LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, May 13, 1993
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
* * *
Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Bob Wright, Keith Smith, Herbie Spence and others requesting the Family
Services minister (Mr. Gilleshammer) to consider restoring funding for their
friendship centres in
* * *
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
M.J. Ali, B.A. Mallick, Donna Oliveira and others urging the government of
Mr. Speaker: I
have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Clif Evans). It complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of
the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend
upon the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS several studies have pointed
out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as
the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS the Children's Dental
Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extremely
cost‑effective and critical for many families in isolated communities;
and
WHEREAS the provincial government
did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing
plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this
service; and
WHEREAS preventative health care is
an essential component of health care reform.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly
pray that the Legislative Assembly of
Mr. Speaker: I
have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Dewar). It complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk:
The petition of the undersigned citizens of the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend
upon the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS several studies have pointed
out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as
the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS the Children's Dental
Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extremely
cost‑effective and critical for many families in isolated communities;
and
WHEREAS the provincial government
did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing
plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this
service; and
WHEREAS preventative health care is
an essential component of health care reform.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly
pray that the Legislative Assembly of
Mr. Speaker: I
have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Chomiak). It complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of
the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend
upon the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS several studies have pointed
out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as
the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS the Children's Dental
Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extremely
cost‑effective and critical for many families in isolated communities;
and
WHEREAS the provincial government
did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing
plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this
service; and
WHEREAS preventative health care is
an essential component of health care reform.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly
pray that the Legislative Assembly of
Mr. Speaker: I
have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Leonard Evans). It complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk:
The petition of the undersigned citizens of the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend
upon the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS several studies have pointed
out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as
the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS the Children's Dental
Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extremely
cost‑effective and critical for many families in isolated communities;
and
WHEREAS the provincial government
did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing
plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this
service; and
WHEREAS preventative health care is
an essential component of health care reform.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly
pray that the Legislative Assembly of
Mr. Speaker: I
have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Ashton). It complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk:
The petition of the undersigned citizens of the
WHEREAS
WHEREAS over 55,000 children depend
upon the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS several studies have pointed
out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as
the Children's Dental Program; and
WHEREAS the Children's Dental
Program has been in effect for 17 years and has been recognized as extremely
cost‑effective and critical for many families in isolated communities;
and
WHEREAS the provincial government
did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing
plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists, nurses and assistants providing this
service; and
WHEREAS preventative health care is
an essential component of health care reform.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly
pray that the Legislative Assembly of
* * *
Mr. Speaker: I
have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Plohman). It complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read? [agreed]
Mr. Clerk:
The petition of the undersigned citizens of the
WHEREAS the Canadian Wheat Board has
played a vital role in the orderly marketing of Canadian wheat, barley and
other grain products since its inception in 1935; and
WHEREAS the federal Minister of
Agriculture is considering removing barley from the jurisdiction of the Wheat
Board; and
WHEREAS this is another step towards
dismantling the board; and
WHEREAS, as in the case with the
removal of oats from the Wheat Board in 1989, there has been no consultation
with the board of directors of the Wheat Board, with the 11‑member
advisory committee to the board or the producers themselves; and
WHEREAS the federal minister has
said that there will be no plebiscite of farmers before the announcement is
made.
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly
pray that the Legislative Assembly of
* (1335)
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural
Development): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the
Actuarial Report on the Manitoba Municipal Employees Group Life Insurance Plan
as at January 1, 1992. I would also like
to table the Actuarial Report on the
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 afternoon from the
On behalf of all honourable members,
I would like to welcome you here this afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Immigrant Investor Fund
Audit
Tabling Request
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the First Minister.
On the Immigrant Investor Fund, the
independent consultant has stated that the economic analysis, as we had
alleged, for specific projects was primarily conducted by the promoters, and
all the information for improvement was done by the promoters themselves, not
by the provincial government.
Yesterday, we learned again that
accountability is not a priority with this government in dealing with these
funds when we found that the government is late with an audit about their own
funds from the Federal‑Provincial Tourism Agreement, and three weeks
after asking the question in the House, it is now initiating another audit on
the disposition of public funds to another project co‑sponsored by the
Immigrant Investor Fund.
Mr. Speaker, this has been going on
for a long time. Questions have been raised in this House, and we believe the
public has a right to know the status of these inquiries.
Does the government have copies now
of the five specific audits, and will they agree to table those audits, the
specific audits in this Chamber?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as
notice on behalf of the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.
Stefanson).
* (1340)
Status Report
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I would be surprised that the Premier would
take as notice, Mr. Speaker‑‑[interjection] Well, the Premier is
the chair of the Economic Development Committee of Cabinet, and he does not
have any answers on $200 million worth of investment, and he will not give us
the assurance in this House that the reports will be tabled in this House. He takes it as notice.
Mr. Speaker, one of the specific
funds is for a project‑specific development called the Winnipeg Ramada
Renaissance Project. This, of course,
has been approved by the provincial government and the federal government. Funds have been raised for that specific
project, and now there are no building permits to go ahead, and virtually there
is no project at this point in time.
I would like to ask the Premier or
his minister: What is the status of the
funds, and what is the status of the visas that were potentially issued for
purposes of the investments made to that project?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade
and Tourism): I have outlined to prior questions exactly
where things are at as it relates to the Immigrant Investor Program, Mr.
Speaker.
In terms of the Ramada Renaissance,
as the Leader of the Opposition well knows, those funds are currently frozen by
the federal government, partly at the request of the provincial
government. That is one of the five
audits he asked about earlier. We have
received four of those audits. I have
said in this House before, when we receive all five audits we will be making a
public statement, and we will be making as much information available as we
possibly can.
Obviously, there might well be
aspects of confidentiality, third‑party confidentiality, and so on. We will make that assessment after reviewing
all five audits, and we will certainly make public as much information as we
can, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Doer: We
would urge the government, on behalf of the public, to make those audits
completely public, Mr. Speaker, when he has those audits in his hands.
Fund Transfers
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, there are examples and one
specific example dealing with the Winnipeg Ramada Renaissance‑‑and
the minister never answered the question on the status of the visas‑‑where
the developer has stated that some funds raised for the project were in trust‑‑and
the minister has said those funds are frozen‑‑and other funds
raised for the project‑specific amount for the Ramada Inn that exceeded
the amount required for the project were diverted to so‑called other
corporate investments of the same company and of the same developer.
Given the fact that Crewson has
raised this as a concern‑‑he has, in fact, stated there is no
control from the provincial government on how these funds are used for
designated purposes‑‑does the minister feel that the diversion of
any funds or the transfer of any funds for a specific project is absolutely
inconsistent with the approval that he and his government gave for those
project funds to be raised for those specific projects?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade
and Tourism): The
Leader of the Opposition is getting into some of the specifics of the audit
that, as I have said, we will make public.
I want to remind him, though, of the
role we play as a provincial government in the whole Immigrant Investor
Program. We brought in regulations in 1988 which I imagine was an oversight of
the previous government under the NDP.
They brought in no rules or regulations when they were part of the
formation of the Immigrant Investor Program.
In fact, in 1986, Mr. Speaker, we
brought in some rules and regulations.
Our role is the economic assessment, as we well know. We have explained on many occasions
before. The federal government is the
final approval authority on the Immigrant Investor Program on syndicated funds
and on project‑specific funds.
I think it is important for the
Leader of the Opposition and members of his party to understand the process, to
remember what they did not do back in 1986 and the steps we have taken since
then in terms of rules and regulations, the audits we are now conducting, and,
as I have indicated, it is certainly our intention to make as much information
as we possibly can public.
Obviously, when you are dealing with
other entities and companies, there might well be some confidential information
that we do not have the legal authority to release. We will release whatever information we
possibly can when the audits are complete.
Firearms
Control
Acquisition Information
Ms. Becky Barrett (
Can the Premier tell the House today
if information on firearms acquisition certificates is currently available to
the police officers in the
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I will take that question as notice on behalf
of the Minister of Justice.
* (1345)
Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, could the Premier explain to us
today what progress has been made to ensure that information necessary to the
ability of police departments in our province to adequately do the jobs for
which they have been assigned by society‑‑what the progress has
been to ensure that this information is easily accessible using currently
available technology?
Mr. Filmon: I
will take that, as well, as notice on behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mr.
McCrae).
Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, can the Premier explain to the
House today why an issue that has been in the forefront of this government's
policy on zero tolerance for almost two years, since the Dorothy Pedlar report
was given to this government‑‑why the Premier is not aware of this
kind of vital information? We are not
talking about‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member has put her question.
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite may wish to
think the Premier does all the work of all of the ministers opposite. That
shows her naivete as never having served in government. Clearly, the reason
there is a cabinet and ministries set up is so there are ministers responsible
whose responsibility it is to carry out these functions.
I will be happy to take her question
as notice on behalf of the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae).
No-Fault Auto Insurance
Income Replacement‑Seniors
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the government has made a major
announcement with regard to no‑fault insurance. They have had distributed to the householders
throughout this province an information package‑‑an information
package which is false. The information
package says that people with minor injuries will still be paid for any income
they lose or other costs they face. It
goes on to say: Permanently injured people will be paid for any lost income.
Yesterday, the Premier in this House
indicated that this is not the case, that if you are over 65, your income will
be 25 percent less, then 50 percent less, then 75 percent less and then 100
percent less.
Can the Premier tell us why the
government has authorized incorrect information to be distributed to the people
of the
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member may know that most
disability plans, both public and private, do not pay disability beyond age
65. As I indicated, there would be
income replacement, but it would be reduced successively year upon year in
accordance with the recognition of other income that does accrue to people who
are over age 65, including pension income, both public and private.
Mr. Speaker, that is the information
that I provided very straightforwardly, and I think it covers the case very
well.
Mrs. Carstairs: As the Premier also knows, both public and
private pension monies are available to individuals in this province long
before they hit their 65th birthday. CPP
can be claimed at age 60, for example.
Private pension plans can be claimed as early as 55 in many cases,
including the plan from the Manitoba Teachers' Society that can be claimed at
age 55.
Will the First Minister tell this
House today why the MPIC chose that they would not discriminate against young
people between the ages of 18 and 25 because they consider it a Charter
violation, but they are prepared to discriminate against people who are age 65
and older?
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I will repeat so that the member
opposite will know and understand, most disability plans, both public and
private, do not pay disability beyond age 65.
This plan does.
We are talking about income
replacement, Mr. Speaker, and most public and private plans do not pay that
income replacement. This one does, so it
is not a matter of discrimination.
Disability Benefits
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, under the
Is that the same model we will be
using in the
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as
notice on behalf of the minister responsible for MPIC (Mr. Cummings).
* (1350)
Tower Funding Business
Practices Act
Violations
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister
of Consumer Affairs.
A company called Tower Funding
charges advance fees of between $120 and $295 to find lenders for people with
poor credit ratings.
Since the minister has known about
problems with Tower Funding for at least a month, why have no charges been laid
under The Business Practices Act?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and
Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, the member,
I believe, should know that at this stage, my department is in the midst of an
investigation under the BPA into this particular complaint that has been put
forward. As well, the police are
conducting their own investigation under their jurisdiction.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, as of this morning, the police
had not even been notified of any‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Question, please.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question
to the same minister. The Better
Business Bureau has had 164 complaints of this nature. How many complaints does it take for this
minister to act?
Mrs. McIntosh:
Mr.
Speaker, this minister, this government and this department is acting.
I said to the member just a moment
ago that we are in the midst of an investigation, that some handful of
complaints had been put forward to the Consumers' Bureau, which is
investigating them. The Consumers'
Bureau, as you know, works in close conjunction with the police on this and
many different issues on a very constant basis.
Indeed, we have four special constables in the Consumers' Bureau.
The case is under investigation
under the BPA, an act which we brought in, not brought in by the members
opposite, and when that investigation is complete, there will be some end that
we can speak of. At the moment, there is
no end we can speak of.
We are in the middle of an
investigation, and we do not jeopardize, pre‑empt or prejudge something
we are in the middle of doing.
Records Seizure
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, this minister is asleep at the
switch.
Does the minister expect to be able
to recover this company's records? Why
did the minister not order the seizure of records of the firm under Section 15
of this act?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and
Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to see the member
quoting the act he was so critical of when we brought it in.
I will say again that we are in the
midst of an ongoing investigation. There
frequently is in this House an attempt to raise and discuss issues which have
the potential to be jeopardized by discussion in the midst of investigations
that have potential for legal ramifications at the end.
Health Care System User
Fees
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, on April 22, 1991, the Minister
of Health criticized the Liberal Leader (Mrs. Carstairs) for calling for user
fees in health care. We agree with him.
There should not be user fees in health care, yet this government has placed
user fees on home care supplies, northern patient transportation, and now the
government is suggesting it for the dental care program.
Why does this government say one
thing about user fees and do another thing?
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, it is with regret that I reject
my honourable friend's preamble, question and facts presented.
Mr. Chomiak:
Mr. Speaker, I will ask the minister again, why has this government
decided to put user fees‑‑and I got two calls from ostomy patients
myself this morning.
Why have they put user fees on home
care supplies, northern patient transportation and are now suggesting it for
the dental care program? They sound like
federal Tories now.
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, let me correct my honourable
friend about a factual error in his question.
He suggested that government, myself, is suggesting user fees in the
Children's Dental Health Program. My
honourable friend was at the meeting; so was the Liberal Health critic, the
member for
Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, in
terms of some of the budgetary changes that we announced wherein individuals
will contribute toward the cost of ostomy supplies and other areas, we surveyed
the practice and the policies of neighbouring provinces and provinces across
I repeat and I reiterate that many
of the contributions that we are implementing are consistent with contributions
in
* (1355)
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, the people who are paying those
do not care whether they are called contributions.
My final supplementary to the
minister is: Why does the minister's own
briefing book‑‑and I will table a copy of the minister's briefing
book‑‑call these user fees contributions, when his own briefing
book calls them user fees and says we should have a communications strategy to
deal with this, Mr. Speaker?
Mr. Orchard:
Mr.
Speaker, it is quite obvious that my honourable friend received, in error, an
old and rejected copy of my briefing book.
Health Care System
St. Boniface Community
Services
Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Health.
A year and a half ago, in October
1991, I wrote to the minister asking about the transfer of home care and mental
health workers from the St. Boniface office to downtown
My question to the minister: I am starting to worry about those empty
promises to provide me and my constituents with this information, but I will
ask him again today. When will the
community workers return to St. Boniface?
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, with all the apologies I can
muster to my honourable friend, I will provide that information to him, as I
indicated I would and did not the last time he posed the question.
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Speaker, I know the minister likes
recommendations or proposals. Since he
has closed departments at St. Boniface Hospital, there would be space available
there.
Will the minister confirm today that
it still remains the intent of his government to have these regional home care
and mental health workers work out of the community in St. Boniface?
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, that is the intention, yes.
Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Speaker, L'Association des residants du
Vieux Saint‑Boniface met with the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister
of Health and Mr. Bernard Blais on March 16, and they were guaranteed at that
time a response of a letter within two weeks. As of last night, there has been
no answer.
When will the L'Association des
residants du Vieux Saint‑Boniface receive a response from the Minister of
Health?
Mr. Orchard:
Mr. Speaker, I believe that group, if I have the correct group with the
correct name, met with the deputy minister in that regard.
New Careers
Program Funding
Reduction Justification
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, one of the consistent education
policies of this government has been to take away from those who have the
least, to cut away the first rung on the ladder of change‑‑student
social allowances, the core area training programs, the ACCESS programs, and
now it is evident that New Careers has been cut by $1.7 million or 35 percent.
Will the Minister of Education tell
the House why she cut a program with such a high retention rate which affected
communities throughout
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member that we
certainly remain committed to the concepts of the New Careers program, but
government had to make a number of very difficult decisions across government.
So, yes, there has been some
reduction in the area, but I will tell her that we are still committed to the
method and to the delivery style.
* (1400)
Staffing
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell us what
will be the impact on the program of the loss of nine staff years, when one of
the keys to the success of that program was those competent community‑based
counsellors and supervisors?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, that
section of my department is now under a reorganization. We have taken in other programs from the
Department of Family Services and the Department of Labour.
We are looking for the delivery of a
continuum of educational programs, and we look to make sure that the kinds of
programs and the offerings delivered in New Careers will continue to be within
that continuum of service.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell us how
many of those people who have already been cut were aboriginal?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Speaker, again, when we are in the Estimates of the Department of
Education, I will be happy to look in detail at the staffing of the New Careers
section of my department.
Gaming Report
Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister
responsible for Lotteries. We have seen
in this province a series of flip‑flops and ad hoc decisions on lotteries
and gaming policy in this province.
Today's announcements follow that pattern.
My question to the minister is: What happened to the study on gaming that the
minister announced in February? If she
has received a copy of the study, will she table it in the House today?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister charged with
the administration of The
I have not received the results of
that study yet. As we receive it and
look at ways and means to deal with some of the problems and find solutions, I
will be announcing those.
Lottery Revenues
Rural
Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, this is my supplementary
question. Today's announcements by the
Minister of Lotteries and Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) cover
only a fraction of the money drained from rural
I want to ask the minister: What further announcements can rural
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister charged with
the administration of The
Some of the money that has been
generated by video lottery terminals in rural
Break-Open Compensation
Program
Revenue Source
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
We have the minister having another
idea, Mr. Speaker. If we go back to the
government's last budget proposal, they said 65 percent of the revenues would
go for deficit reduction, 25 percent would, in fact, be going toward the REDI
program and 10 percent back to the municipalities.
My question to the minister is: Where is this $500,000 going to be coming
from?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister charged with
the administration of The
Mr. Speaker, I question the member
for
I question where the member for
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. Are we finished
yet? Are we ready to proceed with
Question Period now?
Mr. Lamoureux:
Mr. Speaker, I must thank the minister for the advertisement. At least I have a plan, something this
government does not have.
Administration
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member has put his question.
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister charged with
the administration of The
The fact of the matter is, Mr.
Speaker, the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation, I believe, is already looking at
having those cheques in the mail this afternoon or by tomorrow at the very
latest.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister charged with
the administration of The
In fact, when video lottery
terminals come into the city of
Canadian Wheat Board
Barley Marketing
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Can the Minister of Agriculture now
tell us his position? Is he going to stand
up with Canadian farmers, defend their position and retain the monopoly of the
Canadian Wheat Board?
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, what we are looking for, at least
what my office is looking for, is to determine what the real facts are and what
the truths are in all the studies that have been put out on this particular
issue. There are a number of issues that we have to address. Are we maximizing the opportunity to sell in
that market? Are we maximizing the
return at the farm gate?
We are looking at the various
proposals, the various studies, the assumptions they have taken, the
conclusions they have drawn, and we are also asking the Wheat Board in terms of
their interpretation of the studies and what they mean.
