recommendations for eliminating racism‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would caution the honourable member for
Radisson. [interjection] Order, please.
I am just cautioning the honourable member for Radisson. You have been granted leave for a
nonpolitical statement; pick and choose your words very carefully.
Ms. Cerilli: ‑‑a political body that has
developed the recommendations and they are recommendations that I would hope everyone
in the House could agree with and support, take the opportunity to look at that
as a way of commemorating this sad day.
Thank you.
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson
(Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Might I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement?
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave to make
a nonpolitical statement? Leave? It is agreed.
Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, in 1986, the United Nations declared
March 21 the International Day for the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination. In commemoration of the
tragic event at
I do not believe that any of us would not
look toward tomorrow as a day, not only tomorrow but every day throughout the year,
and what we can do as citizens of this province to eliminate racial
discrimination.
We saw in our province, back in December
of last year, criminal charges brought against self‑proclaimed members of
the Ku Klux Klan, following an extensive undercover operation by the RCMP and
the City of
We know that racism crosses party lines. It does not belong to any one political
party. I think it is important and incumbent
upon all members of this Legislature and indeed all Manitobans to work very
positively towards eliminating some of the barriers that exist, and work
together towards eliminating racial discrimination.
I am pleased and proud that many of our
schools today are celebrating. I just
want to make mention too that my son in Grade 4 is involved at
* (1050)
Mr. Reg Alcock
(Osborne): Mr. Speaker, may I have leave to make a
nonpolitical statement?
Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Osborne have
leave to make a nonpolitical statement?
Is there leave?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: No, leave is denied.
ORDERS OF
THE DAY
BUDGET
DEBATE
Mr. Speaker: On the adjourned debate, eighth day of
debate, on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness)
and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer)
in amendment thereto and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the
Second Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) in further amendment thereto, standing in
the name of the honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), who has 21 minutes
remaining.
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): Mr. Speaker, I am going to be fairly brief
this morning because there is an agreement to allow the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to
conclude debate some time after eleven o'clock, but there are a number of
things that I think need to be put on the record with respect to this budget.
This morning the Premier criticized us,
and other members of the government have criticized the New Democratic Party,
for being negative, for continuing to paint a bleak picture of the economic
circumstances that face Manitobans.
I can assure the Premier that the
questions we have raised in Question Period over this session and the last
session reflect not only our concern about the direction this province is
heading economically, but reflect the concerns expressed to us by Manitobans
from border to border‑‑from border to border. The fact of the matter is that the economic
facts we face as a province are bleak.
It is difficult not to paint a particularly negative and frustrating and
difficult situation in questions when that is what you are faced with in
reality. That is the fact of the matter.
* (1100)
For the record, I want to say that this
government's agenda has failed. The
Tory, the Conservative agenda for
If you compare 1991 with 1990, how is the
province doing? Can we tell Manitobans honestly that their economic
circumstances are going to improve this year?
Can we tell young people that they are more likely to find a job this
year? Can we tell businesses that they
are more likely to succeed this year?
Can we tell those who have lost their homes that things are going to improve?
Mr. Speaker, here are the facts‑‑economic
growth down 1 percent, unemployment growth down 2.3 percent, unemployment rate up
almost 20 percent. More people are
leaving the province. Retail sales down 2.4 percent, housing starts down 36
percent, building permits down 23 percent, farm cash receipts down 6.3 percent,
manufacturing shipments down 13.7 percent.
Weekly earnings have remained unchanged.
Investment is down hundreds of percents, to zero in effect.
Tourism, Mr. Speaker‑‑we
learned yesterday that
Well, Mr. Speaker, the trade deficit for
the
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is,
every year since free trade, our imports have increased and our exports have decreased‑‑every
year. [interjection] The Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) is talking
about a billion‑dollar surplus. The numbers in
Now, Mr. Speaker, we have the government
tabling a budget which attempts to be all things to all people, something that
the member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld) has chastised the government for. It is not even clear today, as we prepare to
vote for the budget of the province, that the member for Rossmere is going to support
it. He said he is withholding it. He says he has options. He says he is not happy with the budget.
Well, Mr. Speaker, the member for Rossmere
is not alone. There are 26 members on this side and thousands and thousands and
thousands of unemployed Manitobans, Manitobans on welfare, who do not like this
budget either because it does not speak to their needs.
The First Minister (Mr. Filmon) is very
sensitive when anybody on this side suggests that the government is using a public
relations exercise rather than an economic policy to direct this
government. Whenever you talk to the
First Minister about sound and pool lights, Mr. Speaker, he goes frantic.
