* (1340)

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): We have debated the issue of privatization of health care services previously in this Chamber, Madam Speaker. Yesterday ministers were defending the decision of the government to award a specific contract on home oxygen therapy to the Rimer Alco company.

Madam Speaker, will the Premier (Mr. Filmon) today tell Manitobans why this government is extending the privatization of these services to the private sector? Will the Premier today table the cost and quality analysis of recommendations that led his government to award this contract to the Rimer Alco company?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): First of all, with respect to the preamble of the Leader of the Opposition's question, the issues of privatization in health care, by and large, in these areas where we are purchasing services at better costs and looking at ways to trim costs of supplying various elements that are used in the health care system frees up dollars for other vital areas of patient care. So many of these things are about improving patient care.

Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition may wish to know that the process by which these bids were evaluated included a first stage which was the quality analysis. There were two companies who came through that process, Rimer Alco and VitalAire, I understand. Then their pricing envelopes were opened, and the Rimer Alco contract was the lower bidder and has received the contract.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I want to table a copy of the government's final report dealing with the awarding of the Home Oxygen Therapy Program to the Rimer Alco company, and the recommendation from the government's own group of experts made up of health officials and members of the community.

The recommendation is not to award the contract to Rimer Alco but to recommend, on the basis of quality of care and cost of this service over a three-year period and even the minimal cost difference of a two-year period, to award this contract to a different company.

Why, and I ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon), did his Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and his Minister of Health not follow the recommendations from their own final report and their own experts?

Mr. Praznik: In speaking today with the staff from Manitoba Health who provided the staff to that committee, it was confirmed to me that both companies met the qualification on standards and that both companies made it through that first stage of the quality control. There were other companies that did not, and their price envelopes were not opened. Of the two that made it through that quality process, the lowest tender was awarded and that is Rimer Alco.

Mr. Doer: My question to the First Minister is--they have the costs of the two bids, and they have the quality analysis done by the government's own steering committee of experts from the Department of Health, from the community, an accountant, a representative from the Rural Development department. The government's own group of experts is recommending, on the basis of cost and quality, that the 800 people that receive the Home Oxygen Therapy Program receive it from a different company than the government awarded it to.

I would like to ask the Premier why did they award it to a different company. Why did they go contrary to the recommendations of their own government expert group on quality and cost?

* (1345)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, we have a very interesting thing here in the Legislature being presented by the Leader of the Opposition.

Yesterday he and his members alleged that the company that was selected was not qualified or seen to be qualified by the selection committee. We now find they were wrong on that, wrong again, that the committee said there were two qualified bidders. One was Rimer Alco, the other was the company that he is promoting.

Then, secondly, they alleged that it was not the low bid. On a two-year contract, it is clear that Rimer Alco was the low bidder. They were wrong again, and again the Leader of the Opposition comes forward with his presentation based on wrong facts.

So, firstly, the company was qualified, according to the analysis done by the panel of experts that he is now quoting; secondly, they were the lowest bidder. Now you can imagine, Madam Speaker, what would happen if we awarded the contract to somebody who was not the lowest bidder. What would be their tack here in this Legislature? Secondly, it happens to be a Manitoba-based company, and if we chose somebody that was from outside or primarily from outside the province, what would be their tack then? You can imagine that they would be opposed to it on that basis.

Here we have an opposition who has sunk so low that they will do anything they can, twist any facts, come up with any justification just to oppose the government on every single issue. It is why they continue to be in opposition; it is why they continue to run third in the public esteem of this province.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, I can hardly wait till the Premier reads the whole recommendation from the committee.

The home care workers now employed in delivering this service are all Manitobans. Yesterday in Question Period the Minister of Finance said that Rimer Alco was the lowest successful bidder meeting all qualifications.

Will the Minister of Finance confirm that in the bidding process, Rimer Alco acknowledged to the committee that it was unable to meet the core essential requirement of the request for proposal and did not therefore submit a performance bond, contrary to the requirement of the request for proposal, an essential criterion for bidders? Will he confirm that?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, no, I will not confirm that whatsoever. It is in keeping with the approach of the opposition, that they are wrong on all accounts when it comes to this issue and bringing incorrect information as they did 24 hours ago to this House.