Our emphasis is on what is best for
the farmers of
Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, since the minister has said he
still needs time to study, will he lobby the federal Minister of Agriculture
not to make any hasty decisions, and will he also lobby him to have a
plebiscite so that Canadian producers can have input into a change?
Mr. Findlay:
Mr. Speaker, I have written the federal Minister of Agriculture and
advised him that he should look at all studies that have been done before any
decisions are even contemplated.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Will the Minister of Agriculture stand up and support Canadian farmers
and defend the Wheat Board and defend the transportation system we have, and
will he not be so anxious to give away all those supports as his federal
counterparts are?
Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, in case that member has not
noticed, we are going through an awful lot of change in our industry, and we
had better spend time analyzing all the pros and cons. She does not want to do that. She just says no to everything, stand still,
put your head in the sand.
My point of view is to be sure we
know the facts before making any particular move one way or the other.
[interjection] Well, the Leader of the Opposition, he goes like this. Well, when we get all the facts in front of
us‑‑and I am talking to all the players. I want to talk to all the players on all the
issues. Things are not as black and
white as that member would like them to be.
Lakeshore Women's
Resource Centre
Funding Review
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, we have seen this government cut
funding to resource and crisis centres where increased needs for services to
women and children have grown over the many years.
Mr. Speaker, I want to quote the
director of the Lakeshore Women's Resource Centre in Ashern, Mrs. Lori
Remple: The province is really only
paying lip service to the zero tolerance of abuse against women and children,
for it keeps on cutting funding.
My question to the Minister of
Family Services: Will the minister not
only review the funding to this centre and others in
* (1410)
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family
Services): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to talk
about our commitment to the Family Dispute Services.
Over the last number of years, we
have increased that funding by 262 percent‑‑that is 262
percent. We have stabilized that funding
by offering a better balance between grants and per diems so that all shelters
are on a stable footing.
We funded the first crisis shelter
for native women in
Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Speaker, that does not do anything for
the Lakeshore Resource Centre in Ashern.
Staffing
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): How can the minister defend the funding cuts
to this centre when the number of clients has increased over 400 percent and
the need for that centre alone is two and a half full‑time staff people,
and now they are down to 15 hours a week?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family
Services): I am puzzled how the member cannot recognize
the commitment we have put forward when I have indicated that we have increased
that funding by 262 percent for the services offered by resource centres and by
shelters across the province over the last number of budgets.
Family Crisis Centres
Transition Housing
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to this
minister: Can he tell this House, does
his department have a policy regarding transition housing and programs for
women and children? If he does, can we
see it?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family
Services): I am sorry the member did not join about 10 of
his colleagues in Estimates where we discussed these things in some detail.
In the various communities where we
have shelters, we also have some access to transitional housing. I would be pleased to bring that information
forward again for the benefit of the member.
ROSE Inc.
Funding
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, Anne's Care Home in Rorketon has
provided sensitive care to severely handicapped clients for many years in
Rorketon. Now this care is being taken
away by this minister who is transferring them to ROSE Inc. in Ste. Rose.
I want to ask the minister whether
he can tell this House how much provincial money is being spent on establishing
ROSE Inc. in Ste. Rose. I asked the
minister in Estimates. He said he would
provide these answers, and I would like to have them today.
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family
Services): Mr. Speaker, we did have the opportunity to
discuss this in Estimates. We have
talked about the need to provide the best training programs for those
individuals. In the view of the
professional staff who are working with those clients, they are making a change
in their day programming.
The detailed answer the member asked
for the other day in Estimates we will provide for him in due course.
Mr. Plohman:
Mr. Speaker, I asked the minister whether he would provide the amounts
that Community Places and the Community Services Council were providing to
establish ROSE Inc.
I also asked him how he could
justify per‑diem increases from $8.94 per day which they are paying to
Anne's Care Home in Rorketon, increased to $21.22 for ROSE Inc., an increase of
$18,000 for those four clients, when they are receiving tender care and love
from the current home they are in in Rorketon at the present time.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, the question the member asked on
Monday was to get some detail from another department on Community Places grants
and the Community Services Council, and we will be providing that in due
course.
This is a bit of a surprise. It is the first time a member of the
opposition has said that we are spending too much money on our clients. What we are doing is finding the most
appropriate service for those clients in a different setting.
Mr. Plohman:
Mr. Speaker, if this minister calls cleaning parks, cleaning up garbage‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member for Dauphin, with your question now, please.
Mr. Plohman:
I
want to ask this minister to outline the program that he calls enriched
programming, Mr. Speaker, that would justify the expenditure from $8.94 to
$21.22 per day for these clients.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I have indicated to the member
that we rely on our professional staff to find the most appropriate day
programming and work stations for our clients.
It is always a challenge to find
those appropriate work stations, and I would be pleased to provide more
detailed information to the member on the exact nature of those work stations.
Youth Employment
Programs
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, it is the time of year when many
young people are attempting to get summer employment, and it is another tough
year, particularly in the North and particularly in remote northern
communities. Since this government came
to office in 1988, it has cut back a number of summer employment programs. There are fewer jobs created today than there
were then, and it is particularly tough in remote communities.
I would like to ask the Premier (Mr.
Filmon): Given the fact that in many
communities, there simply are not any summer jobs, will the Premier consider
reinstating the Northern Youth Corps Program and reinstating criteria for
CareerStart that would allow for the different circumstances in communities
that do not have any ability to contribute financially themselves, but where
there is a great need for youth employment, particularly in the upcoming summer
months?
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern
Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from
the member. However, I think it was
obvious, when we came to office, the lack of co‑operation and support by
the government to northern communities, particularly young people, which caused
my colleague the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs.
Mitchelson), with the Lotteries program, to implement a recreation program to
help create employment and provide opportunities for those individuals.
As well, I have just provided some
$50,000 to the remote northern fly‑in camps to support training of young
people over the summer months in a productive, meaningful way.
Mr. Ashton:
Mr.
Speaker, when this government came into power, they cut back the North in terms
of the summer swim program for‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. I would remind the
honourable member for Thompson, this is not a time for debate. The honourable member for Thompson, with your
question.
Mr. Ashton:
Mr.
Speaker, I will ask a very specific question.
I asked about the young people in remote northern communities where
there just are not going to be the summer jobs.
I am asking the Premier (Mr.
Filmon): Will he intervene and ensure
there will be some summer employment so that young people in those communities
will have some hope this summer?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, unlike the member when he sat as
the member for many years with the unresolve of the Northern Flood program
which we have advanced and provided funds for in some of the northern
communities, unlike the former government that could not see fit to provide
overland line hydro service to some 11 northern remote communities which
creates employment for those many people‑‑our record will be put
against those individuals who were in government, and I am prepared to back our
record compared to theirs anytime.
Mr. Ashton:
Mr. Speaker, this is a final question, and I would like an answer from
the Premier (Mr. Filmon) or the Minister of Northern Affairs. I asked about young people. I asked about summer jobs.
What are they going to do to ensure
there are opportunities for young people in remote northern communities this
summer?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, again, unlike the former
administration who were unable for some 10 years to resolve any of the Northern
Flood claims, unlike for some 30 years in the Chemawawin area, in the
Those communities have funds to
spend on their young people to create employment in their communities on their
own, not always looking to government for support.
Mr. Speaker:
The time for Oral Questions has expired.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister
of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and
the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be
granted Her Majesty.
Motion presented.
MATTERS OF GRIEVANCE
Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for giving me this
privilege to present my grievance during this session of the House. Before I do, I want to say and rate certain
things according to my personal experiences.
When I go to a supermarket and I am
wearing my coat and a tie, I am almost always mistaken as a store clerk. So the clients will ask me, how much are
these pineapples, sir? I used to say,
sorry, I do not work here. But if the
same incident happened to me now, I will say, and smile‑‑if they
ask me how much the pineapples are, I will say, four for a dollar, just to
express my feeling of resentment and sentiment against the Superstores.
Another incident was, an Anglo‑Saxon
called me a Chink. I said to him, if you
choose to be a racist, you might as well be correct in your terminology. I am not Chinese, so it is better that you
use the proper term. Instead of using
"Chink" you should use "Flip," and you could be correct.
* (1420)
Mr. Speaker, when a stranger asks
me, how are you, I look at myself and then honestly I cannot say how I am. I do not know what he means. I do not know, during that particular day,
whether my blood pressure is up or my cholesterol is down or my sugar level is
down. I do not really know how I am, so
I just smile.
All these experiences, Mr. Speaker,
convey to me that there are some heathen attitudes in the minds of people that
are not usually expressed, but once in a while they come out.
There was an incident last week
where these heathen suppressed attitudes and feelings did come out. Therefore, I am taking this opportunity, Mr.
Speaker, to grieve on behalf of Esmeralda Bautista's six‑year‑old
boy who had been subjected to such an excruciating experience such that his
youthful developing self‑esteem has been aborted, and also I grieve on
behalf of the integrity of other youths similarly situated.
The boy, being also a member of a
visible minority group in our society, I take this opportunity as a member of
the same group to grieve on their behalf as well, for all those members of the
visible minority groups who had suffered similar treatment, destructive of
their personal integrity.
I also grieve on behalf of all
members of the ethnic groups, particularly workers in our sectors of our
industry who suffered unfair treatment in their employment or in their
reemployment opportunities.
I also grieve on behalf of the poor,
the welfare recipients, the economically disadvantaged, particularly single
mothers who are sometimes ill treated by their caseworkers and by supervisors.
Finally, I also grieve on behalf of
senior citizens who, as residents of nursing homes or other groups homes, are
sometimes victims of physical, emotional, financial and other types of abuses.
Now, what are the facts behind this
story and the incident that was the direct cause of the demonstration of a
sizable number of people against the SuperValu store. The facts are these: Esmeralda Bautista and her six‑year‑old
son were at the McPhillips SuperValu store.
A male cashier accused the little boy of stealing gum. The clerk, without the consent of the mother,
searched the boy's pocket but found no gum.
Allegedly, the search was followed by an utterance to the effect that
all you Filipinos are thieves.
A witness by the name of Lee‑Anne
Thomas, who was nearby, witnessed the search without the consent of the mother,
but she said she did not hear any racist slur.
Because of this allegation of the wholesale condemnation of all the
members of a particular group, the Council of Filipino Organizations of
Between some 1,500 to 2,000 Filipino‑Canadians
showed up to show their community displeasure to the SuperValu store's
employee's behaviour. They were joined
by other ethnic groups, member of the Manitoba Intercultural Council, and even
some politicians.
I would like to talk and take this
opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to elucidate on the concept of ethnic identity in a
multicultural society, to review some of the major competing theories
concerning ethnic identity in the larger mainstream society, and how we can
achieve the ideals of formal justice and equality in our society, particularly
equality of opportunity, in the sense of being the subject of equal treatment,
as well as being treated as an equal.
I would like to review also some
notions of justice, like distributive justice, compensatory justice, procedural
justice and the role of affirmative action, if necessary, as a tool of public
policy to restore initial inequality that has been sanctioned by traditional
practice and institutionalized and embedded in our system.
I would like, therefore, to start
with the notion or concept of ethnic identity.
What do we mean by ethnic identity?
There are at least two meanings attached to the concept of ethnic
identity. The first most popular one was
an idea of the psychologist Eric Erikson, who said that the concept of ethnic
identity represents the individual's personal identification in terms of the
prototypes or models available in society to fix the location that he or she
has in history in time and space.
This identity is formed through the
internalization of the models of the self, the prototypes of what is desirable
and what is not, of what is good and what is evil. It is incorporated such that the identity is
assimilated in the particular social setting.
It implies that one's notion of self‑identity, a concept of ethnic
identity, that it is not just in the conscious level of human consciousness,
but lies deeper into his psyche.
The alternative conception is the
contemporary social psychologist theory of what they call self‑concept. That is to say, the social world consists of
different social categories and membership in those categories, and every
individual must define for himself or herself what his self‑image is in
terms of these various categories of social life. Thus, a particular individual may
simultaneously be a male, Polish, a father, a plumber, whatsoever categories
there are in the society in the social setting.
Some of them are loaded with
emotional elements which determine self‑esteem derived from his own image
of himself and of other people's expectation of his present or future
behaviour. Whether or not the individual
as a human being will subscribe to his particular self‑image is a
question of commitment, the degree of investment that he is willing to grant to
others and the particular social costs of renouncing his own identity.
It follows that one's notion of self‑image,
self‑concept must be linked to the other elements in society such as
prevailing interests, dominant interests, family connections and fellow
feelings with other ethnic groups of his own kind. But the dominant ingredient is one's own
satisfaction and security that the person usually finds when he is among those
who are like himself.
* (1430)
Therefore, there are various social
structures in our society like structures of friendship groups, family units
and organizations to which the individual considers himself a part, such that
the members of any group shares the group's history, their distinctive values,
their point of view about life and the rituals of their social life.
The search for ethnic identity does
not stop with the family. It has to find
other social settings where the individual can freely air and discuss matters
pertaining to his ethnicity. He feels
safe at home in the old neighbourhood where he thinks he belongs.
Now let me review the major
competing theories about social identity of human beings. The first major theory is that propounded by
Herbert Gans in his work, The Urban Villagers.
It conceives of ethnicity, defines ethnicity as a working and lower‑class
style of living. It follows that
ethnicity is the strongest among the socially disadvantaged groups, but it is
gradually and slowly eroded by social and geographical mobility.
In an open society like ours in
The underlying premise of this view
of ethnicity as a working lower‑class style of life is that there is a
correspondence between the working and lower classes in society and their work
and their residence such that their ethnicity is conceived and considered to be
the principal determinant of their chances in life and of their own lifestyle
of living.
Therefore, it is reflected in their
family networks, in their neighbourhood base, networks that define the
character of the lower and the working class groups of people in a particular
community. It carries the implication
that ethnicity and ethnic identity is much more salient and stronger and more
intense among the lower socioeconomic groups than among the higher social
classes.
The members presumably are
suppressing their feelings of ethnicity in order that they can freely mix with
people of very widely differing ethnic backgrounds. It suggests that there is a connection
between class position, ethnically based network and identity and that their
social networks are primarily family based and this can be tested empirically. The competing theory of ethnic identity is
advanced by Glazer and Moniyhan, and this is called the politicization of
ethnicity.
Daniel Bell, noted social scientist,
advanced the argument that politics is increasingly replacing the market
mechanism as the chief instrument for the distribution of advantages in
society. Therefore, since politics
considers only group claims and not individual claims, there is a need and an
imperative for ethnic group consciousness.
But others said, the politicization
of ethnic groups is just an intrinsic feature of the growing complexity of our
society, which is in its advanced stage known now as the post‑industrial
society.
According to this view, the ethnic
identity of people is strongly linked to political attitudes, to political
participation and to collective behaviour.
More likely than not, the ethnic group members will be involved in some
political causes within or beyond the national boundaries; for example, the
involvement of the Irish with the status of the Catholics in Northern Ireland
or of the Jewish people with the case of the state of Israel.
Some claim that ethnicity is
sometimes a revival of the old identities after they have adapted to the new
molds of life in the new society that they have adopted for themselves. In other words, Hansen advanced the
proposition that what the son wishes to forget, the grandson wishes to
remember, saying that usually in the third generation there is a revival of
one's own ethnic identity after they have successfully adjusted to the present
style of life in the society of the country which they have adopted for
themselves, such that there is a perception of renewed interest bound up with
ethnic language, for example, ethnic literature, with ritual, ethnic festivals
and the celebration of their ethnicity.
As proof of this, in our university
structure, for example, you will find certain departments, like Icelandic
studies in The University of Manitoba, emphasizing the study of a particular
ethnic culture.
Others say, this is merely
symbolic. The people actually want to
identify but only in a symbolic sense; they turn to the occasional feeling of
identity, eating the ethnic food and participating in their cultural
activities, with really no political significance.
Given that our society is
multiracial and multiethnic and there are varying differences and distinctions
among various groups in society, there are certain features or characteristics
that many people cannot explain in a rational way. For example, I myself do not understand‑‑I
was born as a Catholic‑‑why it was prohibited to eat meat on Friday
or at least during the holy day weekdays, and I was told when I was young, if
you eat meat, you go straight to hell. I
would be ashamed if I reached the place, along with murderers and rapists and
child molesters, when they ask me, what are you in here for? I would probably be ashamed to say, I had a
Big Mac. So there are certain cultural
characteristics that cannot be explained by the rational mind, but they are
part of our cultural upbringing.
Because of these differences in
behaviour and characteristics and qualities, it is sometimes difficult for some
groups of people to make the necessary adjustment, especially in a society like
ours, which is a model that we call the mosaic model of society, as
distinguished from the model of society dominant across the border which is the
assimilative model of society where everybody is supposed to merge and forget
their past identities and become simply an American. Here we are allowed to retain and maintain
our particular unique characteristics and qualities and even get some
government funding for maintaining your own traditional features and
characteristics. I do not know what the
disadvantages or advantages are of these two competing models of society, but
we have chosen our own model and we have to, for example, accept the
consequences flowing from such an acceptance.
* (1440)
What is meant by formal justice as a
principle, as a doctrine, in modern civilized society? According to Perelman, formal justice is the
principle in which beings of one and the same category must be treated in the
same way. In other words, persons
similarly situated should be treated similarly.
I say, if justice means equality of one individual with any other
individual, and equal treatment as such, who is to be equal with whom? We must be equal to every other individual in
a certain sense, or one group must be equal to every other group in another
sense; but we must understand another element of the notion of equality
relationship, which is the domain of equality.
The domain of equality refers to
things that are to be distributed and allocated equally, but there are only
certain classes of things that are recognized to be allocated equally, for we
know that the doctrine of equality is not factually based. In fact, it is a doctrine that is contrary to
what we actually observe in life, to the biological and social fact of life.
I have alluded to this before in the
sense that it is simply a moral rule of conduct. This doctrine of equality is, in fact,
counterfactual in the sense it does not depend on its validity upon the
empirical fact of what we can observe around us.
To put it in the correct
phraseology, it is prescriptive equality rather than descriptive equality,
because you can hardly claim as a factual, empirical description that people
are equal in appearance, in physical strength, in intelligence, level of
intelligence and other observable characteristics. Even identical twins are not equal in any
sense because there is at least some single identifying quality that
distinguishes one of the pair from the other.
When Thomas Jefferson said in the
American Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal, he was not
describing human beings in their natural setting. He was making a declarative statement. He was making an exhortation, a command that
we should treat people as if they were equal, although we know fully well that
they are not.
In other words, it is an ethical and
a political doctrine. That doctrine emerged as a reaction, as a moral weapon
against the privileges of status and the privileges of birth that had been
characteristic of the old feudal order of society. At the very least, this doctrine of equality
condemns the use of differences based on the status of birth or on family
status or on sex or on gender.