The fact of the matter is that the budget
that was tabled by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is another PR
exercise. How do you judge whether a budget succeeds? How can we judge whether the Minister of
Finance's previous budgets met the mark? I guess you can do it by defining the
goals in the budget and seeing if they have met those goals, by doing some
elementary evaluation as to whether the goals that the government set for itself
have in fact been met. This government
has missed its objective.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance says
he was out in Crescentwood the other day.
Was he telling Manitobans that his desire to control the deficit has
disappeared? Has he told Manitobans that
we have a $530‑million deficit and that includes a $70‑million
lapsing function. If that money is not
lapsed, the deficit for the
If the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) says we
are painting a black picture of the economic circumstances of the province, well,
Mr. Speaker, the First Minister should try living on welfare. The First Minister should try living on unemployment.
The First Minister should have his house foreclosed. Those are the circumstances of average
Manitobans, and if that is a black picture, if that is a negative picture, that
is reality. That is what is happening
out there. What we are trying to get the
government to do is to set an agenda.
The First Minister (Mr. Filmon) is going
to stand up and say we have provided no alternatives. Our Leader (Mr. Doer), today, provided two
alternatives. He called for an economic
summit. Let us assess the problem. The
problem with this government is it will not face reality; the First Minister
will not face reality. We have asked on
many occasions for the First Minister of this government to establish a task
force to examine the real problems of our economy and to help us collectively
come to grips with some of those. This
government did pose some solutions.
Mr. Speaker, there was some tinkering in
this budget but it was only tinkering.
That is not only my opinion. When
it comes to the manufacturing tax credits, when it comes to the telecommunications
tax exemption, all of the experts, people outside this Chamber, say that it is
not going to work. The day after the
budget, university Economics professors at both the
Mr. Speaker, the government has to get
realistic. The government patted itself
on the back in terms of its mining exemption, some new initiatives in the area
of mining. It is tinkering. In 1991‑‑
An Honourable Member: Tinkering.
Mr. Storie: Well, Mr. Speaker, tinkering. The total cost for the mining initiatives,
the total cost to this government‑‑and it is in the budget if the
member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) wants to read the facts‑‑in this
budget are going to cost the government $0.5 million. That is what it says. In 1991, when the Manitoba Mineral
Exploration Incentive Program was introduced, there was much hoopla, again a PR
exercise. They said they were going to spend
$14.5 million.
My question to the Minister of Finance
(Mr. Manness) today, $14.5 million, have they spent a cent out of that fund to
date? The answer is no. In fact, Mr.
Speaker, companies like Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting and Inco who employ
almost all of the people in mining in
An Honourable Member: What did you do?
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, what did we do‑‑the
Minister of Finance will have forgotten by now that we invested with HBM&S
in a mine. We were prepared to have a
joint venture with HBM&S and did have a joint venture in which the province
owned 49 percent. We also worked with the mining company, had a very successful
mineral development agreement with the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, what I am trying to say is
that the government's initiatives in mining are a PR exercise. While the government now has recognized the
importance of mining, we have lost two mining communities. The community of Sherridon and the community of
Mr. Speaker, there can be no credit to
this government because what they are doing is a public relations
exercise. It is no real commitment.
This government is attempting to say that
somehow there is some stimulation in this budget. In the areas where we most need it, there is
nothing. In fact, the statistics that I
just provided, the record high unemployment levels, the record high bankruptcies,
the record high mortgage foreclosures bespeak to an economy that is in trouble.
Mr. Speaker, there is nothing in this
budget that is so important to the people of
The First Minister (Mr. Filmon) stood
today in this House and rejected two more, even though the average Manitoban
believes that we have to address our problems.
We cannot continue to turn a blind eye to the failures of this
government, the failures of Conservative policies in the
Mr. Speaker, just to show you how
desperate they are, yesterday, we learned the truth from the Minister of
Finance, the first time it has been acknowledged, that the deficit is $530 million. The Minister of Finance said that unless
things change substantially, we are facing an almost $600‑million deficit
next year, and this from a government that started only four short budgets ago
with a surplus. That is the fact of the
matter.
We have lost our economic base. Our people are leaving, and there are no jobs. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and the
First Minister (Mr. Filmon) expect us to stand in this House and support this
budget. Mr. Speaker, this budget is a
sham. It is a continuation of economic
development by PR exercise.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to conclude with
comments on only one additional initiative of the government, the First
Minister raised it today, and that is the Economic Innovations and Technology
Council. In the last budget, the
government took $700,000 away from the Manitoba Research Council. They said in the budget they were going to
create this new innovations council.