Rimer Alco has met the bonding requirements. They do have the bond in place, $1.75 million, not like they were alleging yesterday that the bond was not able to be in place. The bond is in fact in place with the company. They are the lowest-cost bid for the two-year contract which was--

An Honourable Member: What about the three year? Where does your committee sit?

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Stefanson: The member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) should go back and look at the original request for proposal which was for a two-year bid. On a two-year bid, Rimer Alco is the lowest-cost contract. They were one of two firms that the evaluation committee said met all of the quality criteria. So, on quality, on price and on performance bonding, they are the logical firm to award it to, unlike the misinformation being provided by the members opposite yesterday.

Mr. Sale: The RFP had two options, Madam Speaker: a two year and a three year.

Will the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) or the Minister of Finance confirm that, during the Home Oxygen Therapy Program committee meeting, a phone call was received from a senior government person telling the committee to continue to consider Rimer Alco even though they did not meet the essential performance bond requirement which all other committees had to meet? Did that phone call take place?

Madam Speaker, I intended to table this document at the time of my question and would like to do so now.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, again the member for Crescentwood--first of all, the request was for a two-year agreement. There was an option to put forward a third-year option. There was never a request for a three-year agreement. They are wrong again. If he has any information about any specific phone calls from individuals, let him provide the information, provide the names of the individuals, any information he can provide.

I am not aware of any such phone calls. Once again it is the same kind of tactics that they bring forward day in and day out, incorrect information, innuendos and sleaze tactics.

* (1350)

Mr. Sale: I can tell the minister who received the call; I cannot tell him who was on the other end, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Crescentwood, with a final supplementary question.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister admit that, according to the accountant on the committee, the company chosen, Rimer Alco, could not demonstrate financial solvency, another essential criterion, that the bid process was not fair to all companies bidding, that in fact it was hopelessly corrupt?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I will admit no such thing. I believe there were five firms that submitted bids. The evaluation committee said there are clearly two firms that meet the quality tests, VitalAire and Rimer Alco. So the first assessment was on quality. When the pricing was opened, the lowest-cost contract proposal came from Rimer Alco.

It is very clear, Madam Speaker, on the combination of quality and on the combination of cost, Rimer Alco was the logical firm to award it to.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, let us get straight what this government is doing here in privatizing this home care service. They are willing to put the health and safety of more than 800 Manitobans at risk to save $4,800 on a two-year contract, when their own committee recommended the three-year option on the contract which in three years is less cost.

I want to ask the Minister of Health how can he justify awarding the contract to Rimer Alco when his own oxygen supply committee recommended that the two-year bid was too short, that it would not fit in with the needs of the program and they clearly recommended the third-year option on the contract.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I think that the member for Radisson is stretching very much the particular report that was tabled in this House. That committee recognized both firms as being able to do the job. It ruled three others out on the quality side. So clearly this company is able to do it. They have posted the performance bond; they were the lowest bidder.

Are members of the other side suggesting that we should not have accepted the lowest bidder, Madam Speaker?

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Radisson, with a supplementary question.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, we have clearly tabled the document that recommends against the two-year option. I want to ask the Minister of Health: is he willing to make the care of more than 800 patients secondary when the same minutes from his steering committee also show that there are concerns regarding the failure of Rimer Alco to deliver the services required? It is in the document we tabled. Read it and tell us how could you award this contract to this company.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, let us understand the basis of that recommendation. It was because of one bidder's experience in the province in delivering that service. If you accept that analysis, that means that no new bidder could ever bid on a contract, that we would continually award the contract over and over again to the people who are in the business. That is not in the best interests of anyone.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, the other concern expressed by the steering committee is about the gaps in service and the inability of this company to provide the technical and service supports to the clients that require oxygen supply. That is also listed in the minutes from the steering committee.