We know that even the traditional
political philosophers, like Hobbes and Locke, have accepted the basic
inequality. In the sense of Hobbes, he
mentioned and sanctioned clearly and accepted clearly the doctrine of the
enormous inequalities in which begin the power of the sovereign and the power
of the subject. Whereas with Locke
himself, his own brand of liberalism justified the great inequalities in the
distribution of property; the consent of the use of money was assumed. There are these political and economic
inequalities that are all the time present in the social system. What we are trying to prevent and to preclude
in our society is the American or what we call the first order type of
discrimination.
* (1450)
If the society is riddled with
racism and discrimination such that it is curtailing the opportunities and
rights of minorities to equal opportunity of obtaining a job or securing secure
economic stability in their family or in their home life, then that society
will be risking substantial social unrest.
If no remedy can be found, people in the workforce would likely be so
frustrated that in all likelihood there might erupt some violent reaction in
certain sectors and segments of society.
What we are looking for, therefore,
is some kind of a formula by which we can find and restore the situation of
equal opportunity without at the same time bolstering and accepting the
recurrence of first order discriminatory treatment.
Ronald Dworkin had offered this
utilitarian formula when he mentioned two fundamental rules or principles which
make a distinction between what he calls the right to equal treatment as
against the right to be treated as an equal.
The right to equal treatment Dworkin defines as the right to equal
distribution of some goods or some benefits.
So, if a person has the right to some equal distribution of anything,
then he has satisfied the concept of right to equal distribution.
On the other hand, the right to be
treated as an equal refers to something else.
It is not a right to receive any particular good or benefit, but rather
it is the right to be treated with the same respect and the same concern as is
offered to anybody else. In this
respect, to any member of our society it is very significant that he be
accorded the right to be treated equally. That is to say, we should give due
respect to every member of our society.
We should give due concern to his or her own interest just like anybody
else. That is what is known as
integrity.
If those who are in positions of
temporary authority in society are by their behaviour not following this rule
of equal treatment, then there will be what we call discriminatory treatment,
which is a defect in the social relationship in a society we call a democratic
society. However, in certain respects
under particular circumstances, if the overall gain to the community is greater
than the overall loss, there might be some form of public policy which may be
looked upon as a departure from equal treatment. That is in accordance with distributive
justice, the distribution of public goods by public authorities to every member
of society.
It is required, according to
Aristotle, that a government acting as the public authority should act
equitably in the distribution of public goods and services among the members of
society, among the citizens. For
example, this government: If this
government in its function as the temporary governor or ruler in this province
are distributing educational opportunities in an inequitable way, as evidenced
by their larger allocation of public resources to some segment of the private
school system, and then depriving the public school system of such financial
support, then we can say that the government is not acting equitably and is
violating distributive justice because it is placing greater opportunity to
certain segments of the population and less and less opportunity to other
segments of the population.
If it is the poorer elements of our
society who are least able to sustain and support themselves in order to
improve their well‑being by the pursuit of educational opportunities,
then we can conclude that such a government, if such be the case, is even
oppressive in the sense that it is taking the opportunity from those who are
least able to have the opportunity because of lack of resources to improve
themselves as citizens of the country or the state.
It is therefore very difficult for
any group in temporary position of authority and rule in society to make the
equitable distribution of goods and services because of this constant intrusion
of the idea of self‑interest and self‑protection. No ruler is entirely devoid of self‑interest,
and if they consider themselves as part of some particular group in society
they would eventually subconsciously, whether they are doing it deliberately or
not, be diverting the public resources for the benefit of those groups by which
they identify themselves. That leads to
the institutionalized inequalities because the rule makers now are the ones who
make the rules, and they are the ones who enforce the rules, and they are the
ones who interpret the rules.
They are making all these rules, all
in favour of some particular group and against other groups in society. How can that be rectified? Even if you appeal to the institutions of any
particular society, the occupants of those positions in those institutions to arbitrate
all these disputes of inequality and justice are in themselves the guardians of
those interests, of this group that they wish to protect.
Hence, this debate about the wisdom
of new forms of public policy like affirmative action policy. Affirmative action relates to a conception
and an idea and a principle which attempts to bring the members of the
underrepresented groups, usually those groups that have suffered discriminatory
treatments in the past, into a higher benefit, a higher degree of participation
in some beneficial program just to rectify their historical underrepresentation. Some affirmative action programs may include
preferential treatment. Other
affirmative action programs may not include preferential treatment.
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member's time has expired.
* * *
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker:
On the grievance? Okay.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I was wanting to comment on the
issue of gambling this afternoon, but just prior to doing that I want to add a
couple of remarks to what the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) has put onto
the record. [interjection] My apologies, the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos).
The incident that had occurred a
couple of weeks ago, in fact, occurred to a constituent of mine, and, Mr.
Speaker, I can somewhat understand in terms of why it is that so many people
are very upset. I know on the day of the
incident I received a telephone call from my constituent expressing some
concerns about what had occurred at the Superstore, and I believe that
something did in fact occur. From what I
understand and in talking to the mother of the child, the cashier had searched
the six‑year‑old child's pocket, which is, in fact, a clear
violation. That today is not being
questioned, and I understand the store itself has apologized for that.
* (1500)
The greater issue is the one of the
racial slur that has been alleged that occurred. I talked to the lady shortly after the
incident and believe that something in fact did occur because she did not have any
reason to give me a call. We discussed
it for 15 to 20 minutes over the telephone, and the suggestion that I had made
to her at the time was to look at bringing it to the Human Rights Commission,
to possibly getting a lawyer to look into the aspect of the search in the
pockets.
What disturbs me about this whole
issue has been the lack of action from the Superstore in dealing with and
trying to come to grips with this issue with this one particular
community. I would argue that it has an
impact on all of the different ethnic communities, and I would only hope that
Superstore will come to grips with this particular issue, sit down with some of
the community leaders and, particularly, the family, the mother, and the
grandmother, and try to resolve it.
I just wanted to say those very few
words on it and go right on to the grievance and the purpose as to why it is I
wanted to stand up today.
Mr. Speaker, today in Question
Period, once again we have seen an announcement from a government in a very ad
hoc way in dealing with an issue that has been ongoing for the last number of
years.
I want to do a bit of
backtracking. We all recall, Mr.
Speaker, when the casino was first announced, the
(Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the
Chair)
Shortly after the casino, we had the
government announce the VLTs. There were
two reasons why they brought in the VLTs.
One was for the hotel industry scattered throughout rural
Now, with respect to the hotel
industry, Madam Deputy Speaker, it has been very successful. You have seen that the number of individuals
attending these rural hotels where the VLTs are has gone up. You will find very few complaints from within
the industry in terms of the impact of the VLTs with respect to attendance at
their local facilities.
The issue I was wanting to talk
about, on the second one, is with respect to why it is they brought‑‑the
second issue‑‑in the VLTs.
That was justified by saying, again, all revenues and proceeds would go
back into rural
Then, we are going to go on by about
a year when we start seeing some of the numbers coming in. We see the numbers, in and around $30
million, coming out of rural
Madam Deputy Speaker, this is in
fact what the government has done. If we
say, what role or what are the government's intentions on gambling, I would
argue that the plan for gambling is to raise revenue. You know, when the minister stood up today
and she made reference to the four casinos, I am going to comment on that,
because there is a difference in terms of what it is that I am proposing as a
leadership candidate for the Liberal Party and what the government is in fact
doing.
Their gambling is based on nothing
more than additional revenues brought into government. That is the reason why they have the
VLTs. That is the reason why they have
the casino. They try to tie it to other issues in order to squash the debate on
gambling itself.
Madam Deputy Speaker, what I have
tried to do, through a campaign of my own in consultation with many Manitobans,
is come up with what I believe is a responsible plan in dealing with the issue
of gambling. Something, as a critic, I
have been asking the government to do is to present to Manitobans what it is
that they really want from gambling instead of making these ad hoc
decisions. Well, what is it that I and
my campaign committee have come up with?
We have suggested that we would introduce a casino in the Gull Harbour
Resort. We have also suggested that
other potential facilities, up to two more casinos that is, could be found in
rural
Tourism is the biggest key here,
what I want to focus on. You see, what we have said as a campaign is that the
gambling policy should be based on tourism, whereas this government's policy
has been to base gambling on increasing revenues for the government. I believe that there is a significant
difference. We do not know what the government is going to be coming up with
next.
We are suggesting, Madam Deputy
Speaker, that in fact there is a responsible approach to this whole issue that
could be taken. Hopefully, the
government will be following suit. The
Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) says, more casinos. I challenge
anyone in that government to stand up and say that there are not going to be
any more casinos, because if someone did say that, I would say that they are
not being truthful inside this Chamber.
We have heard rumours that this
government is looking at having a casino in
The government says, yes, well,
maybe we are. We have not ruled it
out. We have not ruled this out. We have not ruled that out. The government is not being straightforward
with Manitobans in dealing with this particular issue. Having said that, I wanted to comment on the
actual release that came out today. The
government has said in this release that $540,000 has now been put aside to
subsidize those nonprofit organizations that have been losing money as a direct
result.
Madam Deputy Speaker, we have been
saying for a long time now that when the government brought in the VLTs, there
was a very negative social impact. Part
of that impact has been the community centres, community clubs, curling rinks,
local community groups that are scattered throughout the province in terms of
their abilities to be able to raise funds.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the government
has now acknowledged that has in fact been a problem, and they have come up
with this $540,000. Today, we asked
questions with respect to where this $540,000 is going to come from, because,
after all, the government did commit 65 percent of the revenues to go towards
deficits from the VLTs, 25 percent to go towards the REDI program, 10 percent
to go back to the rural municipalities.
The minister, in her response, said
that the $540,000 is not going to be coming from the VLT revenues. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, again, this is
where I will say that they are kind of shuffling things around and trying to
hide what is actually going on. This is
$540,000 that could have possibly been used for the deficit reduction. This $540,000 is not what the government is saying,
by, we are going to be taking 65 percent of the VLT revenues and putting it
towards the deficit, and then saying, we are going to have $540,000 coming from
somewhere else. Where are they going to
be getting that additional money from?
* (1510)
So again what I would argue is that
the reason they tied that 65 percent into the deficit reduction is because they
believed the public is very sympathetic towards deficit reduction and they can
throw all of the money they want into deficit reduction. So, once again, what they are doing is they
are trying to legitimize the issues of VLT gambling by saying that any revenues
that are being created‑‑because now it is virtually unlimited,
especially if you factor in the VLTs that are going to be moved into city of
Winnipeg. If you factor that in, you are
talking about, probably in and around $60 million, $70 million a year that is
going to be generated. So they can put
all the money they want from the VLT revenues into the deficit, because the
deficit is not going to be taken away from VLT revenues.
Now, they are going to come up with
other programs in order to patch up, to fix up some of the things that have
occurred with the VLTs being instituted throughout the province.
Madam Deputy Speaker, if we look at
it and we say, in terms of, what are some of these social impacts that have
been occurring, they have been very numerous.
I have heard of tie‑ins with individuals who have committed
suicide, to individuals' children falling asleep while parents are playing video
lottery terminals, to individuals that are selling property in order to be able
to finance this habit they have acquired because of accessibility to these
machines. There are a number of things
that are happening as a direct result of the VLT machines being scattered
throughout the province.
I believe this is just one of those
issues in which the government has dealt, at least in part, with today in the
press release that they have issued out, but no doubt some time in the not‑too‑distant
future, we will have another press release to deal with another issue, another
negative social aspect of the VLT gambling out in rural Manitoba.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not believe that is
the best way of doing it. In fact, the
government should have had a better idea and known in terms of what was going
to occur by instituting or by putting in these VLT machines throughout the
province.
Again, it goes back to the idea of
this plan or lack of a plan from government.
I would ask‑‑and this is again the primary reason why I
chose to stand up today‑‑that the government be forward with the
people of Manitoba and tell us what it is they want to do with the issue of
gambling. Do they want to have gambling
VLT machines in more than just the hotels in rural
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is just
it. I do not believe that this
government knows what it is doing in dealing with this particular issue. This is why we believe, or I believe, that
what needs to happen is that this government has to come to grips with what it
wants to be able to do. Sitting where I
am and watching and following this debate as closely as I have over the last
few years, the only thing that I have concluded from this government is that
its primary reason for these VLTs and casinos is nothing more than to generate
revenue.
Madam Deputy Speaker, if in fact
that is the policy, then that is fine.
Government can say that, but I would ask that you do not try to confuse
the issue by tying it into rural economic development, health care, deficit
reduction and so forth, that you deal with the issue of gambling. Had the government been dealing with the
issue of gambling and consulted with different individuals throughout
There are some alternatives. For the hotel industry, if it is a question
of ensuring that they have patrons who are attending on a more regular basis,
one has to question in terms of, would not 5‑cent and 25‑cent VLT
machines suffice? Will it not still be
able to bring in or allow the hotel industry to survive if they need that form
of entertainment? Do you need to have
10, 12 machines located in each and every hotel? It takes four times as long to lose a quarter
as it does to lose a loonie.
There are some other alternatives
that could have been looked at that would have appeased the hotel industry, I
believe, had the government done its homework and consulted with Manitobans,
because you will find a vast number of rural Manitobans do not like having VLT
machines scattered throughout the province.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am not going
to say that tomorrow you walk in and you take out every VLT machine, because it
would be very easy to be able to make that sort of a statement if in fact the
will is to do that.
I believe what you can do is you can
put some limitations on it. You say that
there is only going to be whatever number of machines in rural Manitoba, that
no facility will have more than a set number of VLT machines, and that these
VLT machines are not to say that you are going to have the primary purpose of
generating revenue for government, so you can have things such as the 5‑cent
and 25‑cent machines outside, I would argue, of those designated casino
spots that I, in fact, am promoting.
I am going to promote those casinos,
Madam Deputy Speaker, because I do believe that, if we look to what is
happening in
I do not believe, Madam Deputy
Speaker, that any casino, for example, should be privately run; it has to be
run through the government. I believe,
as a specific example, that
Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that
there is a place for casinos in the
* (1520)
We have seen, I believe, the
province of Nova Scotia withdraw VLT machines, taking them out of circulation,
and this is something that I believe that the government of Manitoba should be
considering to do, that they should be cutting down on the number of VLT
machines that are out there, because, after all, as I say, the other reason for
it was to have it for the hotel industry, to help the hotel industry.
If this is going to help the hotel
industry in terms of surviving, maybe there is a compromise that can be
found. I would suggest that that
compromise would be in terms of a very limited number of VLT machines, and the
5 cent and 25 cent with the high payout, which will not lead to as many
individuals getting addicted to these machines, because, as I say, if you talk
to these rural Manitobans, you will find that they are very concerned about the
addiction and the problems they are having as a direct result.
If we saw the government move
towards the tourism‑‑and at least in part we have seen some
admission that it is not just for rural economic development and health care‑‑I
believe it would be a positive thing. I
wait for the next couple of years to see if in fact, or how in fact, this whole
issue develops.
It is very easy to criticize from
your seat when someone decides to take a position on the issue of
gambling. I know the government has not
taken a position. I know the NDP has not
taken a position on gambling.
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is
fine. If they do not want to take a
position on the issue of gambling, that is fine. I will continue to go out on the speaking
engagements that I do enter into and I will point that out, at least, that I am
quite prepared to take a responsible approach to dealing with gambling.
Far too often, governments have
tried to justify doing something by tying it into something nice, something
that is perceived as the public would support.
Whether it is federal government on the GST and using the GST to say
they are going to fight the deficit, or whether it is this government by now
saying that they are going to be fighting the deficit with the VLT revenues,
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is dishonest.
That is not the reason the money
that is being generated from either the GST or the VLTs‑‑there is
no sure thing to assure us that money is going to be definitely used for
deficit reduction. It might mean that they are going to use or spend money on a
different line all that much more, instead of cutting back on some other area,
or whatever it might be, or by spending more, that this would have been
additional revenue. It is a game of
deception to the public. I do not
support that. That is the reason why I
say the government should come clean in terms of what it is they are doing.
I had the opportunity to be out in
Neepawa. I saw a very clear example of
how government tries to sidestep an issue.
The Premier (Mr. Filmon) had announced and was very pleased to announce
that they had come up with this wonderful rural business program that would see
loans given to small business, entrepreneurs.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I agree. It is a wonderful program. The monies, of
course, were going to be coming from the REDI program. Well, you know, it really gets me when you
have the Premier announcing a program, a so‑called new program, when you
know the background to it, when you know that all the VLT revenues were
supposed to go back to rural Manitoba, and then when you find out that only 25
percent is going to be going to be going back in terms of rural economic
development. Then we are talking about a
commitment that is now going to be coming from that 25 percent.
So the government is coming up with
programs, the so‑called new programs that they are now going to go out to
rural Manitobans and say, look how wonderful we are. We are creating a program, and this program
is going to be coming from the REDI program.
The REDI program, we sold short.
We did not fulfill‑‑we did not come up with what our
original commitment was.
Madam Deputy Speaker, again, whether
it is the issue of gambling or some of the other issues that have been out
there, it is a sleight of hand and the art of deception. I guess that is, at least in part, how
governments have worked and have worked in the past and this government
continues to work. But it does not
necessarily mean that it is right. How
can you say one thing so very clearly and then a year and a half later be
making these announcements after you just finish kicking every rural Manitoban
in the stomach and then saying, oh, we are pulling out the foot and here it is
wonderful.
The member for Interlake (Mr. Clif
Evans) agrees on this point because that, in fact, is what this government is
doing. You are trying to say that you are a good government. This is what you are doing for rural
If the REDI program is a wonderful
program, I would argue that the government would have brought it in whether the
VLTs were there or not. Would you
not? Would not the government have done
that? If you did not have the VLTs,
would you not have brought in that program?
If, in fact, we say that it is a
good program‑‑and I say it is a good program. The government applauds when I say it is a
good program, but when it comes to the VLTs not being there, well, they are not
too sure how good of a program that really is.
What about issues with the
* (1530)
An Honourable Member: Where would we find the money, Kevin?
Mr. Lamoureux: Well, the minister says, where will we have
found the money? Madam Deputy Speaker,
that is part of the issue. Is the
government's line to increase revenues through VLTs, and I believe that is what
their line really is, to increase revenues. Yes? No? I
believe that is really what the line of this government is; it is to increase
the revenues.
If, in fact, that is the case, then
the will would have been there to have the REDI program and so forth. For the Minister for Lotteries (Mrs.
Mitchelson), the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), the casinos that I am
promoting are based on tourism, are based on providing some economic activity
in very selected, well‑thought‑out and planned areas.
An Honourable Member: So you would not put that money into a REDI
program then?
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Deputy Speaker, I am not going to
mislead rural Manitobans or individuals that live in the city of
I would have argued that the REDI
program is a worthy program, and this is the reason why I support it. But I do not believe that the government is
being honest by saying that the REDI program is only there because of the VLT
revenues, because if, in fact, they are saying that, I am bit disappointed.