That was a year ago. Did they
spend any money? Did they create the
council? No. In the fall, the First Minister said: We are going to create a new one. We are going to reshuffle things, and we are
going to have this new Economic Development Board of Cabinet.
(Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in
the Chair)
The only real increase in the budget is a
million dollars that this new Mike Bessey super secretariat is going to spend. What
is the record of that department and that individual? The successes of this government are MacLeod
Stedman, you know the head office that never happened; Piper Aircraft, the
company that never came; Repap, the company that just laid off most of its workers;
The Pines project, and then we have the most recent, SEA Inc., the turning away
of jobs from
This budget is a sham. It does not deal with controlling the deficit,
which is the first priority of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), and it
certainly does not deal with getting the
* (1110)
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Madam Deputy Speaker, I
am honoured to speak on behalf of our government's fifth budget that we have put
before the Legislative Assembly and the people of
Without question, this budget is a tribute
to the hard work and dedication of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and
his staff. It is also a testament to the
benefits of prudent management by all of this government's ministers and their
staff and, as well, to the tremendous dedication and input of all members of
this caucus who worked very, very hard in giving their advice and constructive
suggestions to those of us who put the work in and the ultimate decisions into
this budget and, particularly, to the many, many people and groups with whom
the Minister of Finance consulted in arriving at this balancing act, which I
believe is an approach that will, I think, stand out as a beacon by comparison
to many other provinces and the kind of approach they will be taking as they
bring their budgets forward.
I think this budget is proof positive that
our plan for reform and recovery will indeed create a stronger province, a stronger
economic base. It is working despite
tough global economic times. It is
working despite incredible social changes virtually everywhere in the world
around us. It is working despite how
much opposition parties, both Liberal and New Democratic alike, try to throw up
roadblocks to the successful progress of this province.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I have to intercede
to just make comment on how quickly the so‑called sincerity and
credibility of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) was blown by the 20‑minute
tirade that we just listened to from the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), a
negative, critical diatribe that attempted, like his Leader, the prince of
darkness, to paint everything black, black, black.
That, Madam Deputy Speaker, tells us more
clearly than any of the shallow commentary from the Leader of the Opposition
where the New Democrats are when it comes to co‑operation, to working with
the people of this province to set aside their partisanship and to try and
rebuild and strengthen the economic base of this province. He undercut his Leader more than anybody on
this side could have by the kind of diatribe that he just put forward.
It is ludicrous, ludicrous, for them to
suggest that their so‑called constructive approach of tired, worn,
discredited policies such as spending the hundreds of millions of dollars on short‑term,
make‑work jobs is the answer to this, that we should embrace that failed
philosophy that is being discarded by countries all around the globe, being
discarded, that we should embrace that and take it to us as being the salvation
for the economic challenges that we face in this province.
Despite opposition disinterest in the real
issues, and I say, if you want a real analysis of opposition disinterest, just
look at the opening salvo in the speech of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.
Doer) on the budget. What does he spend
his first five minutes on, his initial attack on the budget or his constructive
approach to it? A cartoon. He talks about a cartoon as being the essence
of his criticism of this budget. That is No. 1.
His approach to the budget is to talk about a cartoon.
To show you just exactly what credibility
and what substance was attached to the Leader of the Opposition's response to
the budget, that is the first time in my recollection in this House, and I have
been here now 12 years, that there was no coverage in the press of his
contribution in response to the budget.
That is devastating, but that is true.
There was no coverage in the press of his contributions in response to
the budget. His comments, his
criticisms, were so shallow, so trivial, they were ignored by the press and
with good and valid reason.
Despite this attitude that we are seeing
from the opposition, we indeed are making progress and working with Manitobans
by standing with them to meet common problems and concerns and challenges and
by seeking their advice on solutions.
Madam Deputy Speaker, our government
listens to the people of
This government has introduced five
budgets. All five budgets have been
centered around a tax freeze and, where possible, tax cuts. This is the fifth consecutive year that we have
frozen taxes in this province. It is
unprecedented, and it is unmatched anywhere in this country.
Every time the Leader of the Opposition
(Mr. Doer) and the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs) demand that we
solve our problems by throwing more money at them, every time the NDP and the
Liberals urge us to back up the Brink's truck and spend, spend, spend, that
reminds us of the heavy debt and tax load that Manitobans were forced to bear
as a result of the actions and initiative of previous NDP governments.