Will the minister consider delaying this contract from the start-up date of April 1 so that the gaps in services at least will not occur for these clients that depend on this service?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, if I am referring to the same part of the minutes as the member is, the recommendation is to ensure that that rollover be included in any future contracts or proposals with providers of service. If you accept what the member is saying, once you have awarded the contract to one company, you never could change. The member is stretching this far beyond what I think was intended in the minutes.

* (1355)

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, we are becoming used to this government corrupting the process in which government contracts are handed out, but when it comes to an issue involving health care where their own committee cites quality of care as a concern, is there any wonder why we question this government's agenda privatizing health care. I want to get to the root of the matter, and I want to find out who is pulling the strings on this.

I want to ask the Premier if he or his Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) or either of the ministers of Health at any time met with the principals or any representative of Rimer Alco to discuss this contract.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, you know, the innuendo and the very, very unsavoury kind of approach that is taken to every single issue in this House by the members opposite, really I think brings great discredit on the members opposite.

I can tell the member who has asked that question that I did not know anything about this issue until it was raised in the House yesterday, and I made it my business to check on the facts surrounding the various allegations. I can tell the member opposite that, firstly, they alleged that the company, Rimer Alco, that was awarded the contract was not seen to be qualified by the committee. In examination of it, they were one of the two companies out of five bidders that were seen to be qualified to provide the service. So they were wrong on that one.

It was alleged by the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) that the bid bond requirement had been dropped from $1.75 million to a million dollars. In examination of that, I find that they were wrong again on that. No such decision was made. No such move was made. They alleged that they were not the low bidder on the basis of a two-year contract, which was what was asked for in the request for proposal in the tender, and they were the low bidder on that basis. They were wrong again, Madam Speaker. So how many times do they have to be demonstrated to be wrong before they stop playing all of these games of sleaze and innuendo?

Mr. Ashton: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, Beauchesne Citation 492 lists the terms that the Premier used as being unparliamentary. I would also point out that the Premier did not even answer the question once again as to why his government overruled their own committee in handing out this contract.

So, Madam Speaker, not only should he withdraw that comment, but if there is anyone looking at sleaze it should be sleaze in government as we are seeing on this contract.

Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, on the same point of order.

Mr. Filmon: Despite the fact that the Free Press editorially has used that term in speaking about the New Democrats, I will withdraw that word because it is unparliamentary.

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable First Minister, and I would remind all honourable members to pick and choose their words carefully. I think it would be very much in order now if the honourable member for Thompson would also withdraw the word "sleaze" attributed in his point of order.

Mr. Ashton: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will withdraw the word "sleaze."

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable member for Thompson.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, with a supplementary question.

Mr. Ashton: On a supplementary question, Madam Speaker, since the First Minister did not answer the question. I want to get to the root. I want to ask him why this government overruled the recommendations of his committee that pinpointed as one of the key factors the quality-of-care issues. Who is pulling the strings on this contract? Why did they ignore their own committee?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I have said and it has been repeated here by the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) that we have to abide by requirements in government to ensure that contracts are awarded on a fair basis, and one of the requirements is of course that we have a process that identifies whether or not bidders are qualified to be able to provide the services or the products that are tendered. In that process, the committee that was examining it examined five bids and determined that two were qualified, one being Rimer Alco, the other being the company that the members opposite are speaking for. So they clearly were one of the two qualified bidders.

Secondly, they had to meet a requirement for a bid bond, alleged by members opposite they did not yesterday. They were wrong. They did meet the requirement for the bid bond.

Thirdly, they had to examine them then based on which was the best price and the lowest price of the two bidders. The lowest price of the two bidders was the company that was awarded the contract, Rimer Alco. Based on a two-year contract, they were clearly the lowest price. If we had not done it on that basis, members opposite would have found reason then to criticize us because either we did not award it on the basis of the best price, or something of that nature. They are constantly looking for ways in which they could disagree with this government, Madam Speaker. It does them no credit, but the fact of the matter is from all the examination this was awarded on the basis of the best practices that should be followed in the awarding of contracts.