I would like to think that rural
economic development is just as important, that that particular program would
be here today. You know, I looked at the member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans),
would he like to see that program here today whether the VLTs were here or
not? He says yes‑‑the member
for Interlake. At least one New Democrat
agrees with me that that program should be here whether or not VLTs are here or
not.
So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think
that is responsible; that is what I believe, too. The member for Interlake and I agree on
this. I only hope that this government
would come clean and agree with me, because I think that they really and truly
do agree with me. But they are not going
to admit it, because then they would be admitting that the VLTs and the casinos
have been absolutely nothing but a farce in terms of where the money has been
designated to. That is what they would
be admitting, indirectly.
Madam Deputy Speaker, only because I
have the minister right in front of me, I am going to give her the policy
direct, just because she is sitting right in front of me. [interjection] Oh,
she has read it. Okay, I will not read
it verbatim then into the record.
I would hope that she and her
government would only be as bold to say what it is that they would like, or
what direction they would like to take, gambling. I would be very pleased if the New Democrats
were only as bold, because after I was listening to the scrum, and it was asked
of the NDP critic of Lotteries, well, do you believe VLT machines should come
into the city of
Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe that
everyone wants to try to skate around this particular issue, and I am not going
to. I am not prepared to skate around
this issue. I am going to let,
hopefully, as many individuals in
Madam Deputy Speaker, I do believe
that is what Manitobans want to hear. If
you deal with an issue in itself that you do not try to divert the issue. If you do that, you are going to get much
better public input in terms of the issue itself. I know when I talk to some individuals about
the issue of gambling, the comments are entirely different than when I talk to
them about the issue of the REDI program or health care, entirely different
than when I talk to them about the issue of the REDI program, or health care,
entirely different.
I do not believe that you have to
tie them in together. The government has
tried to tie them in together by saying that we need those revenues in order to
pay for these programs. No, I would
argue that what the government is doing is that it is saying that we want more
revenues, and we are quite willing to take gambling dollars as revenue. Then they say, in order to prevent the public
from getting too upset with us, we are going to say that the revenue that is
being generated is going towards something that is real nice, real nice being
health care and rural economic development.
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is what
they tried to do‑‑
Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): That is just nice? That is not a good choice, to put the money
into health and into economic development?
Mr. Lamoureux:
To the member for St. Norbert, he brings up valid point. But we caught the government somewhat
unprepared because they did not expect so much money to come in from the VLTs. Then their priorities changed, and no longer
was it just good enough for rural economic development and health care, but now
they take 65 percent of it and say that is to fight the deficit, just in case
they get more and more money and they cannot come up with more good ideas in
which to designate it out to.
So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would
like to be able to conclude by suggesting to the government to be very clear
with Manitobans on what it is the government's intentions are with the issue of
gambling. That is what we want, some
sort of informative statement of policy from this government dealing with what
it is that they want, what direction that they want to take the
I only hope that they will look in
terms of what it is that I and my campaign are promoting, and that is to have‑‑[interjection]
Well, read the booklet, because if you read the booklet you will find out, or
just ask the minister. She has a copy of
it, and I am sure she will be happy to give it‑‑
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
The honourable member's time has expired.
* * *
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is on the motion
moved by the honourable government House leader (Mr. Manness) that Mr. Speaker
do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider
of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.
Motion agreed to, and the House resolved
itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty
with the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for
the Department of Education and Training; and the honourable member for
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent Sections)
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order.
This afternoon, this section of the
Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will resume consideration of the
Estimates of Education and Training.
When the committee last sat it had been considering item 1.(c)(1) on
page 34 of the Estimates book.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): When we were last together, I had agreed to
table at our next sitting the submission that the Department of Education made
to the Northern Manitoba Economic Development Commission. I would like to table those now.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Thank you.
Shall the item pass?
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I thank the minister for that.
We were looking, at the end of the
last time, about the possible submissions or absence of a similar submission to
the Rural Economic Development commission.
So I wanted to pursue that issue with the minister. Why did the department choose not to make
such a submission?
Mrs. Vodrey: I
can tell you that the department was specifically asked to make a response to
the Northern Economic Development Commission.
We were not specifically requested as a department to make a response to
the rural commission; however, we did send representatives to their meeting in
Neepawa. Also, as I have said, our
Distance Education task force did have contact.
I understand theirs was not a formal
submission but that there was contact with our Distance Education task force
and that rural economic development commission.
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, could the minister tell us what the substance of
her advice would be in the sense of developing educational policy in rural
* (1550)
Mrs. Vodrey:
Again, in looking at the issues of rural
As I said the last time we spoke
about Distance Education, one of the issues that was discussed with our
Distance Education task force was that Distance Education need not be just
confined to the K to 12 side of the department, but that people, particularly
in rural Manitoba, said that they would be interested in access to Distance
Education for some, in some cases, short‑term training programs as
well. Some people mentioned specific
kinds of programs they might be interested in, such as business administration
kinds of programs, accounting programs that would be of help to them in their
businesses, particularly in some cases in farming.
In terms of rural
In addition, we also have looked to
support rural schools through the small schools grant and have also paid
attention to the concerns of some of the rural schools and modified our funding
formula to deal with issues such as sparsity.
In some cases, in rural
So we look to the main principles of
continuing to provide and looking how to develop issues of accessibility. Also, we look to see what the issues are that
have been identified by some rural Manitobans in terms of what they would be
interested in. We also look at some of the formalized systems which we have
presently,
Ms. Friesen: I
would like to address the issue of access as it relates to both northern
What studies has this section of the
department conducted that would give us some sense of comparison of the
proportion of students from rural and northern
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not have any specific statistics available
regarding studies of numbers of students who come from rural Manitoba or
northern Manitoba, specifically, but I would say that the issue of access is
one in which we have wanted to make sure that there are opportunities for those
Manitobans.
One way that we have looked at it is
through the First Year by Distance Education Program which, as the member
knows, allows students to take first year university without having to leave
their home communities and, with that opportunity, to see if that course of
study is appropriate and of interest to that student, and then to make the move
in the second year if that is what the student would like and has decided to
continue.
We also look at Inter‑Universities
North, which is a joint program and allows for students in the North to
undertake a program of study. Then,
through our University Review, we have looked at a couple of areas. One, we have asked the University Review to
look at the issue of accessibility, and we expect to hear from them when they
offer their report to government.
In addition, that University Review,
as well as looking at accessibility, we have also asked them to look at the
issue of articulation. That would mean
where students had a program of study from a community college, for instance,
and were living in rural Manitoba, how that program of study at a community
college might then relate to a university program because, at the moment, it is
very difficult for students to get credit, and we are wondering now if there is
perhaps another way that we can look at it.
Just again, a little bit more on the
Inter‑Universities North, the member may know about this, but it is a co‑operative
venture, as I said, among three of the universities,
The University Review, I have
already discussed. We are looking at
issues of accessibility and also articulation and quality. I have spoken about Distance Education and I
have also spoken about the small schools grants as well.
Ms. Friesen:
It seems to me that the planning context is lacking. The minister says that we have no studies and
no investigations and no numbers that tell us what the needs are and, yet,
there are courses being delivered, courses being selected, years at which those
courses are to be delivered being selected.
We seem to be concentrating upon First Year Distance Education. I think there might be some reason to have a
look at that.
Studies that I would be aware of
suggested in terms of efficiency of learning‑‑I do not mean
efficiency of access, but efficiency of learning‑‑that
correspondence courses and Distance Education courses are probably more
effective when people are in third and fourth year and at least have some
experience of using a library, of understanding course requirements and of
those kinds of studies.
I wonder if the minister's policies
have given any kind of consideration to that.
First Year Distance Education obviously fills a gap at the moment, but
we do not know the full context of what is required, what the needs are. So where is the planning in this?
* (1600)
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have already explained the purposes of the
Roblin commission and the University Review. We are asking through that process
and that will provide us with information.
That information will come from research that has been done. It will also come from the opportunity to
speak with Manitobans about the plan and the areas of interest that they would
like to see offered. So there is most
certainly work being done in that area.
In addition to that, I would say
that the goals of Manitoba Education are that we look at the increased level of
literacy skills and we look at increased levels of critical thinking for
Manitobans. We look to provide through
programming that increase in that area.
We also look for increased rates of program completion.
So there is, as I said, the Roblin
commission, which is undertaking a look at education in
Ms. Friesen:
Then in terms of understanding need, the minister then is relying upon
the Roblin review. I did ask last time
how many staff there are for the Roblin review who are conducting these
research studies and presumably in contact with all the rural schools of
Mrs. Vodrey:
Well, as I said when we spoke about this the last time, I will be happy
when we get to the line of the University Review, to look at the kinds of
studies that have been undertaken, what the committee has asked specifically to
look at.
I used the University Review as an
example of an initiative which this government has undertaken, because we were
discussing particularly universities, and we were discussing particularly First
Year Distance Education and what may be other options, and that is one of the
reasons, that through our University Review, we have asked them to look at
university education.
Ms. Friesen:
Again, it seems to me that a Minister of Education would want to have
some sense of how many students are proceeding to post‑secondary
education and training in the city of Winnipeg and how many are proceeding and
having the opportunity to go to that in areas outside of Winnipeg.
In rural Manitoba and northern
Manitoba, it seems to me that there are particular conditions there which, if
the teacher or principal who spoke on behalf of the school in Portage is right,
that there are fewer opportunities and fewer people are going on to post‑secondary
education proportionately from rural Manitoba, and it seems to me that that is
a concern for a Minister of Education.
I am glad to hear that the Roblin
review would be looking at that. I hope
that they have the staff to deal with the kind of inquiries and range of
contacts that they will need but, surely, a Minister of Education ought to have
some sense of inquiry into where our post‑secondary education students
are coming from.
Mrs. Vodrey: I
am informed by staff that we can get the numbers of high school graduates who
go on directly to post‑secondary education.
We take those numbers from
information which school divisions provide to us, and they in fact keep those
numbers. As we progress on in the
Estimates process, we will also have an opportunity to speak about a new
information process which our department is now going to be entering into,
because it has been difficult to have the capacity in the past, and we
certainly think that there is some importance in knowing where our students are
attending. So we could get that
information for the member.
Ms. Friesen:
Just to clarify that, the minister then has the numbers as reported by
the school divisions rather than the particular schools?
Mrs. Vodrey:
It is by school division.
Ms. Friesen:
Does that information include people who go on to post‑secondary
education outside of the province, both in colleges and universities?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chair, no, it is those students who go on to post‑secondary
within this province.
Ms. Friesen:
Well, that is odd. Why would they
not know who is going on outside the province?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chair, the information that we receive is university
information from MAST by school divisions.
We tabulate that with the number of graduates within the province. That
information is merged together. So that
is how we have received the information and, at this point, we are able to
report it.
Ms. Friesen: I
thank the minister for that, but I still do not understand why such information
from MAST would not‑‑since it is exit information, it is not
entrance information from the university‑‑why would that not
include the people who are going to college, for example, in Saskatchewan and
Alberta, which I gather there are numbers of students who are, and those who
are going to universities outside the province?
If I may continue, the issue that I
am trying to address here is essentially what are the futures of students from
each of the regions of
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chair, I can tell the member that CMEC, the Council of
Ministers of Education, is looking at this information as well, with a
subcommittee on university entrance. So through that subcommittee, we may, as
ministers, also be able to look at a system through CMEC.
Also, as I said, we are looking at
our own new information system, and through our own new information system, we
look to be able to track students in a much more effective way. So that is another way in which we will be
able to, I think, be more precise in tracking our students.
However, I think it is very
important to acknowledge what has been done so far in looking at the
needs. As I have said, so far we have
acknowledged and looked at the needs of rural and northern Manitobans through
the Distance Education task force. They did look at what might assist students
in rural and northern
We also fund FYDE the First Year by
Distance Education Program, through the universities. Our colleges are moving to governance and our
colleges will then be more responsive within their own regional area.
One of the other areas of interest
to us is to make sure that what is offered at the community colleges is well
known within the regions and that it responds to the regional needs and the
regional interest. We believe that as it
has moved now to board governance with the two‑way communication that I
have spoken about during our past few sessions that we will get more of that
information out into the community.
* (1610)
I add also that we have commissioned
the University Review, which is also looking at the issues of accessibility
across
Ms. Friesen:
The issue I am pursuing is, what is the information base that you are
working from and why can school divisions not tell us who is going to
university and college in Manitoba and why can they not tell us, which is what
I understand from your response, the locations that they are going to college
and university outside?
The Council of Ministers of
Education, I am glad to hear that there is some movement there. In fact, one would be glad to hear of any
movement on the part of the Council of Ministers of Education; it is one of the
slowest moving bodies of any kind of federal‑provincial co‑operation. You would not be the only minister, I think,
who would agree with that. I think
ministers in previous governments were.
The new tracking system, I am
interested in that. I think that is
quite probably a very interesting and could be a very productive use, but that
is going to take some time to kick in.
What I am asking for is now, because
what you are doing is, you are developing a series of programs and you have a
perception of need presumably. What is
that perception based upon and how do we deal with the perceptions of people in
rural
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, in relation to the CMEC, the member might
like to speak to her colleague the Minister of Education in Ontario, who is
chairing CMEC right now and who may provide her with a slightly different
perspective.
The other issue that I would like to
say is, the member has asked again for statistics, and I have spoken about the
statistics we receive at the moment, how we intend to look at a more inclusive
information system. Statistics are one
way in which information may be collected, and we have also engaged in a number
of other projects, a number of other initiatives to gather information about
northern and rural
We are looking to provide responses
and, as I look for the information from the University Review, I look to see
what its recommendations are and what the impact might be. I have a feeling the member is looking only
at numbers and I wanted to let her know that we have also looked at a way of
gathering information about
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, yes, of course, quantitative and qualitative
replies are very important and both are useful.
What I am simply asking for is a verification that the assumption that
is there and that is reported in newspapers in Brandon and Portage, for
example, that rural students do not have the same access to post‑secondary
education as others, that there is a basis for that.
Does the minister believe there is a
basis? On what grounds does she believe
there is a basis? What is the magnitude
of the issue?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think that is an important part of our mission
statement that we have looked at the need for literacy and education and
training for all Manitobans.
The member is speaking about two
specific areas of the province. As I
have said to her, we have made efforts to gather information about these areas
and other areas of
Again, I remind her, we have moved
the colleges to governance. That is one
way in which we have tried to make our community colleges more accessible and
more responsive. We are also undertaking
a university review and that university review will look specifically at our
university education.
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, does the minister believe that rural
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we would recognize that the needs of students
across
Sometimes it may be the opportunity
for First Year Distance Education so that they can look at a sampling of
university education. It may be other
kinds of programming, so we are looking across
I keep going back to saying the
issue of the University Review is looking at issues of accessibility. Our Distance Education task force is looking
at accessibility and the use of Distance Education to provide some kinds of
training and education on the K to 12 level.
Then we will have some students who wish to come to our community
colleges.
So we are looking to provide
students across Manitoba‑‑because we realize, too, their choices
will be different. Their needs will be
different and their choices will be different.
So when I look at our K to 12 model of funding, I can say that looks to
accessibility, and accessibility and equity are guiding principles. I know that when we were together the last
time, we spoke a little bit about a long‑range plan. We spoke a little bit about a plan in terms
of education.
I just remind the member that when
we released our strategic plan in 1991 it did include a mission statement. This Ministry of Education in this province
is the very first to share its direction with the public. We did believe that it was important that the
public understand and see the path that we would like to move along. We have shared that with the public, and the
public has given that a great deal of, first of all, scrutiny‑‑they
looked at it‑‑and then support.
* (1620)
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister wants to talk about differences,
variabilities, different needs. It seems
to me that we are working in a fog, because there is no comparable basis of
data across the province that she seems prepared to put on the record. Vision statements are fine. Acknowledgement of differences is fine. What are the differences? Where are they? Whom do they affect? Does the minister believe, for example, that
the children who graduate from school in
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again the member is relying on a statistical
method to determine differences. That
seems to be our point of some difference at this point, because when I provide
information which is not just statistical but which relies on our information
which comes from representatives of those areas, from individuals themselves,
that personal information from Manitobans does not seem to satisfy the member.
Then when she spoke about a plan, I reminded her of the plan that we have and
it is the first plan in
We have recognized the differences
in regional location. We do recognize
that a large portion of
The three universities, in
Each of the community colleges has
satellite campuses. I spoke about the
fact that there are satellite campuses.
In these campuses there is a variety of full‑time and part‑time
courses which are offered. The fact that
they are both full time and part time provides a range of accessibility for
students. The communities included in
the satellite network are communities such as Winkler, Portage la Prairie‑‑that
has been a specific area which the member has spoken about‑‑Selkirk,
Steinbach, Dauphin, Russell, Flin Flon, in addition to main campuses at
Brandon, The Pas, Thompson and Winnipeg.
I want to remind her again that we
have taken action. I think that is an
important part of what this government has done. We have not just relied on a statistical
study, but instead, we have taken what Manitobans have told us, and we have
provided an action plan. We do have the
availability in some of those communities where the member has expressed
concern about access. I have just
related to her what some of those programs are.
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I think the honourable member for Wolseley is
tired of hearing the same old broken record here today. It is clear that the minister has indicated
that she just does not have the quantitative data that the member was asking
for. Is that clear? Just say yes or no and do not tell us all the
programs you are doing. We know about
the things that are happening, and we know that it needs improvements, but we
do need to know whether you have that data or not.
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have explained to the member the data that we
have. I have explained the data that
comes from MAST. I have explained the
data which we have on high school graduation.
I have explained how we merge that information together. I have explained to the member also that we
are moving towards a new information system in the Department of Education
which will allow us to have a more comprehensive view of what Manitobans are
doing. I have explained to the member
also the project underway in CMEC.
So I have given her a number of
cases in which we have statistical information.
Then I also explained to the member that relying on statistical
information is only one way to look at the issue and that we have also taken a
broader view than statistical information, where we have arrived on direct face‑to‑face
consultation, reports of task forces, and that we also have ongoing information
coming from a university review. We have just moved to college governance.
So I have explained a full range of
ways in which we have gathered information.
I followed that up with her by letting her know the action that we have
taken. I have given her examples of the
action which this department has already in progress across
Mr. Plohman:
Yes, and I am going to deal with some other issues, but I do want to get
clarification whether the minister has said that the one way‑‑and I
acknowledge that it is one way of making judgments. The statistical information, is it available
to track students from various areas of the province to various destinations
and outside the province as well as within?
Mrs. Vodrey: I
have explained to the member the information which comes to us from MAST, and
also with our graduation rate, speaks to students' post‑secondary choices
within our province, and that the Council of Ministers of Education is looking
at a way to see, through a subcommittee on universities, how we can look at
students across Canada and what their attendance is at other institutions.
I have explained with our new
information system that we look to be able to provide even more comprehensive,
statistical information. However, I come
back to saying, it is one way to look at the issues. We also are wanting to look at what people's
express views are and what it is that they would like to have in their
communities.