We listen carefully to the opposition
every day for new ideas. We search their
comments for fresh approaches, perhaps some innovative solutions. We examine their rhetoric for some recognition
of the reality facing the taxpayers of
Point of
Order
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Point of order, Madam Deputy
Speaker, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is known for his cheap shots, but he knows
that all members of this Chamber are honourable members, and he should not
refer to the opposition benches in any way.
I would ask you, in light of the fact that the Premier should be showing
some leadership in this Chamber, to raise the level of his words with members
in this Chamber.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Leader of the
Opposition, I do not believe has a point of order, but I can assure him that I
can quote the word "cronies" that he has used over and over and over
again in this Chamber, over and over, gang, cronies and all of those cheap‑shot
slurs that he enjoys using. If he is
afraid‑‑
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
I would remind all honourable members in this House that indeed all
members are honourable members, and reference should be used accordingly.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Madam Deputy Speaker, all Manitobans know that
we have been down that failed road before, courtesy of the New Democrats. Hundreds and millions of dollars of the
The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer)
does not even know that Flyer Industries was not created by the Jobs Fund,
heaven forbid. He does not even know
that, and he comes and he interjects with a silly contribution. He does not even know the history of this
province. Maybe that is one of the
reasons why he is so off track.
We all know the answer. The Jobs Fund jobs do not exist today in this
province. They have not existed for
years. All that is left is the debt and
lots of it. Big debt forces higher taxes,
Madam Deputy Speaker, and that is the only legacy of previous NDP governments
that they have left for Manitobans.
The member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) has
learned absolutely nothing from the past.
He clings to the tired old socialist policies that failed in
In 1983, for instance, the member for
Concordia was the president of the Manitoba Government Employees'
Association. I remember the Minister of
Justice (Mr. McCrae) saying he was a pretty good president of the union in
those days. He thought in those days
that he made a lot of sense in some of the things that he said.
* (1120)
For instance, on September 28 of 1983, he
gave his opinion on the NDP government's newly announced Jobs Fund. It is bloody immoral in my mind, he
said. I hope those words are not unparliamentary
because they are an exact quote. It is
bloody immoral in my mind, he said about the Jobs Fund.
He was even more forthcoming a few months
later. In the spring of 1984, he was
blasting the NDP government for, quote, hiring people to count flowers along
the roadside.
That is the Jobs Fund jobs, hiring people
to count flowers along the roadside, according to the member for Concordia (Mr.
Doer). Then he went further and he said,
the government does not understand the difference between a make‑work job
and a structured economy. Any economist,
he said, will tell you a structured job is more beneficial to the economy.
In more recent times, he has had a lapse
of memory. In October of 1991, he said
in a letter that was sent throughout the province that this government did not
understand labour relations, that this government was unsuccessful in its
dealings with its employees. In fact, he
said in a letter signed Gary Doer, Leader of the NDP, both the federal and
Manitoba Conservative governments have abused their power by ignoring their own
commitments to work within the collective bargaining process.
All right.
What happened then just a couple of months later? Here is a clipping from Friday, February 7,
1992,
"I am disgusted that I had to choose
between whether I was a New Democrat or whether I was a labour person said
Janice Ducharme, president of the local representing office workers at the party's
provincial headquarters. I am disgusted
that the elite clique of the New Democratic Party would submit themselves to
this kind of public scrutiny.
"Moreover, Ducharme said the tiny
local was pushed into the strike by the party executive's negotiating committee
after going eight months without a contract."
Now listen to this. "She said the committee"‑‑that
is the party's negotiating committee‑‑"is stacked with hired
guns from more powerful labour organizations such as the Manitoba Government
Employees Association, the City of
What were the issues that they were
unwilling to bend and to be reasonable on with their employees? The union says the key issues include the
party executive wants to strip the workers of their current maternity benefits
of 17 weeks full salary. Madam Deputy
Speaker, we willingly put‑‑
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Point of
Order
Mr. Conrad Santos
(Broadway): I cannot hear what the First Minister is
saying, besides I cannot see any relevance attacking a political party in the
budget.
Madam Deputy
Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, the honourable member
for Broadway indeed does have a point of order.
I, myself, am experiencing great difficulty in hearing the First
Minister's speech, and I would request the co‑operation of all members on
all sides of the House in complying with this order.
Thank you.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Madam Deputy Speaker, I can understand the embarrassment
of the New Democrats and particularly their women members when I remind them of
the fact that their party wanted to strip their female employees of their maternity
benefits, benefits that we willingly gave to the MGEA without even discussion. We put it on the table as being a
"given," that we would allow them the choice between what they had
and what the federal government was giving them.
