Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Madam Speaker, members opposite have been rising in the House day after day since they broke the agreement concerning the date the House shall rise, and all of this apparently in the name of democracy.

In the name of democracy, they have broken a signed agreement despite the member for Wellington's (Ms. Barrett) eloquent words that a contract is a form of trust. In the name of democracy, they have kept the Legislature past the agreed-upon date. In the name of democracy, members opposite denied leave of the House to be able to continue debate on Bill 67. In the name of democracy, the people of Manitoba paid over $10,000 per day because members opposite refused to debate Bill 67. In the name of democracy, the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) stood and put on the record that the New Democratic Party is committed to ensuring that MTS will be brought back under public ownership, a notion that is reminiscent of Fidel Castro's rise to power some years back. In the name of democracy, members opposite called for referendums ad nauseam, something their own record while in government fails to support in any manner, and I refer to 22 tax increases in five years without referendum. How soon they forget.

In the name of democracy, members opposite perpetuate erroneous and misleading information both in the House and in the public. In the name of democracy, a great deal has been done by members opposite; however, I believe that members opposite have not done this in the name of democracy but in the name of political grandstanding. To this, I say, shame.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Smoking and secondary smoke is a health hazard. For those reasons many and most public buildings are nonsmoking facilities. It is a common sight to see smokers in designated spaces or outside partaking their habits. Schools, daycares, hospitals and offices are mostly smoke free.

Madam Speaker, I urge the Assembly to make the second floor members' lounge a smoke-free space for the following reasons. Secondary smoke is dangerous. Health and Welfare Canada 1991: Involuntary smoking is the third largest cause of lung cancer death after direct smoking and radon, estimated to cause 300 deaths annually in Canada from lung cancer alone.

As a responsible mother-to-be, I try to avoid any conditions that would be harmful. (1) cigarette smoke alters the heart rate, blood pressure and oxygen supply of the unborn infant; (2) avoidance of the smoking area is very difficult given that primary second floor washrooms are accessible only through the members' lounge or better known as the smoking room; (3) my fundamental right to use the members' lounge is compromised because of the unsuitable dangerous air quality in the room. Second-hand smoke contains 4,000 chemicals, including tars, nicotine, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide, ammonia and other known cancer-causing agents. In an enclosed space cigarette smoke harms not only the smoker but also the other occupants.

As leaders we should be role models. Many of our public buildings are smoke free, including offices, hospitals and schools. The smoking room concept available to elected members of the Legislature but not normally available to workers and the rest of the public sector is an example of elected officials having special standards for themselves. Smokers have access to other areas for smoking, including the cafeteria or outside. I would urge all members to join me.

* (1430)

Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): Last night many of my colleagues and I had the great pleasure of attending the launch of Manitoba Pork Advantage. Everyone in attendance had a wonderful evening. Even the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) could not contain her enthusiasm during the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) speech. Her spirited applause echoed throughout the room. It is wonderful to see that at least one member opposite recognizes what this government has done to promote the growth of Manitoba's pork industry, despite her initial opposition.

Madam Speaker, the Manitoba Pork Advantage is an innovative partnership between Manitoba Agriculture and the pork industry for the purpose of positioning this important sector for growth to meet the opportunities of the 21st Century. The objective of the Manitoba Pork Advantage is to highlight the economic efficiencies of producing pork in Manitoba based on the recognized expertise of production in our province, the established quality of the product and supportive infrastructure that is present in the Manitoba pork industry.

Manitoba is one of the most dynamic sites in Canada for pork production. In the past decade, our province's hog production has nearly doubled. The growth of this industry has been spurred on by a tremendous growth in export sales. More than 80 percent of Manitoba pork is sold to customers outside the province with one-quarter of these exports bound for markets beyond the Canadian border.

Manitoba is profiting from record sales of our pork around the world. Our rate of export continues to increase at a phenomenal rate. As a result, jobs in pork production and processing are also increasing. Today, there are about two thousand hog operations in Manitoba. The pork industry generates 12 percent of all farm income and more than one billion for the provincial economy. More than 12,000 Manitobans are employed in the production, processing, transportation and distribution of pork products.

I would like to thank all the organizers of last night's event. I would especially like to acknowledge the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) for his leadership and commitment to ensuring the growth of the pork industry.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Madam Speaker, I would like to put a few words on record under the heading Tories' priorities. The Tory government showed where its priorities lie when it passed over the bid by Gateway North transportation system and went with a company that has a reputation of turning a fast profit on short-line railways. Unfortunately, it also revealed its shortsightedness in failing to see that jobs and local spending were also at stake. By choosing an American buyer, the Manitoba government has in all likelihood sent 121 jobs and all the profit of the northern rail lines south of the border. This is despite a proposal by the Gateway coalition to co-operate with the workers to negotiate contracts. However, without experience running a short-line railway and a shaky financial foundation, the coalition was too risky a proposal.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am experiencing great difficulty hearing the honourable member for Flin Flon.

Mr. Jennissen: After it signed the paper to transfer the ownership of three northern rail lines Friday, OmniTRAX refused to talk about the future of the 121 jobs that go with the Flin Flon, Churchill and Sherridon line. It was a safer decision. Going with a more secure company better ensures the future of the rail line and the jobs of hundreds of miners in Leaf Rapids. Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting also stands to benefit from a dependable service. The company is also pursuing ownership of the Port of Churchill which shows its commitment to the new venture.

The deal illustrates that Canadians cannot compete with money-hungry American business operators even on its own soil. It is sad to see our provincial government turn its back on local business, but it should not come as a surprise. With the emphasis on balanced budgets and privatization of public corporations, the government is interested in making a profit first. The proposed privatization of MTS and changes in the contract negotiation strategies with its public sector workers are only signs of more to come. It should not be long before Manitobans are dealing with private agencies to insure their cars. If privatization is so good for competition, why are our neighbours in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia paying more than twice the cost to put their vehicles on the road?

Madam Speaker, this is a verbatim statement from the Flin Flon Reminder, Monday, November 18, 1996. Thank you.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, I want to respond to the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) comments today in Question Period, where he argued that Mr. Nugent was speaking off the cuff and that he did not have the facts at his disposal. I have read the comments of Mr. Nugent to the commission on November 13, and there are several elements which become very clear from that speech. I urge all honourable members to read it. First of all, Mr. Nugent is absolutely clear that he is speaking for the record. He says, whatever happens here, of course, gets translated very quickly to the Manitoba Legislature; there is no question about that, he says, end of quote. He continues: In any event, he says, we are very conscious of the politics of these proceedings--meaning the CRTC hearings--here and at home. We are very anxious to see things done that will make it easier for the people of Manitoba to accept the inevitable.

What is very clear from the reading of Mr. Nugent's comments is that he is aware that he speaks for the Manitoba Telephone service. He is aware of the importance of what he is saying for debate in this House. He is very clearly aware of the unease of Manitobans at the sale of their corporation, and he argues in fact that the purpose, in part, of his presentation is to ease those concerns and to make the increase in their rates more palatable.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.