Mr. Plohman:
Certainly that is important, and I just simply ask the minister about
this one way, the statistical information. Does she have it or not, in terms of
the tracking of students?
I mean, it is nice to say I have
explained this and I have explained that.
So it would be very easy to just say yes or no or we are working on it,
we hope to have it next year, we do not now, whatever, but tell us clearly
whether you have it or not at the present time, the information, because‑‑[interjection]
No, the minister has not said it.
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, let me repeat again then what I just said. The information that we have which comes from
the Manitoba Association of School Trustees speaks to students' post‑secondary
choices within this province. We merge
that information with our number of high school graduates. The Council of Ministers of Education, the
subcommittee on university education, is looking at how we can look at
students' attendance across
We are developing a new information
system in which we look to have a much broader scope of being able to have
statistical information available and, as I said to the member, in the next
year we hope to have more information.
If statistical information is what‑‑and
is the only way that the member would like to look at information regarding
students' post‑secondary choices, then I believe that is the same answer
I have given at this table at least three times.
* (1630)
Mr. Plohman:
So the minister says she does not have it, she hopes to have it soon,
and we acknowledge that it is only one way to look at the kinds of decisions
used as data for decisions that are necessary in providing a responsible and
responsive education system throughout the province. That is acknowledged.
However, we hope that we can follow
this up with the minister and that indeed the Council of Ministers will move
quickly, and, if the minister is not able to get this data on her own, or
provide a system in the province as to where Manitoba students go, that she
will be able to determine that more readily once the council ministers have
that information.
I wanted to ask the minister about a
couple of other issues‑‑
Point of Order
Mrs. Vodrey:
Again, I would not want to leave false information on the record by that
member.
Let me tell him again. We have information which relates to where
students attend within
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister does not have a point
of order. It is a dispute over the
facts.
* * *
Mr. Plohman:
So the minister has the information as to where the students attend in
Point of Order
Mrs. Vodrey: I
would just like to clarify again. It is
how many students‑‑not exactly which institutions‑‑it
is how many students progress into post‑secondary study in this province.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister did not have a point
of order. It was a dispute over the
fact.
* * *
Mr. Plohman:
So all the minister has is how many, but she does not have from which
area of the province and to what institution within the province or without?
Mrs. Vodrey: I
will tell him again. We have information
from within this province, and we will look to provide, when we have a new
information system, when we have information from the Council of Ministers of
Education across
Mr. Plohman:
Well, we were asking only in this particular context of statistical
information. It does not mean that it is
the only information that we require. I
think the member for Wolseley has quite clearly provided that information in
the proper context earlier on in the questioning that was done.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wanted to
ask the minister about the issue of parental involvement. In one of the statements made by the minister
the other night when she talked about this branch, and the kinds of things that
were being deliberated in her department, she talked about policy statements
and documents that were being developed on such issues as teacher training,
parental involvement, assessment standards, gifted children, adult education
and special needs.
Just on the issue of parental
involvement in the public education system, can the minister tell us whether
she has a policy statement on that at the present time? This is an issue that was raised in the
legislative reform report that the minister had for some six months before
releasing, and it is also one of great concern to the public, I think, in terms
of having input into the education of their children, and it is an important, and
therefore, topical and current issue.
Would the minister be able to provide some information as to how she
views it? In what type of structure does
she see it within the school divisions, at the school level, whatever, and how
she sees it working in the governance of the public schools? What kind of role does she see parents having
in the governance of the public school system?
Mrs. Vodrey:
We believe that the involvement of parents within the school system is
very important, and certainly we are pleased to see that particular
recommendation by the task force who just reported on legislative reform. We believe too that children can benefit when
their parents become involved in the education at the school level, and this
was indicated in Strategy 66 of the High School Review and Answering the
Challenge that the department is committed to finding ways in which parents and
communities can be encouraged to become more involved in the education of their
children.
The department established the
Student Support Branch in 1992 to improve the educational outcomes of students
at risk, and parent involvement is a program priority for this Student Support
grants program. Educational programs
designed with strong parental involvement can enhance the academic accomplishments
and the social development of at‑risk students in particular. In 1992‑93, approximately 85 schools in
32 school divisions received funds to involve parents in the education of their
children.
The funded programs were in the
following categories, home school programs.
These programs were designed to promote more effective parent‑school
communication about school programs and children's progress, and they included
home visits, increased phone communication, school newsletters, information on
skills required of students, increased parent‑teacher conferences, and
informal parent evenings.
A second program was the early
school years language development programs.
These programs assisted children from kindergarten through Grade 4 with
language difficulties by providing specialized programming and involving
parents so that school learning is supported in the home. This provides some specialized training for
the parents.
We also funded early literacy
programs. These programs promote parent‑child,
in the K to 4 area, literacy activities in the home that are co‑ordinated
with the classroom reading and writing, and they include home reading and
writing programs. We also looked at home
math programs, and these programs promote parent‑child math activities
that reinforce math skills by co‑ordinating the activities with the
children's classroom programs.
Other titles of programs are the
family intergenerational literacy programs, parent education programs, parent
volunteer mentor programs, services to immigrant students and families, and
programs for adolescent parents.
Mr. Deputy Chair, as well, the
Student Support branch has developed parent‑involvement resources for
schools. This includes Home and School
Reading Programs: A Handbook For
Teachers. It also has provided Learning,
Living and Loving Language: A Handbook
For Parents. Also, the Student Support
Branch has developed a document, Parents and Schools, Partners in Education. I will be pleased to table a copy of that for
the member the next time we are sitting together.
Mr. Plohman:
Just for clarification, did the minister say she is going to table her
policy statement on parental involvement or one small part of it? I did not catch that.
Mrs. Vodrey:
We have worked, the Student Support Branch has worked, and we have
developed a document and this document is called Parents and Schools, Partners
in Education. This document assists
schools in designing parent‑involvement programs to meet the needs of
parents and their children.
It also discusses the benefits of
parent involvement and the ways that schools may involve difficult families and
families that are difficult to reach in terms of their involvement and ways to
try and bring children in and bring families in. That document I will be happy to table for
the member.
Mr. Plohman: I
would very much appreciate having that at the next sitting before the Estimates
for this department. I appreciate the
minister providing us with that document.
* (1640)
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chair, I just wanted to clarify something the minister said
earlier and that is she would provide the information that she receives from
the school divisions on the transfers to post‑secondary education.
Mrs. Vodrey:
For the member, I know she is interested in statistics. Yes, we can provide that information.
Ms. Friesen: I
thank the minister for that. I wanted to
go back to the same issue, perhaps to quote one of the honourable members of
this House who says that rural children have always had a tougher time getting
into post‑secondary education. I
wonder if the minister believes that situation has changed, and could she tell
us how its changed?
Mrs. Vodrey: I
did recount for the member a number of initiatives which are ongoing, which
have provided support and have assisted in access for rural Manitobans to
access post‑secondary programs, whether they are programs through the
colleges, whether they are university programs through Inter‑Universities
North or whether they would be training programs.
So there has been a recognition of
the need to assist all Manitobans, and assisting all Manitobans to recognize
that Manitobans who live outside of the city of Winnipeg or the city of
Brandon, specifically, may have other kinds of needs. We have put in place action to assist those
Manitobans.
Again, I point to the satellite
offices and programs which are full‑ and part‑time for our
community colleges. I think that is
another example in the range that I have also looked at.
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, well, the minister is yet again reading a list
of programs. The issue I am asking for
is change. I am asking, have things
changed under this government, under other governments? If the minister believes that her programs
are effective, presumably she will say that there has been access under this
government. If so, let us see that. I think everybody would welcome that.
The point I am making is, if you do
not know where you start, how do you know that there has been change and that
access has been improved? Are there
steps being taken, even given the relatively simple mechanisms we have now of
providing that kind of information, that base information, of giving us some
sense of what the effect of these programs is?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in terms of the programming I was speaking
about, it was not the reading of a list.
It was providing for the member some information, again, which I have
already spoken about.
She asks, under this government,
what have we done? We have expanded the
satellite areas or campuses for our community colleges. We have also expanded our literacy
programs. Before this government came
into power, there was not a literacy office, there was not the literacy office
responsible for literacy programming.
That literacy programming provides community‑based programming,
and it is funded also through rural
So when the member asks, how have
things improved, I point to those two examples to say, when our goal is to
increase literacy, when our goal is to increase accessibility and availability,
there are two examples that this government has been able to provide.
Ms. Friesen:
Perhaps the minister misunderstood my question. My question was: How has accessibility of university and post‑secondary
education changed in rural Manitoba over X number of years, and how does the
minister know that it has changed since the minister does not know the range of
differences between rural and urban Manitoba and/or northern Manitoba? That is really all I am asking for. It seems to me a relatively simple thing for
a minister to say, yes, that would be interesting information to have and, yes,
it would help in our planning and, yes, that is something that any government
should be doing.
I am not particularly, at this
stage, in a question of policy and asking for information making this a
partisan issue, but the minister persists in listing programs and not answering
the question. It really seems to me very
self‑defeating both of the process that we are in now and wasting the
time of a considerably large number of her staff. I simply do not see the point in it.
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member asked me, in her question: What has the improvement been? We can, perhaps, check the record, but the
question was, under this government. So
I did provide her with information about how we have expanded opportunities and
accessibility under this government. I
have spoken about, in the post‑secondary area, I gave the example of the
expanded satellite programs in our community colleges.
When I look at all Manitobans, and
if the member only wants to speak of post‑secondary, but I thought her
interest also included training, and the training spectrum includes the
literacy programming. So I provided her
with answers which dealt with a portion of the spectrum of educational
opportunities available for Manitobans.
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, my questions have dealt with the transition from
high school to post‑secondary education in colleges and
universities. That has been in the
entire line of questioning.
My question is, how does the
minister know that change is occurring?
We know that it has always been difficult for rural and northern
Manitoba students. How does the minister
know what change is occurring and whether it is improving or whether it is
deteriorating? Are, for example, these
Distance Education programs simply taking up the slack of students who can no
longer now afford to come into Winnipeg or Brandon? Are we, in fact, educating the same
proportion of students simply through a different way, a different method? Are we, in fact, giving greater accessibility
in the sense of greater opportunities to rural and northern Manitobans through
these programs? My point is, if you do
not know where you start from, how do you have any sense of evaluation?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think the member knows that university enrollment
has continued to rise over the past few years.
So we are not just looking at a same pool of students which are now
doing First Year Distance Education which take away from the numbers of
students who might enroll at university, because we know that the university
enrollments have increased.
When the member asks for assessment,
First Year Distance Education has just undergone an assessment. We will be able to look at the assessment,
and we will be able to look at the assessment in relation to what is being
proposed through our Distance Education task force. So when the member is suggesting that there
has not been any way to look at the changes and any way to look at the
accessibility to post‑secondary, I go back again to saying we have
expanded the college campuses to satellite campuses.
Within those satellite campuses, we
have been able to provide full and part‑time programming. We have been able to provide First Year
Distance Education. We are looking at an
evaluation of that First Year Distance Education, because when we look at that
evaluation, then perhaps we will be able to see what changes need to be made
and how we might offer that in the most effective way. When the University Review comes in, we will
have again another opportunity to look in detail about accessibility as one of
the many issues that that commission has looked at.
So if we are only going to focus in
this discussion on post‑secondary opportunities at the colleges and the
universities, I think that I have been able to provide her with information
from the University Review, First Year Distance Education and our expanded
college campuses.
* (1650)
Ms. Friesen:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, yes, the minister has provided a lot of
information, but the minister does not seem to be able to relate it to the
question that I am asking. For example,
she has now argued that university enrollment has expanded, and yes it
has. But who is enrolling in university?
For example, are our universities‑‑the teacher training program at
Brandon, for example, is it increasingly rural Manitoba students who are
registering there or is it people from Ontario or Saskatchewan?
What is the relationship between the
expansion of university enrollments and the question which I have been asking
for some time now and that is the increased accessibility of opportunities to
rural and northern Manitoba?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, at the moment the universities do not report to
us specifically where their student population comes from. It may be that it will be a recommendation of
the Roblin commission that the universities do begin to report or at least look
at regionalization of where students come from and those who come from outside
of the province. They do not report it
in that way at the moment.
Ms. Friesen:
Well, that is right, so why did the minister offer that as a piece of
evidence that there was a greater accessibility for rural
Mrs. Vodrey:
The question was, with First Year Distance Education, did that take away
from the enrollment at the university main campuses. My response to her was, with First Year
Distance Education, enrollment in universities continues to rise.
Ms. Friesen:
It still does not answer the question.
The enrollment may be rising because of people coming from outside of
the province or it could be an increase of enrollment from people within
Winnipeg. We seem to be going around in
circles and I really can express, I think, my disappointment.
I was looking for a discussion of
policy of the kinds of things that any government in Manitoba would want to
know at the level of policy and planning that we do not know now, that there
are a lot of assumptions which are made, programs which are based upon
assumptions, programs which are based upon research, information and some
statistics and some qualitative information, some anecdotal information, and
really, it seems to me, not much basis for measuring change, improvement, loss,
expansion, whatever. That is really all
I am looking for. I just find it very
disappointing that the minister would choose to engage in this kind of
discussion.
I would like to move on, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, to look at the overall policy of this department which I expressed
in Question Period today and that is that it has every appearance in Education
and Training, and I am again particularly talking about a number of particular
programs, but the overall approach of the department seems to have been to take
from the poor, to take from those who are at the lowest level in education.
The kinds of things that I mentioned
in Question Period were the cuts to the ACCESS programs, the loss of the
Student Social Allowances, the loss of the SOSAR program, the transition to
loans rather than bursaries, and today what I was specifically asking about
were the 35 percent cuts to New Careers.
The minister surely must recognize that the version of that, that is so
evident to people across Manitoba, is that this is a government which really is
not interested in breaking that cycle of poverty, of taking the people who have
no other opportunities, and giving them, first of all, some hope, and second of
all, giving them an opportunity to get one foot on the ladder of education that
may offer them some chance to change the conditions of their lives.
The minister chose not to respond to
that in Question Period. So as a matter
of policy, could the minister explain to us why all of the cuts seem to have
been made in those areas where people have no other alternatives?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, I can say that the reductions that this
government had to make across government were not easy decisions. They were decisions in which there was an
effort to not have to look only at one specific group. That is why you will see that the reductions
occurred across all departments. They
did not just occur to affect one single group of individuals or one single
need. The reductions did not occur in
one department only.
In the past budgets, the Departments
of Education and Family Services and Health had not gone through a
reduction. There was a continued amount
of increase in those departments even at times while other departments, which
provide important work and important service, had to look at a reduction. But this year, the position of Manitoba was
that we had to look in all places. We had to look in all places because we
recognized that if we continue to build on our debt and our deficit, that we
would then have nothing that would be available for any Manitobans at all.
The member knows, in very simple
terms, if you continue to increase your debt, then you are no longer able to
borrow, then you are no longer seen as financially viable. That would not have been a good legacy to
leave to any one of our children or any Manitobans when that day came.
So this government did look at
having to make reductions across all departments. We looked to try and make them in a way that
was not targeted or focused at any one specific group. So we did have to make some reductions.
The member asked me about New
Careers, and the member has asked me about Access Programs. I can tell her that, yes, there were some
reductions in the New Careers area, but we have maintained our commitment to
the type of community‑based programs that New Careers offers and that it
was not targeted at any one group of people and that we certainly think the
concept is important.
I also have explained that the
Advanced Education and Skills Training part of this department is now
reorganizing. In that reorganization, we
will be able to look at where other kinds of community‑based programs may
also be available to Manitobans so that in the New Careers area, where there
has been some reduction, there will also be an opportunity for Manitobans to
look across the department and see what additional kinds of programs may be
available. But we have continued our
commitment.
I can also tell the member that in
the area of ACCESS, which we have discussed several times, this government has
also maintained a commitment. The
federal government has changed how it will be flowing its funds for ACCESS
programs. Last year that change in
commitment occurred partway through some students' programs, through their
year. It was this government that
stepped in and provided the support. It
was support of over $1 million in support of those students. That is a commitment. That is a commitment to
students in post‑secondary education.
I look at the fact that, yes, there
have been some changes, but we have endeavoured to also maintain a level of
commitment to these programs and to these students and also to the type of
program. So I speak about the programs
specifically and then the types of programs, because we recognize that the
ACCESS programs are one kind of program, New Careers are another kind of
program.
I have spoken about literacy this
afternoon, several times, because literacy programs, programming within our
Human Resources Centres also, all of these programs are now within one part of
the department, and we will be able to look at the focus and the availability
of the training and the training opportunities through the number of programs
which are available.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The hour being five o'clock, time for private
members' hour. Committee rise.
AGRICULTURE
* (1540)
Madam Chairperson (Louise Dacquay): Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. This section of the Committee of
Supply is dealing with the Estimates for the Department of Agriculture. We are on item 4.(a) Agricultural Development
and Marketing, page 15 of the Estimates manual.
Would the minister's staff please
enter the Chamber.
Item 4.(a) Administration.
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Before I answer that specific question, I
would like to give the member some information she had asked about the other
day on some property that MACC had sold in the Miniota area. We have some detail on the half section and
the quarter section that were involved.
The half section, the west half of
29‑14‑26, consisted of 81 acres and had an appraised value of
$16,000. The northeast of 30‑14‑26,
the quarter section referred to, had 140 cultivated acres on it. It was appraised at $25,000. Now, if she divides the acres into the price,
she will find that the price is not much different. So the half, obviously, is not worth twice as
much as the quarter, because there are about half the acres on the half that
there are on the quarter.
The member said that the person who
bought the half section had sold it immediately after and made a sizable
profit. The facts are that the
individual, who bought the property, purchased it in December of '91 and sold
it in January of '93 for a price, we understand, of $500 more than he bought it
for‑‑not that much of a profit.
It probably did not even pay for his legal costs. The issue the member
was trying to raise has no substance in fact.
With regard to whether we are doing
any studies for the downstream area of the Assiniboine, as I mentioned last
day, we are offering technical assistance to a number of committees and task
forces that are in operation, including the Central Plains Task Force, the
Portage irrigators, the Pembina Valley Co‑op and the Agassiz irrigators
association. Extension staff are
available to work with any and all and are working with those various
groups. In terms of the department doing
specific studies by ourselves, no.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chairperson, I want to thank the minister for the information on
that land in the Miniota area because, as I had indicated, I was not familiar
with the area. I do not know the terrain
of the land. It was brought to my
attention. I think the fairest way to
get the information is to ask the minister about it.
He did not say whether that other
quarter was‑‑has that quarter been sold, the northeast of 30‑14? Is there a price on that one as well or just
the one there?
Mr. Findlay:
My understanding is, it was offered for tender. There was a successful bidder
who then withdrew, did not follow through, to the best of my knowledge.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Thank you for that information. I
will convey it to those people who expressed the concern.