A second major issue that they were
criticizing their employers, the New Democratic Party, for was that the union
wants to force the executive to use its work force to full capacity before
taking steps to contract out. What they
were fighting for was opposing contracting out, when these people get up day
after day after day in the House and have the audacity to criticize us as a
government for our contract negotiations on issues such as this.
An Honourable Member: How does that fit with your philosophy,
Mr. Filmon: You see that is the kind of short‑term
memory‑‑they have difficulty with the long‑term memory and
they have difficulty with the short‑term memory.
Let us talk more about the short‑term
memory. Let us talk about the multiple
positions of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) on the Fiscal
Stabilization Fund. About a week ago in
his response to the budget he said:
"They have no business taking an asset and putting it into the new
budget."‑‑in reference to the Fiscal Stabilization Fund.
He was saying that he did not want us to
spend the Fiscal Stabilization Fund to maintain essential programs. What he forgets, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the
number of times that he demanded in this House and outside that we dip into the
rainy day fund because as he said, it is raining, it is raining. We heard him say that, it is raining
now. Then when we do spend it to maintain
essential services, he says, I object to it.
On June 7, 1989, the member for Concordia
felt it was raining for health care, for job creation, for education. The very day before that, he said that the
Stabilization Fund money should go to Klinic, to Municipal Hospitals, to
northern facilities, to child care centres.
In 1990, it was the Native Communications network he said we should
spend the rainy day fund on. In 1991, it
was the nurses' strike that he said we should spend the money on.
Last week he said, no, do not spend
it. He said, I object.
Mr. Doer: No, I suggested taking an asset and putting
it in. Read it right, the whole statement.
Mr. Filmon: The Leader of the NDP has total recall, all
right. It is like the auto manufacturers who say that. He says that his statements are subject to
total recall just like the auto manufacturers cars are subject to total recall.
(Mr. Speaker in the Chair)
Mr. Speaker, Manitobans simply will not
buy what he is trying to sell them.
Manitobans want consistency and they demand honesty from the people whom
they elect. Those cutesy 10‑second
clips that he goes for everyday are not what the people are looking for. They fall far short of the mark. He is all pretty paper and fancy ribbons and
all wrapping and no package.
With all of this all‑show and no‑dough
double‑talk approach to government, he is now having to fear the
comparisons that are going to be made day after day between what New Democrats
say when they have the luxury of opposition and what New Democrats do when they
are in office. What his colleagues in
Manitobans know that what we are doing by
consistent, by relevant policy matters, by keeping the taxes down, the deficit down
and building a stronger foundation, will position us better for the economic
recovery and the growth that we know will happen. They are confident in the combined abilities
of Manitobans working together. We share
their optimism and their confidence. Our
government will stand with them and will continue to work hard to build a
stronger
Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.
Doer) would learn something if he spent a little more time listening to what
the government was really saying, so that he understood it instead of the knee‑jerk
reactions that we get day after day.
Perhaps he should listen to his honourable colleagues in the opposition
in the Liberal Party. For instance, the
member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), have
said some very positive things explaining relevant economics of the 1990s to
the people of the New Democratic Party.
They understand the challenges.
They understand the issues. They
understand the opportunities, and I give them credit for evaluating the budget and
for being consistent in looking at some of the things that they like and some
of the things that they do not like, not the knee‑jerk negative reaction
doom and gloom, painted‑black approach.
* (1130)
You only have to listen to the
contributions of the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) from time to time when
he recognizes that health care reform is an issue, that health care reform is being
dealt with by governments throughout this country, and that health care reform
is part of the process of keeping medicare alive and healthy. He says that, Mr. Speaker. Even the tone he takes in response to
ministerial statements is head and shoulders above the tone of his counterpart
in the New Democratic Party. At least when he agrees with the initiative that
the government is undertaking, he has the courage to say so, not like the New Democratic
knee‑jerk reaction, always negative response.
The member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) gave
evidence of his grasp of today's reality in a recent television speech on Provincial
Affairs, and I will quote what he said.
It is very interesting. He
said: If we are going to be successful,
we must face these challenges together.
We must stop the negativism, reduce the constant focus on what is wrong
with this province. It is time to get to work on what is right about it. We do not live in this province because we
have to. We do so by choice, because
there is a great deal to be proud of in
Well, I agree wholeheartedly with the
comments of the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock). I have said those very things myself in
speeches across the length and breadth of this province of ours. I believe in
The bottom line is that taxes are a very
important factor in determining our economy's ability to grow. Manitobans cannot afford more taxes. Manitobans want a strong economy. Mr. Speaker, this budget offers far more than
just tax restraint. It offers
specifically targeted incentives aimed at helping to get our economy
growing. We have made tax cuts in
strategic areas to promote investment in
The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), in
his lack of knowledge, in his ignorance earlier today, said that amounts to a half
million dollars. The fact of the matter
is, that could be tens of millions of dollars of forgone revenue in order to
get hundreds of millions of dollars of investment here, hundreds of millions of
dollars of investment.