Mr. Ashton: A final supplementary: I want to ask the Minister of Finance, responsible for Treasury Board, how he can justify ignoring the recommendation that due to the quality of care that VitalAire is able to provide and a lower cost, how he can ignore that when he himself yesterday said that the company that was rejected in this process, that was outlined as recommended, could provide better quality care. How can he justify ignoring a recommendation for a cheaper contract and better quality of care, the most important thing for our home care clients in our province?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we have to explain the process to members opposite so that they will ultimately understand it. We have a very comprehensive process in terms of reviewing tenders and proposals that we are very proud of, and as has been outlined, when proposals are first submitted the analysis is first done by an evaluation committee on the basis of quality. It was determined two firms met the quality test, Rimer Alco and VitalAire. Both met the quality tests. When the proposals were opened, in terms of costs, the lowest cost two-year contract was Rimer Alco. On the basis of the firm meeting the quality test and providing the lowest-cost contract, the award was made to Rimer Alco. It is that simple. [interjection] The member for Thompson seems to have difficulty understanding two firms met the quality test. Two firms met the quality test. Rimer Alco and VitalAire both met the quality test as reviewed by the evaluation committee. Do you not understand that they both met the quality tests? Both firms met the quality test, plain and simple.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I would like to refer to the minutes from the committee specifically dated Friday, December 13, 1996, where in fact it states, and I quote direct, "the committee recommends Manitoba enter into a contract with Vital Aire."

The question is: who in this government is going to take responsibility for overturning this decision? Someone in this government, whether it was the former Minister of Health, the current Minister of Health, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) or the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), someone is responsible. Who is it?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member for Inkster makes many accusations. I know there are many in the province who would like to know how his Leader got into the contract she has received from the federal government, what process she went through.

Remember the process here. The committee was to review the applications first for whether or not they could meet the quality requirements. Two bidders were successful. There were two option proposals for whether it would be a two-year contract or a two-year plus an option. There was a recommendation from the committee, as the member outlined, for one particular bidder based on a three-year contract. It was a recommendation. The view that was accepted in awarding the contract was that it should be for a two-year contract. The lowest bidder, Rimer Alco, also met the quality requirements of the contract.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, with a supplementary question.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Health if he can indicate whether or not this deal has been completely finalized. Has it been signed off? If it has not been signed off, can we get assurances from the Premier (Mr. Filmon) that he personally will investigate this whole matter before the agreement is signed off?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, despite the accusations that came from the opposition yesterday that there was an inability of Rimer Alco to meet bonding requirements, they have met their bonding requirements and their contract has been awarded.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

Yesterday, the chief of the Winnipeg Police Services, David Cassels, announced the publication of a document titled Firearm, Homicide, Robbery and Suicide Incidents Investigated by the Winnipeg Police Services (1995). I would like to table that report in the House today because I believe that is an important document that clearly demonstrates the need for gun control legislation.

Given that the chief of police has now demonstrated the importance of gun control to the health and safety of Manitobans in this report, will this minister join with the majority of Manitobans and ask for the support of the official opposition and withdraw his government's support for the Alberta constitutional challenge?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I would thank my colleague from The Maples for tabling that report.

I think there is a large problem with that report, and I am not faulting the police service. I have the highest respect for the police service and for my colleague who is a police officer. But what I am very concerned about are the statements of Justice Minister Roche who indicates that Bill C-68 is intended to get firearms out of the hands of criminals and potential suicides. Now that is the purpose of the FAC, the firearms acquisition certificate. That is the process by which we determine whether someone is suitable to have a firearm.