Getting back to irrigation, the
minister said that they just provide technical assistance. I would have thought the department would be
doing some work to see the impacts.
There have been concerns raised in
the Portage la Prairie area that they are going to be affected. If additional water is drawn off from the
river then is the department not concerned with those farmers in that
area? Would they not have a
responsibility to do some analysis of what the impacts of additional lowering
of the water levels would have on the people and on the agricultural production
in the Portage area?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, the member for
We as a Department of Agriculture
are concerned about all farmers all over the province, not just a selected few
in certain locations. So we work
technically with anybody who wants to do anything in regard to irrigation, if
that is the issue, or with any other aspect of agriculture. So we will work with the people with
irrigation interests on the Assiniboine Delta Aquifer or the people around the
Portage area who withdraw from the river or people in the Pembina Valley who
have interest and need for water. We are
concerned that everybody's needs be met.
As I said the other day, it comes
down to an issue of being able to manage.
Mother Nature gives us the water.
We have not figured out how to manage it yet to keep it here for use for
domestic, industrial, municipal or agricultural irrigators' use. but we are
pretty confident the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) has this
completely in hand. He will supply us
with the water, and we will handle it responsibly.
* (1550)
Ms. Wowchuk:
Can the minister tell me then, since irrigation is an agricultural
issue, are licences to draw water from rivers for irrigation purposes issued by
the Department of Agriculture?
Mr. Findlay:
Licences for water use are issued by Natural Resources.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chair, the minister said through the Department of Agriculture
there are technical services provided for anybody that is looking at different
projects, whether it be irrigation, to help them develop. Is there anywhere or has any money been
allocated from the Department of Agriculture in last year's budget or in this
budget that we are now dealing with for any irrigation projects other than
technical assistance?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, the member asked if we contributed dollars towards
irrigation in areas other than technical assistance in the last two budgets,
and the answer would be no.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Let us move to another area. I
want to ask about what other work is being done with residue management and
alternate uses for straw, whether any research is being done or if there is any
assistance for people who want to develop new equipment for residue management,
and whether any work is being done in the department or anyone is doing any
research on different products? We hear
about, possibly, a fibre board being developed out of straw. We hear about different kinds of, possibly,
fuels. Straw has a very high energy
level. Is there any research right
now? Who would be doing it? Where would that research be done?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, there is quite a bit of interest in how to handle
straw or how to deal with the issue of excess residue after the harvest season.
Right now, there is a research
project that has been approved involving the Faculty of Agriculture at the
University of Manitoba, looking at the issue in a broad, sweeping manner in
terms of shorter straw varieties, how it could be properly incorporated, how it
could be chopped up to be incorporated.
There are other proposals that are
in various stages of analysis to determine how to manage straw, how to use it
in alternate ways or how to incorporate it properly. Several of those ideas come forward and some
of them probably will bear further investigation and other ones may not.
There is a fair bit of interest by entrepreneurs
looking at whether there is a market for a by‑product of straw or whether
there is a market for a piece of equipment to chop it up finer. There is some
equipment now on the market that will do a pretty good job of chopping crop
residue up into very small particles for eventual incorporation.
There is a fair bit of activity and
some of it has been ongoing for a while.
I would have to say that the level of activity has picked up since last
fall, since there was a fair bit of an issue with regard to the volume of straw
that is around. Some people see it as a
resource, as a starting product for some other kind of manufacturing or
industrial activity.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chair, there was one specific case that I had with respect to
equipment. I have not got that letter
with me, but perhaps a little later I can bring it back and ask whether
anything is happening with that one.
As I just look under Soils and
Crops, one of the items identified is a line on bee colonies and
honeybees. There is the whole issue that
the federal government is proposing to open up the border to allow bees in from
the United States. This has caused a lot
of concern amongst beekeepers and has been an issue for many years.
I raised the issue with the minister
in Question Period and asked him if he would discuss this matter with his
federal counterparts to discourage opening those borders. I wonder steps the minister has taken in that
area.
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, as I told the member in Question Period, the border
has been closed since 1987 in response to a Varroa mite that was in the
States. What had been happening prior to
that was, bee packages were being purchased in the southern states and brought
up to Manitoba for use in the summertime, consisting of a queen and other bees
in each package.
The Canadian industry felt it would
be appropriate to close the border to slow down the spread of the Varroa mite,
knowing that bees can migrate and the mite might eventually get into Manitoba
or into somewhere in Canada.
* (1600)
The department has been involved in
surveys every year and have identified that the Varroa mite is present, to some
extent, in a small area just north of the border in southcentral Manitoba. Really there are no sightings elsewhere in
the province, certainly of any significance.
If the border was to be opened,
there would have to be enough evidence that the packages could be treated to be
sure we got rid of the mite that was in the package. I have asked the department to get involved
in that kind of research with the university. There are people in the industry
that promote that the bees should be imported.
The only way we can argue against that is if the research shows that the
use of phlivalvinate [phonetic] strips do not adequately guarantee that the
mite is killed in the packages.
We do not want to be importing
packages that bring in the mite or any other problems that might be in the bees
in the southern states. I know some
people are raising the issue of the Africanized bee, and we are not aware that
it would ever overwinter here, but we will set that aside.
I want to work with scientific data
and information. To this point in time,
we believe that the process of keeping the border closed has been very
effective in decreasing the probability that we will have a mite problem in the
future that will require chemical treatment.
So the position of the Canadian
Honey Council and the Manitoba Beekeepers' Association is that they want to
keep the border closed for the time being, but I understand they did pass a
resolution along the lines of, let us investigate what we need to do if the
border was open. That is the research
side of the question. I think that it is
appropriate that we do the research to determine if phlivalvinate [phonetic] strips
will work, and if they will not work, then obviously we will work very hard to
keep it closed.
My understanding is, it will be
closed for at least this year. The
federal government has not discussed it with us at this point, in terms of the
last few months. Certainly, we will
discuss it at that federal‑provincial meeting in the beginning of
July. In previous years, we have
advocated maintaining the closure because there was no way to treat the
affected colonies in an economic way if the mite got in here.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Just for clarification, did the minister say that there were some in the
southeast corner of the province, and if there were, what happened? Were those colonies destroyed?
Mr. Findlay:
The area that I mentioned where there were some colonies found with the
mite was south central
For the colonies found last year,
our understanding is that there is an experimental process of treating those
affected colonies this year, right now, the ones that have been overwintered,
to determine if the treatment process will adequately control the mite that was
identified in those colonies.
Madam Chairperson: Item 4.(a) Administration (1) Salaries
$105,400‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures‑‑$27,500‑‑pass.
(b) Animal Industry (1) Salaries
$1,446,100‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $510,200‑‑pass.
(c) Veterinary Services (1) Salaries
$1,338,200‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $506,000‑‑pass;
(3) Grant Assistance $467,600‑‑pass.
(d) Soils and Crops (1) Salaries
$2,193,700‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $674,100‑‑pass.
(e) Technical Services and Training
(1) Salaries $1,139,200‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $633,300‑‑pass;
(3) Grant Assistance $382,100‑‑pass.
(f) Marketing (1) Salaries $342,700‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $296,700‑‑pass.
(g) Less: Recoverable from Other Appropriations
($46,100)‑‑pass.
Resolution 3.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $10,016,700 for the Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Development and Marketing, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March,
1994‑‑pass.
Item 5. Regional Agricultural
Services.
Ms. Wowchuk: Madam
Chair, I do not have very many questions in this area, but the one area of
concern or issue that often arises is that we do not have enough information in
our school curriculums, enough understanding of the agricultural industry. I
think that the whole public should be aware of, all people should be aware of
where their food sources come from and the value of agriculture.
In this line, we see about making an
effort to make the school students more aware of the agricultural
industry. I want to ask the minister,
what extra efforts are being made? Do
the home economists and other staff people get involved any way with the school
programs? Are they encouraged to do
that?
I know they are involved with 4‑H
as an extracurricular activity, but what efforts are being made? Through the department, are any efforts being
made to get more agricultural‑related information into curriculums?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, there is no question that it is important in
agriculture that we inform the urban public wherever, whenever possible about
our industry, try to put our industry in a positive light. Certainly that is one of the consumer
awarenesses, one of the issues addressed in our Vision for the 1990s document.
Our staff are involved wherever,
whenever an opportunity arises to work with the educational system. I guess the most formal way in which we do it
is through the Ag in the Classroom committee.
Really, it is a group of citizens who have an interest in exactly this
topic to be sure that we maximize our presence in the school curricula
wherever, whenever possible.
About a third of the members on the
Ag in the Classroom committee are department personnel. They are working with the Department of
Education in putting together modules of education that can go into various
school courses. If there is any
shortcoming, it is the fact that schools and school divisions voluntarily
decide if they want to incorporate it in their curriculum. I think it is very important that we
aggressively work to achieve integration into school curricula wherever
possible.
* (1610)
Staff are also involved in a
speakers bureau. In other words, when
requested, they will appear and speak on topics of agriculture. We are also working with the university's speakers
bureau in career development to stimulate people in high school to look at a
career in agriculture through the University of Manitoba.
Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): To follow up with what the member for
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, I would like to introduce two staff who just joined
us here at the table: Mr. John Neable,
Director of Crown Lands; and Mr. Wayne Digby, Director of South‑West
Region.
I guess it is fair to say that the
answer to the member's question is, we do not have a compilation of the number
of requests. We feel that probably each
ag rep gets two or three requests in a year, but some of the staff will do it
on staff time and other staff will do it outside of traditional hours almost on
a volunteer basis. It is done both in
staff time and out of staff time and no record is being kept of all the
occasions and appearances.
Mr. Gaudry:
In the first Expected Results here, again to follow up in this area, it
mentions: Utilize various media venues
extensively to reach farmers, farm families, agri‑industry and the
consumer‑‑newsletters.
What is the budget for that kind of
media or communication?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, we cannot give the member a specific budget number in
terms of what it costs, because the activities are spread broadly across
extension staff and come out of the expense aspect of various budget lines
really. We are involved with such things
as putting columns in rural newspapers on a weekly basis, newsletters that will
go out to particularly ag rep offices, Crown Lands branch offices. We put together public service announcements
that will be on radio or on TV, so we are trying to reach the public in a
variety of ways, and it is difficult to put an exact figure on the cost for
this.
It is not isolated to any one group
of people, it is broadly based across the department in terms of the
activities. A lot of newspapers look for
that kind of input. Sometimes I see on
rural television, there will be a 30‑second public service announcement
on a conservation project that is going on and the staff have done it on
request by the station. They say give us
something in this area. That is the way
we get some of our information out.
Mr. Gaudry:
So you would say that the department is satisfied with that kind of
communication to the communities through the radio and through the newspaper?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, the member asks if we are satisfied. I guess the part that we are satisfied with
is that a lot of this is gratis in the newspaper columns, on the public service
announcements, so it is very cost‑efficient to be able to do things that
way. There will never be enough that is
done, and I commend the staff for the opportunities they pick up on. We will always pick up on as many
opportunities that exist.
Do not forget also that the
marketing boards do quite a bit of this activity too in terms of advertising
meat or milk or eggs, and they have these display booths at the fairs,
particularly Brandon fair, the member may have noticed a group of booths. There must have been eight or nine of them,
one for pork, one for beef, one for eggs, one for milk and free samples,
recipes and that sort of thing.
It is an ongoing process by the
department, by the various commodity groups and marketing boards. We work together and share activities. We will always do as much as we can, and I
know that more is always going to need to be done because consumer awareness is
very critical. So when difficult issues
come before the public like irrigation, they have an understanding that we are responsible
and we are using water for the right reasons.
Whether it is a hog barn being built, they see the positive side of the
location of a hog barn in an area. It creates jobs, creates economic activity,
makes food.
The job to reach the urban public
will never end. I think it will only
speed up as people get more generations away from the farm and have less
understanding of what we have to do in order to produce food of the high
quality and high food safety that they have in the retail outlets.
Mr. Gaudry:
Again, here it says: assist
producers' efforts to conserve and improve the quality of soil and water
resources.
I know there has been discussion of
soil and water in the Estimates during this process. Could the minister tell us briefly what kind
of assistance that they give to the producers in regard to soil and water
resources conservation?
* (1620)
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, we have become quite involved on the conservation
side with producers trying to improve our activities on conservation of soil
and water and managing soil in a very agronomically responsible way. Back in 1990, the Farming for Tomorrow
program started. It was federal and
provincial money. We set up soil and
water associations across the province, and there are 44 of them. Sometimes it is two municipalities, sometimes
it is three or four municipalities. This has been a very effective way to use
minimum dollars to promote people to do some of the things that they think are
important in their region.
These associations are run by local
people‑‑councillors, farmers, interested people‑‑and
they lease out equipment for farmers to use, whether it is a zero till drill or
whether it is an air seeder or whatever, and plant trees, grass down gullies
and that sort of thing. Small incentive
grants are given to the farmers so much per acre or so much for trees.
I will just give you some of the
practices that are being funded through these associations over the last few
years. There is residue management
studies, shelter belt establishment, shelter belt maintenance, forage
establishment, field gully projects, small dam structures, annual crop
barriers, strip cropping, cover crops, green manuring activities. These are decisions made by local communities
that this is what they would like to see done.
I see quite a noticeable improvement
in the way people are handling land.
This all came about, to a large extent, in Manitoba because in 1988, the
first year I was minister, we had a horrendous water erosion up in Swan River
with a quick melt and a heavy rain, and it was the worst disaster I had ever
seen. I did not think Mother Nature
could do that to flat land. Then in the
South here, we had terrible windstorms, a tremendous amount of topsoil lost to
wind erosion. That was in late April of
1988.
The farm communities responded very
positively to these kinds of initiatives.
They see the merit of doing these things. These projects and the successes of these projects
and the involvement of the people are the forerunner of what we will be doing
with federal‑provincial money under the green plan as a follow‑up
to the Farming for Tomorrow program. So
it is a good initiative. I think it is
environmentally responsible. It is
certainly responsible from the standpoint of handling soil and the practices
that we employ in agriculture.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chairperson, there are a couple of areas that I want to touch on
in this area. Just generally looking at
all the regions of the province, there is a tremendous amount of work that is
done by the agricultural staff. What I
want to know is with the summertime being a very busy time and a time when
farmers would need most of the assistance, what will be the impact, or has
there been any decision on how the four‑day workweek will be
implemented? Are days going to be taken
off during the summer, or with the Department of Agriculture is a shift going
to be taking time off during the winter months where staff might not be as
busy?
I realize that there is work to be
done all year, but it is during the summer months that farmers tend to need
most of their assistance. So how is that
going to affect the regional offices?
Does the minister feel that there will be adequate services there, or
what is going to happen?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, certainly the executive has discussed at some length
as to how to accommodate the days off. The seven Fridays in July and August
will be the official days off plus the three between Christmas and New
Year's. But certainly staff in the past
have always responded to where need existed, to where emergencies were, or
where there was a 4‑H rally and working of the Saturdays and Sundays or
on a Monday, if it was a long weekend, and the same principle will apply.
If it is a day off like one of those
seven Fridays, if there is need, if there is an emergency, if there is a
hailstorm and crop insurance, or if there is a disease outbreak and needs
technical staff in that regard, or whether there is a 4‑H event or a fair
where staff are needed, they will work on that particular day and take other
time off.
It is generally the seven Fridays in
July and August but flexibility to deal with the services that are needed to be
delivered, as has always existed on weekends and long weekends in previous
years, that level of flexibility in staff time will be maintained.
Ms. Wowchuk: I
guess the minister has addressed what I was concerned about. In reality, there are many fairs and events
that Agriculture staff have to participate in.
But the information we got on it was sort of outlining that there would
be seven long weekends. So in reality,
it is not long weekends for these people.
They will have flexibility, and if they have to take them off later on
in the fall, that will be dealt with. Okay.
That is good.
Have there been staff meetings? Has there been any resistance to this? I have talked to people in other departments,
particularly in my area, where there seems to be some frustration and inability
to work out when the services are most needed.
I can understand that Agriculture is
much different than Family Services or Health services where there could be a
crisis arise much more quickly than there would be in Agriculture, but has
there been resistance or has there been dissatisfaction by many of the staff
people, or has this been accepted quite well?
Mr. Findlay:
The general answer is no. Neither
the executive nor the director is aware of resistance. The challenge will be in working out the flexibility
where and when it is needed. Although you think of Agriculture as being busiest
in the summer, that is when farmers are busiest in terms of crops, but in terms
of our staff, what has been discussed is the fact that our staff are quite busy
in the wintertime and maybe even busier because courses are going on and all
those kinds of jobs.
In the summertime, unless some
emergency arises, sometimes the offices are a lot quieter than you would think,
and that has usually been the good news.
But certainly if emergencies arise, as always staff will respond and be
flexible in the whole process of when they have to work. I am sure the member is aware that many of
our staff work a lot longer than the 40‑hour week, where and when needed,
as farmers need their assistance.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chairperson, I would like to just ask a few questions on Crown
lands. You talk about improving
productivity on Crown lands and improving management. The minister may not agree with me, but many
times Crown lands are lands that are quite often of poor quality and lands that
are more fragile and have to be farmed in a different way than very rich
soils. Many times there is a lot of that
land that is Crown land that should not be farmed. It is pasture land and things like that.
* (1630)
I am wondering if there are efforts
being made to discourage the cultivation of these lands, to leave them more in
their natural state, to manage them better rather than tearing up some of these
pieces of land that really are not very productive. Is any effort being made to preserve those
lands more?
Mr. Findlay:
The vast majority of Crown land is not under cultivation. It is really forage land. Approximately 20,000 acres are cropped and
about 1.7 million acres are in continuous forage. Under the Farming for Tomorrow program on the
forage leases, producers can receive a grant of up to 25 percent of costs of
using new technology, whether it is breaking up, reseeding, watering patterns,
cross fencing or rotational grazing projects.
So the whole idea is to improve the
productivity of the forage in terms of fertilization, management, rotational
grazing. When the time comes to break it
up and reseed it, the lessee is to get clearance from the agent and that sort
of thing. The whole intent is to make
sure that the land that is most vulnerable remains in forage and that farmers
are allowed to improve the productivity of that forage in a responsible manner.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Has very much Crown land been sold?
There is a land exchange program and also land that is sold. Has there been much land exchanged in the
last year and has there been much of this Crown land that has been bought?
Mr. Findlay:
Well, the policy is, a lessee has the right to purchase Crown land if he
so desires. In 1992, 31 parcels were
sold and the process is that the lessee makes application to Crown Lands, and
then the Crown Lands Classification Committee determines if the land that is
being requested to be bought falls into the category of land that we are
prepared to sell. If the Crown Lands
Classification Committee turns down a proposal, the applicant can appeal to
PLUC.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Could the minister tell us then, is there an increase in the amount of
Crown land that is being sold or is that a fairly consistent level that has
been staying there?