Elimination of the corporation's capital
tax on mine exploration costs, another incentive that is being welcomed by the
mining industry. A sales tax exemption
for 1‑800 numbers to help improve the competitiveness of business
telecommunication services in
A new
Mr. Speaker, we are confident that the
private sector will respond to the signals that are so clearly presented in
this budget. In order to take advantage
of these tax breaks, the private sector must invest in the
The investment will spark economic
activity that will create jobs, real long‑term jobs, permanent jobs for
Manitobans. Our government will work
alongside Manitobans to ensure that we can quickly and efficiently create new
opportunities and attract new business to
The new tax incentives announced in our
budget will continue the momentum that is being generated by other programs
that are helping Manitobans to help themselves, programs such as the $10‑million
initiative to bring more voice and data‑intensive industry to Manitoba,
the Manitoba Industrial Opportunities Program, and the Mineral Exploration
Incentive Program, the Crocus Investment Fund, a labour‑sponsored capital
fund that we were the first in this country to bring in. No New Democratic government brought it in;
we were the first. We brought it in, Mr.
Speaker, because it made good sense, good sense to work co‑operatively
with labour to form yet another capital pool to help encourage the creation or
the enhancement or the consolidation of business in
The $20‑million Manitoba Industrial
Recruitment Initiative announced in last week's budget will help
The Rural Development Grow Bond Program
and the Community Choices programs are helping to build a strong rural
This budget, with its tax cuts and its tax
incentives, encourages businesses to invest in
Our government has also made an investment
in Manitobans to help ensure that they are ready to accept both the benefits
and the challenges of expanded opportunity.
Through programs such as Workforce 2000, we have invested over $100
million in various training and youth employment initiatives. Included in this year's budget: $2.5 million for new and expanded training programs
at our three community colleges; $1.4 million for the Partners with Youth
program to create jobs for young Manitobans.
In fact, in this budget, Mr. Speaker,
there is $204 million of additional funding in the areas of Health, Education
and Family Services, $204 million additional.
Education and Training spending will
increase 5.5 percent or $52 million.
That is three times the rate of inflation.
Health spending will be increased by $101
million this year, 5.7 percent, three times the rate of inflation.
Family Services will receive an 8.7
percent increase, $51 million; that is five times the rate of inflation.
Even the pretend budget of the NDP
"gimme" group, Choices, they were only going to give a 5.1 percent
increase to Family Services. Tim Sale
was never very good at numbers. That
much I knew. We all knew that.
Increases of this magnitude were needed to
protect and assist those Manitobans most severely impacted by the recession.
In addition, we have underscored our
commitment to stand with the hardworking men and women of the agriculture
industry with a dramatic increase in spending on income support programs.
Last year, we invested more money in
agriculture than any provincial government in the history of this province had
ever done, and this year we will be investing 21 percent more, primarily in
GRIP and NISA, in this budget alone.
Manitobans said they wanted to protect
their vital health, social services, education, and they wanted to preserve
their agricultural way of life. Once
again, we have listened and we have responded by the measures in this budget.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure you will agree that
this aggressive package of incentives aimed at getting the economy growing, the
significant increase in funding to vital human services and no tax increase is
indeed an impressive package for any budget.
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that at this
budget, because it was the first of any provincial government in the country,
we had people from the financial markets of Toronto and New York, from the bond
rating agencies, the people who sell our bonds, from the people who evaluate
province to province right across this country those who are doing a good job
on the management, and they were overwhelmingly positive at this budget and the
manner in which it balanced all these things.
In addition, the fact that there is over
$300 million of this budget in direct funding that is being spent on capital,
for infrastructure, for highways, for hospitals, for schools, personal care
homes, all of those things that are long‑term assets to this province‑‑$1.1
billion if you combine not only the direct provincial but all of the Crown
corporation investment in capital. I
might say, I invite you to compare the approach on capital investment that is
being taken by this government with that which was taken by the members
opposite when they were in government and by what is going to happen in
* (1140)
I was in B.C. I have talked with the people in both provinces
who have talked about what is going to happen there. Do you know that the
provincial government of British Columbia has already put on notice all of the
consultants, the engineers, the architects, the people in that community who
say there is less work coming in investment in infrastructure, in highways?