What this is, very sadly I would say, is simply a political attempt to try to prop up a very bad bill which does nothing but take police officers off of the street. I would ask the member for The Maples to stand up and say that he supports police officers in the street and not this kind of legislation.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Given that Manitoba Hydro has been restructured into four business units and given that Manitoba Hydro has signed onto the Mid-Continental Area Power Producers grid and given that legislation will be before this House in this session allowing for deregulation and given that some sections of Manitoba Hydro already operate in a nonregulated environment, will the Premier clarify for this House what he means when he stated Hydro was safe as long as it is in a totally regulated environment?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I heard the member for St. James on the radio this morning proposing the same kind of phoney argument about the potential for privatization. I have to tell her that I have said consistently that, as long as Hydro is in a market in which it has no competition at the retail level, there is no reason for us to ever consider privatization.

It needs, of course, to do what it is doing with respect to the wholesale distribution on a utility-wide basis in order to ensure that it preserves its capacity to export energy into the United States. That brings some $250 million U.S. annually into our economy, and it is very important that that is there so it keeps our rates the lowest in North America.

She, of course, would tie their hands so they would be in danger of losing that kind of ability to export to the United States by virtue of opposing this move. She is wrong, absolutely wrong. When questioned this morning and asked about operating in, as she says, already a partially deregulated market, she said, well, you know that they are in competition for installing hot water heaters, that they could have competition for that.

I thought to myself, my good heavens, that is a terrible situation, that somebody might be able to compete with them for installing hot--I mean, it might not be the end of the world, but I am sure you can see it, Madam Speaker, from here.

* (1410)

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, Beauchesne is very clear. Beauchesne Citation 417 is very clear that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate.

The Premier was asked a very straightforward question about Manitoba Hydro, shades of MTS. I would appreciate it, Madam Speaker, if you would ask him to give a straightforward answer and deal with the very real concern expressed by the member for St. James, a question on a lot of Manitobans' minds on whether they can trust this government with anything to do with privatization, particularly to do with Hydro.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I would remind the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon) that he should not provoke debate.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. James, with a supplementary question.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, my supplementary question to the Premier: if the Premier feels that this is something Manitobans believe, will he give the commitment to the people of Manitoba that it will go to a vote before Manitobans before any part or all of Manitoba Hydro is privatized like MTS was?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, Manitoba Hydro is so concerned that they ensure that the public is well informed about the issues here--and there are serious issues--because Manitoba Hydro, and indeed the customers of Manitoba Hydro, cannot afford to have their market for export of electricity that is worth more than $250 million U.S. a year to them cut off. They have a business plan that is intended to reflect a transition to ensure that they protect those markets and allow them to be a growing opportunity for the utility.

They are so concerned about it that they are going to have a series of public consultations so that they can put forward all of the facts surrounding this issue to the public, because they know that the public wants them to continue to strengthen and grow in public ownership, as they are today, and to maintain their ability to service customers at lowest possible cost. So they are going to put the facts forward, not the phoney things that are being put forward and false things that are being put forward by the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk).

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): One overriding legacy of this government is its total disregard for the role and value of nurses. We have seen, in the last several years, over 1,800 people, according to government figures, lose their work in the health care sector, mostly nurses. Today nurses, doctors and others were protesting at the St. Boniface Hospital about the elimination of nurses from the management role, policy role of the hospital.

I will table, Madam Speaker, the proposed organizational structure that eliminates nurses, and I would like to ask the Minister of Health is he not concerned, from a government that has eliminated nurses in the breadth and width of this province, that the elimination of nurses from policy-making roles at St. Boniface Hospital will have an effect on the delivery of patient care already hurt by government cutbacks?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): The member's statement is so far from the truth and the reality, it is directly opposed.

St. Boniface Hospital, with their new CEO and their board, are currently in the process of doing some reorganization that will accommodate the centralization and reorganization in Winnipeg that is absolutely needed to provide better patient care. That is what it is about, and the most telling part of the member's question, he never once mentioned patient care. That is what this side of the House is concerned about.

Mr. Chomiak: Will this minister, who is so quick to defend this structure that eliminates nurses, explain to the nurses and the patients of Manitoba why they continue to eliminate the need to hear the voices of nurses? Will the minister meet with nurses? Will he discuss their concerns? And, will he be prepared to take action with regard to the elimination of nurses from the policy and management structure of St. Boniface Hospital and as a matter of fact, Madam Speaker, most institutions in the province?