Mr. Findlay:
Over the last approximately 10 years, it varies between 25 and 40
parcels per year, so it is reasonably consistent over a period of time. There is no great increase or a lack of
desire. Just always somebody comes
forward and says, I want to have more control of what happens to this land or I
want to make investments in the land so I would just as soon own it. They come
forward and make application to be able to purchase it.
Ms. Wowchuk:
We were talking earlier about this land being in many cases quite
fragile land. Is any consideration given
to that when somebody wants to buy a piece of land, that it is not really good
for very much agriculture production, and that if you turn it over to somebody
else then you lose control on protecting those marginal pieces of land?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, the Crown Lands Classification Committee has a number
of criteria on which they will make a decision as to whether the land should or
should not be sold. Some of them are things like if it is fragile land. Vulnerable land is best if it is held by the
Crown. If it is subject to erosion,
whether it is subject to flooding, particularly the land around the lake, if it
is frequently subject to flooding or if there is a gravel deposit, the
Department of Highways thinks that the government should keep it for future
use. Those are some of the criteria
used.
Approximately half of the requests
are turned down each year and many farmers know they are in an area that they
would never be approved, so I am sure they do not even bother to apply.
* (1640)
Madam Chairperson: Item 5.(a) Northwest Region (1) Salaries
$1,800,900‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $686,800‑‑pass.
(b) Southwest Region (1) Salaries
$1,720,300‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $466,700‑‑pass.
(c) Central Region (1) Salaries
$1,885,800‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $518,700‑‑pass.
(d) Eastern/Interlake Region (1)
Salaries $2,108,100‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $773,200‑‑pass.
(e) Agricultural Crown Lands (1) Salaries
$1,117,700‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $573,700‑‑pass.
(f) Less: Recoverable from Other Appropriations
$935,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 3.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $10,716,900 for Agriculture, Regional Agricultural
Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994‑‑pass.
Item 6. Policy and Economics.
Mr. Findlay: I
wonder if I could ask the opposition, since there is only a little over 15
minutes left, if they could go to Vote 7, because staff from Carman are here on
the Canada‑Manitoba Soil Conservation Agreement, if we could clean that
off today or deal with it so that we would not have to have staff come back
from Carman, if there are any questions in that area.
Madam Chairperson: Is that the will of the committee? Agreed? So we will forgo dealing with item 6.
Policy and Economics and proceed now to item 7. Canada‑Manitoba Soil
Conservation Agreement, with the understanding we will revert to item 6 after
conclusion of this resolution.
Would the minister's staff please
enter the Chamber.
Item 7. Canada‑Manitoba Soil
Conservation Agreement.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chair, this is I believe a new agreement?
Mr. Findlay:
It is about four years old. That
is Farming for Tomorrow.
Ms. Wowchuk: The
minister has indicated it is Farming for Tomorrow program. If it is four years old is it near the end of
its program? Okay.
Since it is near the end of the
program, can the minister tell us then what negotiations are taking place, what
plans there are to replace this? Are
there negotiations with the federal government on a further program that will
be cost‑shared?
Mr. Findlay:
In terms of what is the follow‑up for what we have called the soil
accord, soil agreement, which led to the Farming for Tomorrow program, over the
last four years we have expended $8.7 million federally and provincially. The expenditures on the provincial side have
come from both Agriculture and Natural Resources. The follow‑up agreement, as I mentioned
earlier, will be under the green plan, and federal‑provincial
negotiations are going on right now on what projects will be undertaken
building on the successes of the Farming for Tomorrow program.
The expected expenditure will be a
little bit more over the next four years as what has been over the last four
years, again involving both Agriculture and Natural Resources. That process of determining what will be the
activities under the green plan in the future has been ongoing for over a year
and getting close to a conclusion.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chair, if I remember correctly, under the previous agreement,
under the soils accord, there was more effort put into damming of rivers,
diking and controlling water flow. In this program, there is more effort being
put on farm operations. Was that a
different guideline that was used? Was
there a different choice being made in what the priorities of the funding would
be used for under the soils accord versus what is being used under this
agreement, Farming for Tomorrow?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chair, the member for
The green plan activities to follow
up will start next year. The activities to determine what the grassroots wants
in terms activities under the green plan have been going on for some time,
going back as far as February '91, when a workshop was held to determine what
the activity level was needed or wanted beyond 1993 in the green plan.
So what we have seen in the last
four years really was the soil accord, then there was the soil agreement and
then Farming for Tomorrow, and it is all the same thing. That is what has been delivered over the last
four years. The degree of water storage
structures varies by location across the province. The various associations, some want some of
that activity, others have no need for it.
The Deerwood soil and water
association, which was in existence during the latter '80s, did a lot of
preliminary work in terms of managing water with small dams, what the engineers
called energy dissipation structures.
That is where a lot of that work started. There was a lot of local input. That was under the previous agreement that
the Deerwood soil and water association did their work. It led to activities in other locations in
the course of the Farming for Tomorrow Program of the last four years.
To what degree there will be that
kind of activity in the next agreement is subject to final decisions. As I say, we have tried to stimulate a lot of
the discussion and the decision‑making process from the grassroots of the
associations that have been in place and working very well over the last four
years.
* (1650)
Ms. Wowchuk:
Madam Chair, I am not exactly sure what agreement it was under, but I am
thinking back to pre‑'88. There
was a federal‑provincial agreement, and I am thinking of one specific
project. That was a structural dam that
the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Natural Resources did an
awful lot of work on. It happens to be
in my own community. It is on the Cowan
River.
The minister alluded to the damage
that was done in 1988 from the flooding on that river. Then when the new agreement was signed, we
could not get anywhere on it. That is
why I am asking whether the focus has changed, whether there is no more
interest in controlling water coming off escarpments, because there has been no
progress on that whatsoever.
We were told, when the new agreement
was signed, whether it was in '88 or '89, somewhere in there, that focus was
gone. So I am asking now, as you are
looking at the new agreement, is there any intention to look at that
again? I am encouraging the minister and
his staff, or whoever is working on that agreement, to look at structural
construction that has to be made because of damage that can come with water
coming off mountains. That is what I was
looking at, whether there was a change in focus.
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, we will certainly take the member's comments into
account as we look on into the new agreement.
As I mentioned, this agreement involves both Agriculture and Natural
Resources, and really, handling the water in that context is more a Natural
Resources' responsibility, but it is always a joint activity of the two
departments.
Certainly there have been activities
under what is called headwater storage in the Farming for Tomorrow, but we are
just not fully aware of whether there was an interest there or whether it got
missed in the process as to why activity did not occur. Maybe the local
association did not see the need along the way, and they may well in the future
agreement, but we have noted the member's comments on that particular aspect of
Cowan River, I believe she said.
Ms. Wowchuk:
The river goes through town. It
is the North Duck River. I would
appreciate if we could find out why that proposal died. There was a tremendous amount of work done
both by agricultural staff and Natural Resources staff.
The community has given up on it
now, but basically because they cannot get any answers. We have tried very hard, and it is an
important project although it is a small community. So perhaps after Estimates, I can maybe
contact people in the department, and we can work through it as to where we
should get started on it again.
Mr. Findlay: I
will have staff look at it, and we will respond as quickly as we can in terms of
giving the member an understanding as to where it is at, what took place and
what may possibly take place in the future.
Madam Chairperson: Shall item 7. Canada‑Manitoba Soil
Conservation Agreement $1,040,000 pass?
Mr. Gaudry: I
do not want to waste time here, but could the minister quickly explain No. 1 at
the bottom of page 18, in addition, $260,000 is included in the Canada‑Manitoba
Enabling Vote for the Canada‑Manitoba Soil Conservation Agreement? Why the difference there of $1,040,000 and
then it goes to $1,300,000?
Madam Chairperson, if the minister
wants to give me the details after, it does not matter because it is coming
close to five o'clock, and if he wants to pass that.
Mr. Findlay: I
just can tell the member that it is an accounting procedure used by Finance to
set up the flexibility to source money out of what is called the Enabling
Vote. We will give you some more detail
later.
Ms. Wowchuk:
Just one more question on this area.
There are 44 local organizations, and there is technical support
provided. Are any of these organizations involved with irrigation
projects? Is there any money from these
agreements that are used to support conservation projects or technical service
for conservation projects?
Mr. Findlay:
Madam Chairperson, in the process of the Farming for Tomorrow program
and setting up the associations, there are four soil conservation specialist
positions located in four locations in rural
Ms. Wowchuk:
The minister said that there was over $17 million federal and provincial
spent over the past few years, $8.7 million federal, $8.7 million
provincial. What amount, if any, of that
money was spent on irrigation or is it just on conservation? Is there any money dedicated specifically to
irrigation projects?
Mr. Findlay:
The only irrigation aspect that could have happened would be in some of
the small dams that might have been built to hold back water in terms of doing
some back flooding or something like that, maybe that kind of irrigation. But in terms of irrigation facilities or irrigation
in the general context, the answer is no.
There will be none of the money used
for irrigation projects, other than very small dams to hold back water to maybe
create back flooding or something of that order.
* (1700)
Madam Chairperson: Order, please. The time being 5 p.m., it is time for private
members' hour.
Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
Committee Report
Mrs. Louise Dacquay (Chairperson of Committees): The Committee of Supply has adopted certain
resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again.
I move, seconded by the honourable
member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson), that the report of the committee be
received.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker:
Is it the will of the House to call it six o'clock?
Some Honourable Members: No.
PRIVATE MEMBERS'
BUSINESS
Mr. Speaker:
The hour being 5 p.m., it is time for private members' business.
DEBATE ON SECOND
READINGS‑PUBLIC BILLS
Bill 200‑The Child
and Family Services Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On
the proposed motion of the honourable member for
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker:
Stand? Also standing in the name
of the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer). Stand?
Is there leave that this matter
remain standing in the name of the honourable two members? [agreed]
Bill 202‑The
Residential Tenancies Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker:
On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Burrows (Mr.
Martindale), Bill 202, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act; Loi modifiant
la Loi sur la location a usage d'habitation, standing in the name of the
honourable member for
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker:
Stand? Is there leave that this
matter remain standing? [agreed]
Bill 203‑The
Health Care Records Act
Mr. Speaker:
On the proposed motion of the honourable member for St. Johns, Bill 203,
The Health Care Records Act; Loi sur les dossiers medicaux, standing in the
name of the honourable member for Emerson (Mr. Penner).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Stand?
Is there leave that this matter remain standing? [agreed]
Bill 205‑The
Ombudsman Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker:
On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr.
Chomiak), Bill 205, The Ombudsman Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur
l'ombudsman, standing in the name of the honourable member for Niakwa (Mr.
Reimer).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker:
Stand? Is there leave that this
matter remain standing? [agreed]
Bill 208‑The
Workers Compensation Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker:
On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Transcona (Mr.
Reid), Bill 208, The Workers Compensation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi
sur les accidents du travail, standing in the name of the honourable member for
Niakwa (Mr. Reimer).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker:
Stand? Is there leave that this
matter remain standing? [agreed]
SECOND READINGS‑PUBLIC
BILLS
Mr. Speaker:
Bill 209, The Public Health Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la
sante publique. Are we proceeding with
Bill 209? No? Okay.
Bill 211, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi
sur l'evaluation municipale. Are we proceeding with Bill 211? No?
Okay. Bill 214, The Beverage
Container Act; Loi sur les contenants de boisson. Are we proceeding with that bill? No?
Okay.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
Res. 23‑Partners
with Youth
Mrs. Shirley Render (St. Vital): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for
WHEREAS the Partners with Youth
program was designed to foster an important partnership between government,
business and youth in our province; and
WHEREAS through the Partners with
Youth program, Manitoba youth have the opportunity to gain valuable work
experience while creating lasting benefits for communities across the province;
and
WHEREAS project areas include: environmental initiatives, infrastructure
development and tourism projects, which aid in enhancing our urban and rural
communities; and
WHEREAS support for this valuable
program is derived from the Rural Economic Development Initiative fund.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the
Legislative Assembly of Manitoba continue to foster partnerships between
government, business and youth to build a strong Manitoba.
Motion presented.
Mrs. Render: Mr. Speaker, it is good to be rising to speak
to a resolution such as this. I think
the key word with this resolution is "partners." Now, partners indicates that there have to be
two halves to this. It is like an
equation.
Now in this instance, who are the
partners? Well, on the one hand you have
got the sponsors, and in this instance it could be things like municipal
government, agencies, registered businesses or a nonprofit organization. On the other hand, the other partner could be
called employees. But actually, as the
title of this resolution suggests, it is youth.
It is the young people of Manitoba, those between the ages of 16 and 24.
I mentioned earlier that this is a
partnership, a partner with youth. That
suggests an equation, and an equation that is balanced on both sides‑‑two
sides each wanting something, two sides each looking for something. In this instance, we have a community or a
business organization that needs something done and does not mean something
done just on the short term, but something that is going to provide a lasting
benefit for the community.
The other partner is our young
people here in Manitoba, young people who require a job. Not just any job, a job that is going to
provide them with valuable work experience.
I think it is important for our young people to build up a resume that
is going to give them a wide assortment of experience.
Any government at any time should
never spend money foolishly.
Particularly in hard times this is a rule that we absolutely must
follow. Now quite often we hear things
like put more money in, do this, make work, produce jobs. Well, in this instance we are producing jobs,
but they are jobs that are going to be giving a lasting value.
* (1710)
Because we want to make sure that we
are not just dumping money into a project which is not going to provide some
sort of benefit to the community or the organization, this program states that
projects must fall within four categories.
They are: environmental, business community development, tourism and
marketing.
I just want to go back to these four
categories and expand a little bit. Any
project that applies underneath the environmental category could be things that
promote environmental improvement and awareness within the community. Things like conservation planning or
environmental education programs or recycling activities are all things that
this project would consider to be proper.
The second one, business community
development, is really focusing on the infrastructure, and projects in this
category must provide for changes, in other words, improvements for a physical
structure or for the development of resources for use in the business or the
community.
An example of this particular one
could be, well, let us say, upgrading of a park or recreational facility. For that matter, a business organization or a
community organization may choose to develop new resource materials, or a
private company may expand its business facilities.
The third category is tourism. Projects in this category, needless to say,
must be to promote and support the tourism industry in Manitoba, and I think
all of us recognize that tourism is an absolutely vital industry in this province. I think we all remember that not too long ago
the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) unleashed a new
marketing strategy.
So I think it is very significant
that this is one of the categories that this Partners with Youth program has
targeted, because we recognize that tourism is vital in this province and we
must be promoting it.
Now, the fourth category is
marketing, and here projects in this area must be promoting a new product or
service or be marketing a community feature.
For example, an organization or a business may want to involve a young
person in an advertising strategy or a municipal government or community
organization may wish to initiate a marketing campaign for a local fair or
celebration that it holds, say, in the summertime.
Now this year a fifth category was
added, and it is called the Young Entrepreneurs. This is for youth who are between the ages of
18 and 24, and it is designed to encourage these young people to start their
own full‑time businesses, not part time, not just for a few short weeks
during the summertime, but full time.
Under the Young Entrepreneurs program or project, whatever you want to
call it, the approved applicants will be provided with a matching grant to help
defray business start‑up costs, but before that is going to happen they
have to submit a very comprehensive business plan. It cannot just be a lemonade stand on the
street. It has to be something a little
bit more businesslike than that.
This to me is a very important
addition to this Partners with Youth program, because it encourages our young
people to not always be looking to somebody else to provide them with a job,
but to be looking to their own initiative, their own creative abilities, to
start their own businesses. As I said
earlier, businesses must be ongoing for the full year. It cannot just be a short‑term
summertime kind of business. It must be
permanent in nature and the applicant must work full time at it.
Now this program was introduced a
year ago, and I am not too sure just how many people here in the Chamber today
know of some of the projects that were undertaken. I think it is always important when these
programs are introduced to go back and look at them and make sure they are
doing what they said that they were going to do.
Now, obviously if this Partners with
Youth program was not good, did not have a good basis to it, nothing would have
happened. So I think it is very
significant with these numbers. Let me just give you some numbers here. There were 276 sponsors who participated in
the Partners with Youth program in 1992. There were 464 positions that were
generated under this program and 496 students and youth, and that is including
the replacement employees who were provided with employment under this project.
Now where did these projects happen? Well, they happened all across the
province. My colleague here sitting
beside me of the constituency of Gimli (Mr. Helwer), there were more than a
dozen young people in the constituency of Gimli who found summer employment
with this particular project. Five young
Manitobans, for instance, were employed for a campground expansion project last
year at Stonewall's Quarry Park. Quarry
Park, I think as a result of these young people, is now a very improved
facility that thousands and thousands of people, whether they are from Manitoba
or other parts of Canada or from the United States, will be able to enjoy this
coming summer thanks to the Partners with Youth program.
In the town of Gimli itself, the
seniors resource council took advantage of this program to hire a very
enthusiastic young person who did computer filing for this nonprofit
group. The Ukrainian Homestead Museum in
the Winnipeg Beach area employed one person, which means that this, well, I
think you could call it a historical gem, can better serve the public. That is just in the Gimli area.
There is also here in Winnipeg the
Youth For Christ who developed and constructed a skateboard centre for young
people. In Grandview, the Watson‑Crossley Museum was a restoration of an
old and original pioneer home. In
Churchill, there was an environmental cleanup of the Hudson Bay lowlands. In Roblin, there was an upgrading of a
landfill site. In St. Pierre, there was
a new firehall that was constructed.
I think these things all give
sustenance or truth to the fact that this is a program that was initiated and a
program that worked, a program that provided lasting benefits, or will be
providing lasting benefits to the community and also be providing a very good
work experience for the young people that were involved in the program.
I think it might be useful if I just
maybe go over some of the details of this Partners with Youth program. They are a little more mundane than the
actual things that some of our young people have done. For instance, when the projects are turned in
and people are looking to see whether or not it is a worthwhile project, what
kind of assessment or criteria do we look at? Well, the degree to which the
project addresses the criteria of one of the identified categories, and I have
already mentioned the five categories that any of these projects must fall
within‑‑the degree to which the project provides a lasting capital
asset or other benefit to the community organization.
Another thing that people look at
when assessing whether or not a project is worthwhile to fund is whether or not
the proposed activity is in addition to the regular, planned or normal seasonal
activities.
We talked about money earlier. This government has committed $1.4 million to
this program. I think that shows the
commitment it has not only to the local community, but also to our young
people.
* (1720)
Now just breaking that down so that
it is something that we can identify with a little better, sponsors, in other
words, the employer, the municipal level of government or the community
organization, these sponsors are each eligible for a grant of $2,000 per youth
participant, provided that the sponsor or the youth entrepreneur contributes
matching funding to the financial support provided by the Partners with Youth.
These funds, I think it should be
noted, cannot be levered from any other provincial or federal government
programs or from grants given, say, under the Lotteries umbrella.