When I was in the hospital, there was a
person who was on the same ward with me, an elderly person, who after recovery
from a hip operation was still on the ward, was disoriented and confused. The poor woman was very upset because they
could not move her out of the ward because they had no personal care beds. The
same kind of thing that the New Democrats here get up and bleat about is being
practised by their brethren in
It is worse than that. They have been in office for a short time,
but they are going to follow the same thing, I predict, that the New Democrats
did when they froze capital spending in health care for a full year. They froze capital spending so that we did
not have personal care homes and other investments in health infrastructure
being made. Those are the things that we
have seen from New Democrats in office.
What really sets this budget apart is the
fact that it was presented at a time when this provincial government's revenues
will likely not increase at all, minimally.
The fact of the matter is that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer)
does not remember some of the things that he should have learned while he was
in government, and that is that government revenues lag behind the progress of
the economy, that even though the economy is expected to increase substantially
this year in Manitoba, the losses carried forward by businesses will result in
them likely paying very little taxes this year and that that, more so than anything,
will affect the kinds of revenues that we can predict.
We were able to do all of this. We were able to keep the taxes down. We were able to give tax incentives. We were able to keep the deficit in
manageable proportions, and we were able to increase the spending in all of
these key social service areas and still keep all of this in line because of
the fact that this government has learned, and has learned the lessons well, of
management and organization and priority setting above all.
Here is what a recent article said. "On the election trail, Romanow said
What are they doing? They are trying to suggest that the debt of
the province is higher than expected.
Where is the big area that they have identified? Unfunded pension liabilities, $3 billion‑‑those
are exactly the same pension liabilities that were there when Allan Blakeney
was in government. Those are exactly the
same pension liabilities that carried on because, like
Well, in the next few months all other
provinces are going to bring forward their budgets, and we will look forward to
comparing the priority choices that they bring.
We will watch, we will see whether or not their approach of increasing
taxes and cutting vital services is the approach that Manitobans would prefer.
In
* (1150)
Let us look at the
Mr. Speaker, here is a collection of
clippings about these provinces and what is happening. Here is
The deputy minister, Michael Decter,
former Clerk of the NDP Executive Council, has just replaced five of the six
assistant deputy ministers‑‑whoop!
Out, the axe came. One ministry
source said, the senior officials are being dumped or reassigned to make way
for people who back the NDP's agenda, of bed cuts, of thousands of jobs lost,
of 1 percent increase in funding, that is the NDP agenda. Of course, no reasonable people who had been working
for the department would go along with that insanity so they had to put their
own hacks in, in order to do it.
Let us look at what their priorities
are. This will be interesting for the
Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer).
This is a story from the Ottawa Citizen that is entitled "Economy
speech cost $62,000." That little
speech that Bob Rae gave on television to tell people how tough things were
cost $62,000, of which $2,600 was to rent a teleprompter to make sure he got
his lines right.
"The supper‑hour lockup, which
was formally opposed by the Queen's Park press gallery in a letter to the
premier's press office, cost taxpayers $51,000," to do what the Leader of
the Opposition does every day, which is to entertain the press‑‑$51,000.
* (1200)
"There were $200 for 18 pots of
yellow chrysanthemums that lined the stage where Laughren spoke to
reporters." They not only have
potted lights, they have potted chrysanthemums at their news conferences, the
New Democrats. This is in a time of economic
despair.
"Laughren said the lockup was
intended to assist media coverage of both Rae's speech and his announcement
that transfer payments would increase by only 1 per cent‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Point of
Order
Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, one of the rights of all members is
to be able to hear the speech that is being given. This statesman‑like speech should be
heard.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Here is another priority area of New Democratic policy
in
"As everyone knows, Post‑it Notes
are the most user‑friendly item to hit offices since personal
computers." That is the little
yellow stickies, in case you do not know.
"Everyone, that is, except
In case you have not seen it, they have a
new billboard campaign going in
The concluding paragraph is‑‑this
is from the bureaucrats, the civil servants‑‑we still see ourselves
dealing with self‑interest groups, not a government, says one assistant
deputy minister, and all the little interest groups have an axe to grind. The tyranny of the periphery is now the
government of
Well, I have a great deal more to talk
about, about
In
Mr. Speaker, Manitobans already realize
what the balance of the nation is just finding out. Government spending sprees mean big deficits,
heavy debt loads that transfer into higher taxes, and higher taxes mean fewer
jobs 10 times out of 10. I know that our
co‑ordinated approach to economic renewal is working. Our trust in Manitobans has been well
founded.