Something else that has to happen is
that the youth who are participating in this program must be employed for a
minimum of the equivalent of 10 weeks of employment at 40 hours per week. For
sponsors who are employing the high school students, projects of a minimum of
eight full weeks will be approved, and a grant available on a prorated basis
will come forward with this.
Sponsors are eligible to apply for
grant support for up to five youth positions.
A sponsor may be considered for more than five positions for a special
project that would provide a very exceptional benefit to the community, but
obviously this has to be worked through.
Approved sponsors will be reimbursed at the conclusion of the project,
following the submission of a claim for grant funding. I think it is important to note that the
funding comes at the end after people have assessed it. The claim for grant funding will detail all
project costs including payroll, capital costs, equipment purchases, rentals,
and must be supported by cancelled cheques, receipts or paid invoices. Again,
we can see the accountability that is built into this program.
There are 17 offices throughout the
province which are involved with this program.
All in all, I think it is a program which shows a partnership between
our young people and the community, a partnership which has been formed within
government because this is a program that has been undertaken with the
departments of Industry, Trade and Tourism; Education and Training; Culture,
Heritage and Citizenship; and Rural Development. So we have a partnership, a co‑operative
integrated approach.
This program will be a boost for
communities, a boost for the young people and a boost for businesses, and I
think with today's job market realities, this program, Partners with Youth,
shows this government's continuing commitment not only to our young people but
also to enhancing things in our communities.
It is a natural kind of partnership, and once again shows the theme that
this government undertakes, the theme of partnership, which underlines our
government's philosophy. We all benefit
from partnership, and we all benefit when we look left and right and work in
concert, whether it is within government with other departments or whether it
is with our young people and the business community or the community club or
whatever the project sponsor is.
I would just like to say that this
is a program that I think, if any of you know of young people between the ages
of 16 and 24, encourage them to check into this because it will be very
valuable.
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member's time has expired.
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chance to speak
to this resolution, which is a pretty soft resolution. It does not call for the continuation of the program
but merely the partnership, and it is interesting that it comes from the member
for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) in the back bench. It seems to be some kind of cry
for attention to young people, which I would say the cabinet of this government
really needs to hear. Unfortunately, it
seems to be only coming from the back bench with this soft resolution, and it
provides us to take a look at what this government is actually doing in terms
of support for youth, job experience development and education.
It is interesting to note that this
particular program, Partners with Youth, has created opportunities for 496
young people. Mr. Speaker, that is a
drop in the bucket when you look at the exodus that is occurring of young
people out of the province. Some 23,000
young Manitobans within the last four years or so have left the province,
forced out because the government has not been creating any opportunities or
any incentive for them to stay, and they are forced to take their education,
their skills, their enthusiasm and their ideas out of the province.
(Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the
Chair)
When you look at the $2,000 that
goes toward creating programs and salaries, again, it is a drop in the bucket
when you look at what young people are faced and trying to pay for. When you look at the increase in tuition
fees, when you look at the more competition that there is to qualify for
programs, when you look at the increased costs of books and transportation and
all of these things, and then you look at the fact that there are fewer jobs
and there has been no increase in the salaries of those jobs. There has not been an increase in the minimum
wage, which many young people work for in this province, during the time that
this government has been in power.
Another important thing to look at
with all of these programs is that this program as well is only 10 weeks in
duration. So students, particularly
university and college students, are out of school for a lot longer than that
time. Yet, there is only 10 weeks of
employment provided through this program, and that leaves them unemployed for a
large percentage of time in the summer and forced to look at other ways of
gaining an income.
It is interesting to note that with
CareerStart, with the Student Temporary Employment Program, all these
partnership programs where half of the salary comes from government and the
other half comes from a business or a community agency used to provide a full
four months employment.
I know when I was a student at
university, I benefited from the Student Temporary Employment Program. I worked 16 weeks, Mr. Acting Speaker, and
that allowed me to raise enough money over the summer, through employment, to
pay for university. That does not happen
anymore.
Not only, as I said, is there a
decrease in the wage in relation to the costs that students and young people
are facing to pay, but there is also a decrease in the number of weeks that
they can work and, as I have said, there is an increase in the tuition costs
they are trying to earn money to pay.
So these are the kinds of programs
that we have to be developing but, unfortunately, under this government, there
is a very small commitment. We see that
in the small number of positions that are created, the short number of weeks
that students are employed. These are
not really promoted all that much, because I do not think they want students
pounding down the doors to apply for these programs.
With the Student Employment Office,
Mr. Acting Speaker, that has been open since the beginning of May, there have
been lines every day and students being turned away every day who are
unemployed throughout the summer.
The office on Main Street, I
understand, has been closing its doors as early as eleven o'clock in the
morning because they no longer have any jobs to offer all the young people that
are coming to those offices. They only
have enough jobs every day to service a very small number of the young people
who are unemployed under this government's out‑of‑touch and
ineffective economic policy.
We can talk also about the number of
programs that they have cut to service youth‑‑the Northern Youth
program, the ACCESS programs, the way they have seemed to not move in the trend
that was originated in the '80s to get young people off social allowance and
welfare through programs such as Gateway and use that money to train them in
education and then place them in work experience. This government has chosen to either cut and
not expand those kinds of programs.
We have seen a tremendous increase,
Mr. Acting Speaker, in the number of young people who are on social allowance
and are forced to turn to welfare because they have no chance to go to school,
they cannot afford it, and they have had no success in finding work.
This government is also missing the
boat on developing co‑operative education. They talk a great deal about partnership but,
under this government and under the federal government, there were a number of
other work study programs that have been eliminated and co‑operative
education has not been developed as it should be and could be.
Now even I have had phone calls from
the Transcona area that the power tech program has been threatened, which was a
program that trained people in small motor maintenance. That is the kind of program where co‑operative
education could be developed, where there are small businesses that can employ
young people in an area where there is an opportunity to generate more
employment. We are seeing this government back down in their support for that
kind of a program.
* (1730)
This program mentions environmental
initiatives, and I raised a report the other day where there is a huge
potential for environmental initiatives and job creation for young people
working with the universities to train people through our community colleges,
Mr. Acting Speaker, to retrofit small motors, to retrofit houses through the
construction trades, to deal with lighting and water conservation and plumbing
and to create jobs in partnership with agencies that would benefit from the
increased demand, if the government got serious about energy conservation and
water conservation. There would be a
huge potential to create thousands of jobs for young people if we would just
take some of the money that we have not spent now in Hydro from not going ahead
with Conawapa.
The other thing, Mr. Acting Speaker,
is that young people do have a tremendous number of ideas for entrepreneurial
projects and for creation of jobs, particularly in the environmental area. They need more promotion and assistance
through an entrepreneurial program so that they can put those ideas into effect
and create some of the businesses that there is the potential to create, and to
get serious about the lip service that is given by this government to
partnership and environmental technologies.
Also, I would talk in the area of
tourism. This is another area where
young people can be trained and can do a huge amount of benefit work as well of
providing tours, wilderness tours especially, for people who like to come to
our province to enjoy the outdoors. This
is an area where I do not think this government understands the potential that
is there of taking people out into the wilderness and giving them a truly new
experience. There is an incredible
opportunity to have Manitoba‑owned businesses in this area, rather than
what is happening now where we have the majority of our ecotourism industry
operated by American‑owned companies.
This is, in my opinion, a travesty.
We could talk also about the
shortsighted cuts to Education, the $16 million that has been cut, the 2
percent, and the effect that is having on young people. I have had a number of young people talk to
me about the kind of courses that are being cut. The programs that are being
cut are the kinds of courses that keep young people in school often, and those
are the kinds of things that this government does not seem to realize. They are showing now that they are really not
serious about seeing young people as the future and seeing their education as
important and as a link to the economy.
I look at the kind of programs that
are being cut. The first to go are often
the programs that keep the most vulnerable students in school, the English
language programs, the counselling programs, resource programs. We are getting to this bare‑bones
education that is not developing the full potential of all students.
I think down the road we are going
to see that this is going to translate into a negative effect on the
economy. Young people are not given much
hope by a government that continues to make education inaccessible, continues
to allow it to be financially out of reach of a greater and greater number of
young people.
This government does not seem to see
the connections in real terms of developing, for instance, the community
college programs in our province. They
have allowed the community colleges to deteriorate in the province and do not
seem to understand that a lot of the potential growth in trades and
communication areas, telecommunications, could come through the development of
the community colleges.
This goes the same for a lot of the
areas in health care, in education, in the emphasis on having more preventative
and more community‑based health care.
There is a tremendous amount of opportunity to create jobs in this area
and train them through the community colleges.
Rather than developing programs that
are training people to work in group homes and the like, they are cutting back
on those community college programs.
They do not seem to see the potential in employment of training people
to work with the elderly populations in our province, and that there is an
incredible need to train people in working in a community setting with seniors,
and rather than having the expense of having seniors in hospital, institutions,
of training people to work with seniors in their homes developing home care
programs and having people train to do that.
I think that it is important to look
at what is happening in some of the other provinces. In Ontario, there was $20 million put into
youth programs and $2.7 million into work‑study programs. That is the kind of support I think is
required.
It is interesting that there is no
total on the government's sheet about the Partners with Youth program that
talks about the amount of money that has gone into it.
I think I would be remiss if I did
not mention, Mr. Acting Speaker, that with all these initiatives, we be careful
that young people are not being exploited.
I have talked before in this House about the number of young people who
suffer greatly in the marketplace and in their places of employment by being
intimidated by their employers. Because
of their age and their inexperience, they often do not feel able to, or do not
have the skills to stand up for their rights.
There is a tremendous need in this province to inform young people about
their rights under employment regulations, to inform them of how to deal with
sexual harassment and racial harassment in the workplace.
I would hope that, along with all of
these programs, there is information that goes out to both workers and
employers that would deal with these important issues in the workplace. So that young people are not working in
unsafe conditions and that they are not exploited under schemes where the
employer knows they are only going to be there for a short amount of time.
In the same vein, it is it important
for us to look at these programs where young people are brought on and the
program is cost‑shared with the intention that there would be a full‑time
position created, and that does not happen.
Thank you for your time, Mr. Acting
Speaker.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laurendeau): Is the House ready for the question?
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Acting Speaker, it gives me pleasure to
rise at this time to talk about this rather interesting resolution, Partners
with Youth program. I think the intent
of the honourable member who introduced it is certainly worthy and that she
recognizes that youth can be involved in considerable productive activities
that would benefit the economy in Manitoba and certainly benefit the youth in
their development. So we do not have any
quarrel whatsoever with the objectives of this particular resolution. In fact, it sounds, if I can use the terms,
very much like motherhood or fatherhood, parenthood or whatever, in terms of
its description and its objectives.
* (1740)
But it does bring to mind, to me at
least, the fact that the youth of this province are facing unemployment
problems as they have never faced before to my knowledge and in my
lifetime. I was not around to understand
what was going on in the great Depression of the Dirty Thirties. We have had a couple of recessions since
World War II, but I cannot think of any time when jobs have been so tough to
find as it is at the present in Manitoba.
It is probably pretty tough in many other parts of this country as well,
but it is particularly tough here. I say
that, not only because of the statistics but also because of information that I
have of individuals who simply cannot find work, young people who have good
training.
(Mr. Speaker in the Chair)
I talked to a young lad just a
couple of days ago. He came to see me in
my office. He not only had a Master's
degree in Public Administration, he went on to obtain a Master's degree in
Business Administration, and he has had a couple of part‑time and also
short‑term jobs, but he has not been able, for the life of him, to get a regular
job. A very nice young gentleman, he
presents himself well, he is intelligent, he has two graduate degrees and
simply cannot find work.
Another lady tells me that her son
graduated a year ago from the University of Manitoba with a degree in electrical
engineering, a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering. The nearest he can get to electrical
engineering is selling electrical appliances in a retail store.
Well, this is a sad state of
affairs, Mr. Speaker, when our young people who are well trained, well
motivated, ambitious, wanting to work, cannot find work and they are totally
frustrated. It is no wonder that the
welfare rolls today have, more than ever, people on them that have good
training and who are motivated and have skills, and yet they are on welfare
because there is no work for them.
This is different from what it was a
few years ago. Five or six years ago,
usually people who ended up on municipal welfare tended to be people who had
little or no training, had difficult times in schools, had other disadvantages,
emotional problems. I am not saying
these types are still not there. There
are people, unfortunately, who have difficulties and end up not being able to
keep jobs and they end up on welfare.
But, in addition to that group that has tended to be there
traditionally, you have this other category of young people, in particular, who
have training but have absolutely no chance of working and therefore cannot
exist, and unfortunately they end up on welfare. Yes, in some cases they can live at
home. A lot of young people do live at
home, but that is not true for all of them.
So I think back when we last had a
recession in Manitoba, it was the years '82‑83 when I had the privilege
of being in government with Howard Pawley as Premier, and we established the
Manitoba Jobs Fund. The Manitoba Jobs
Fund was not perfect, Mr. Speaker, but at least it was an honest effort made by
the government of the day to address what was then the No. 1 problem, and indeed
is the No. 1 problem now, and that is unemployment.
When I say that, you have to
underline youth unemployment because according to the statistics, the degree of
unemployment among young people is far higher than it is on average. Certainly,
when you compare it with the adults, that is people over 25, you find that it
is considerably higher than the adult unemployment rate. So you have this as probably the No. 1
problem facing this province today.
I do not believe, I know governments
are concerned with deficits and debts and interest on debt and so on, but for
the average person out there, for the average family out there, the No. 1
problem is unemployment. How can the
family's son or daughter or cousin or whomever find a job? Well trained, well motivated, but no jobs.
Now this program the member
mentions, Partners with Youth, perhaps is all right as far as it goes, but I do
not think it can make up for what the government should be doing in terms of
other initiatives.
It is really sad to me to see this
government having cut millions of dollars out of the CareerStart program. I know that was just a summertime program but
at least it gave the young people some experience. They were at least producing some wealth in
the province, and at least they were earning some money that would help them
survive and perhaps contribute towards their continuing education. So that is a real step backward. I wonder where is this government's
commitment to the youth of this province when they can so blatantly cut the
guts out of the program‑‑well, eliminate half of the program.
Another one which has been totally
eliminated, Mr. Speaker, and which was referred to by my colleague the MLA for
Thompson (Mr. Ashton) in the Question Period, that is the Northern Youth
program in northern Manitoba, where unemployment is astronomical compared to
southern Manitoba, where there just are not the job opportunities and where you
do have youth in the North totally out of work, totally without employment
opportunities who had, at least under this program, a chance of earning a few
dollars and being productive for two, three, four months of the summer period,
depending on the circumstances. Yet that
program has been eliminated by this government.
I say, where are your priorities, just where are your priorities and
what are your concerns about youth?
If you want to talk about a
Partnership with Youth, surely a Partnership with Youth is a program that is
positive and effective, that gives work to young people who want to work and
who want to succeed and who want to get ahead.
The other program that has been
virtually killed is the STEP program, Student Temporary Employment Program,
which was an excellent program for young people to come and work in the civil
service in a job, during the summer usually, and to get excellent experiences. Those were fine jobs.
I know personally of many university
students who were able to get into that program and obtain relevant
experience. No matter whether it was
with computers, whether it was in fisheries or wildlife, whether it was in some
scientific area, whether it was with highway construction or whatever, people
who had been in engineering, who had been in human ecology programs, people who
had been in business administration, or wherever they were, had an opportunity
to work in government and get useful experience that stood them in good stead
for future occupations, for future employment.
Then I think, too, of the education
cuts that have been made by this government.
If anything has been an attack on the youth indirectly, and then
directly, it has been the cuts in education.
We see this going on in spades in this budget and these Estimates where
millions of dollars are being eliminated in the educational system and the
bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that the youth of Manitoba are going to be
shortchanged. I think particularly of
universities in this province which have been starved for funds for years. I do not know how they manage, where the
classes are getting larger and larger, and where the facilities are running
down and where the standards are deteriorating on that account. Insufficient funds for library, insufficient
funds for books, for research equipment and so on. There has been this
squeezing of the university system and, of course, the tuition increases that
result from inadequate funding of the universities.
This is not a partnership with
youth. This is a plan to hurt youth, Mr.
Speaker. This is a cutback of
universities, and then the resulting tuition increases that hurt youth, that do
not help youth, that do not offer a partnership with youth, but indeed provide
obstacles in the way of young people from getting a higher education.
I think of one other program, which
is a shame, Mr. Speaker, that has been eliminated by this government and that
is the Student Social Allowances Program.
Basically it was not necessarily confined to young people but most of
the individuals were in their younger years on this particular program. We have totally eliminated it, and the excuse
that the minister gives is, well, there is no other province that does it.
Well, this goes to show you, because
this program goes back to the Schreyer years, where we set this up when we had
the Schreyer government, NDP government in office, and we set this program
up. We were a beacon across the country. We were a progressive government, and we
provided a beacon of light, I guess, to everyone else. Say, look, this is what we can do for young
people on welfare. We can give them a
chance to get trained, to get better qualifications so that they get off of
social allowances and become gainfully employed.
Admittedly, the problem we have is,
even if we do train people, there are not jobs for them. That is a real problem, and as I say, when we
are talking about migration statistics, we see in spades thousands of young
people leaving this province. As a
matter of fact, as I stated yesterday in Question Period, approximately 41,000
people were lost since this government took office in early 1988. That is a net loss; that is not a gross
figure; that is a net figure. That is
after you take everybody that has come in and everybody that has gone out, the
bottom line is we lost 41,000 people, and the great majority of those people
are young people, who are totally frustrated with this provincial economy, totally
turned off. They simply cannot find work
here. They probably would like to stay in their home province. They cannot find work here and they go.
* (1750)
So I do not know to what degree the program,
Partners with Youth, has been able to offset this. I do not think it has made any difference
whatsoever, Mr. Speaker. The fact is
that we have lost people, and we are continuing to lose people.
Another thing I would like to
mention is something that we did under the Jobs Fund when we were in
government, and I was the Minister responsible for Employment Services, and
that is, we made a deal with the federal government to utilize welfare monies
to put into a program to give people work.
This was not workfare, which I am totally opposed to. This was monies used to provide job
opportunities in small business and nonprofit organizations and therefore which
allowed those organizations to hire people.
So, Mr. Speaker, that is something
that should be looked at again, but it is not being done, because job creation
is not a priority of this government. It
seems to be way back on the back burner.
I would, therefore, make an
amendment to this particular resolution.
I move, seconded by the MLA for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that Resolution
No. 23 be amended as follows:
By striking out the words
"Legislative Assembly" and replacing them with the word
"Government" and by striking out the word "continue" and
replacing it with the word "start" in the THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED.
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The amendment, as
moved by the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), I am going
to take this matter under advisement and I will report back to the House about
said resolution. I am taking the amendment
under advisement so it is not before the House.
Is it the will of the House to call
it six o'clock? [agreed]
The hour being 6 p.m., this House is
now adjourned and stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow (Friday).