The Conference Board of Canada is
forecasting our real GDP will increase by 3.2 percent, ranking us in the top
three nationally. Stats
Believing in ourselves and our ability to
accomplish and excel has always been part of the
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. In accordance with Rule 23(5), I am interrupting
proceedings to put the question on the subamendment to the House.
The question before the House is the
subamendment moved by the honourable Leader of the second opposition party
(Mrs. Carstairs) to the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Opposition
(Mr. Doer).
THAT the amendment be amended by adding
thereto the following words:
And further regrets that:
(a)
this government has failed to adequately invest ineducation and training
as witnessed by the cuts toKeewatin Community College and the cuts to Education
andTraining Assistance and its failure to restore thedrastic cuts the community
colleges received in 1991; and
(b)
this government has failed to address the employmentneeds of many
Manitobans by reducing funding for specialemployment programs including youth
programs,employability enhancement and the Human ResourceOpportunity Program;
and
(c)
this government has failed to live up to its commitmentsto the most
vulnerable in society by granting belowinflationary increases to 55 Plus and
CRISP; and
(d)
this government has failed to provide capitalstimulation by cutting
highways maintenance and byproviding below inflation increases to highway
capitalprojects; and
(e)
this government has failed in its commitment to promotesustainable
development by cutting funding to the CleanEnvironment Commission, making
further cuts to forestryand silviculture and by eliminating energy conservationprograms
in the Department of Energy and Mines; and
(f)
this government has failed to provide adequate resourcesfor community
health development with its cuts toexternal agencies under healthy public policyprogramming;
and
(g)
this government continues to obfuscate the government'sfinancial
statements with its continued use of theFiscal Stabilization Plan.
All those in favour of the proposed
subamendment, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
(Second Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays,
Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Call in the members.
A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Alcock, Ashton, Barrett, Carstairs, Cerilli, Cheema,
Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Edwards, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Friesen,
Gaudry, Harper, Hickes, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Maloway, Martindale, Plohman, Reid,
Nays
Connery, Cummings, Dacquay, Derkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme,
Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness,
McAlpine, McCrae, McIntosh, Mitchelson, Neufeld, Orchard, Penner, Praznik,
Reimer, Render, Rose, Stefanson, Sveinson, Vodrey.
Mr. Clerk (William
Remnant): Yeas 26, Nays 29.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the subamendment lost.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is the
amendment moved by the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) to the
proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) that this
House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government.
THAT the motion be amended by deleting all
the words after "House" and substituting the following:
Regrets that:
(a)
by the government's own projections, economic growth inManitoba will be
below the national average; and
(b)
this below average economic performance will lead tocontinued
unacceptable high unemployment, increasednumbers of Manitobans on social
assistance, more andmore discouraged workers leaving the labour force andfurther
reductions in our province's services forpeople; and
(c)
this government refuses to take action to fight theeffects of the worst
recession since the GreatDepression.
THEREFORE this government has thereby lost
the confidence of this House and the people of
All those in favour of the proposed
amendment will please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it.
Mr. Steve Ashton
(Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Call in the members.
A
STANDING VOTE was taken, the
result being as follows:
Yeas
Alcock, Ashton, Barrett, Carstairs, Cerilli, Cheema,
Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Edwards, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Friesen,
Gaudry, Harper, Hickes, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Maloway, Martindale, Plohman, Reid,
Nays
Connery, Cummings, Dacquay, Derkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme,
Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness,
McAlpine, McCrae, McIntosh, Mitchelson, Neufeld, Orchard, Penner, Praznik,
Reimer, Render, Rose, Stefanson, Sveinson, Vodrey.
Mr. Clerk: Yeas 26, Nays 29.
* (1210)
Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion lost.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is the proposed
motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) that this House
approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.
All those in favour of the proposed motion
will please say yea. All those opposed
will please say nay. In my opinion, the Yeas
have it.
Mr. Ashton: Yeas and Nays.
Mr. Speaker: Call in the members.
A
STANDING VOTE was taken, the
result being as follows:
Yeas
Connery, Cummings, Dacquay, Derkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme,
Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness,
McAlpine, McCrae, McIntosh, Mitchelson, Neufeld, Orchard, Penner, Praznik,
Reimer, Render, Rose, Stefanson, Sveinson, Vodrey.
Nays
Alcock, Ashton, Barrett, Carstairs, Cerilli, Cheema,
Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Edwards, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Friesen,
Gaudry, Harper, Hickes, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Maloway, Martindale, Plohman, Reid,
Mr. Clerk: Yeas 29, Nays 26.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Is it the will of the House to call it
12:30? The hour being 12:30 p.m., this
House is now adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. Monday.