Mr. Praznik: First of all, I would say that the role of nurses in this province is expanding in a greater way than it ever has in the past. First of all, the change in the nursing school system, the requirement of a four-year nursing program, is going to produce better nurses who are more needed in the system.

Virtually every--not every but the vast majority of the liaison staff that Manitoba Health appointed to work with the regional health authorities are nurses.

As we move to program management within the Winnipeg Health Authority, each of the management teams include not only a clinical head but a nursing head. What St. Boniface Hospital is doing is reorganizing their structure to accommodate the reorganized Winnipeg program delivery system. The member would have us turn back the clock.

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Tonight this government is giving out sustainable development awards to nominees such as Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting, a company that even mining associations says has the worst air pollution record around.

This government continues to do a snow job in the idea of sustainable development so no one is surprised to see this government eagerly selling off park land at the same time as trumpeting sustainable development.

This minister should be reminded that in adjusting park boundaries at Winnipeg Beach for condo developments he is breaking his own legislation. Why, when plenty of commercial sites are available outside park boundaries, is this minister anxious to dispose of park land at Winnipeg Beach, and why is he breaching Section 14 of The Parks Act that restricts the sale of park land to do it?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): After listening carefully to that question, I believe the member is starting to read his own press releases. The fact is the Winnipeg Beach issue is being put through the process as is required by The Parks Act. An information meeting was recently held at Winnipeg Beach, and further information will be taken from the public before any decision is finally approved.

Mr. Struthers: Before a decision is finally approved. Why then was a lease concluded in 1995 between the deputy minister and the Lions Club, complete with a lease-signing ceremony attended by the deputy, long before proposed boundary changes and long before any public hearings?

Mr. Cummings: Madam Speaker, for the very purpose of what I said, to begin the process of having input, consultation and to facilitate any decision making that will be required.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, yesterday in response to my questions regarding the privatization of historical artifacts and by what authority this government was selling historical artifacts to legal firms, I got bluster from one minister and bombast and bullying from the other; however, I will return to the questions today.

To the Minister of Culture: has the minister's office consulted with any stakeholder groups, including aboriginal people, since so many of the historical records for sale pertain to transactions regarding aboriginal people?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I will attempt to be as gentle as possible then in my comments back to the member as I tell her that she was wrong yesterday and she is wrong today.

Madam Speaker, I can assure you and assure this House that those documents are not for sale. For a second day the member has failed to check her facts. She was wrong yesterday; she is wrong again.

* (1420)

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to address an issue which the honourable member for Osborne has just raised again in this Chamber, and it was a question on which I took notice yesterday. I would not be so audacious as to allege that the honourable member for Osborne is a purveyor or muse of stygian murk, but I can assure the honourable member for Osborne that I have consulted with my department and there are absolutely no documents that are being sold or offered for sale.

In fact, the Winnipeg Land Titles Office has solicited offers from private law firms to contribute charitably to underwrite the cost, under the auspices of the Provincial Archivist, to have these documents preserved, mounted and framed to be displayed in the public domain. So the allegations that this government is selling 35 historical documents, including Riel's power, is categorically, unequivocally wrong.

Madam Speaker: Technically, time has expired, but in order to acknowledge the member for Wellington who was on her feet well before the members started chiding each other across the Chamber, I think it is in order that we recognize the honourable member for Wellington for one very short question.

Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Last Thursday the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism stated that he was in the process of preparing a communication outlining the government's response to the closing of Eaton's and that our concerns about Eaton's potential closing were highly speculative.

I would like to ask the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism, in light of the announcement yesterday that most of the stores that Eaton's plans to abandon will be shut down on June 30, six months ahead of the schedule that was announced in late February, if he can table for us the communication that last Thursday he was in the process of preparing and if he plans to meet with civic groups such as Downtown BIZ and City Council in Winnipeg and Brandon to figure out what to do about this distressing situation.

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Yes and yes, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.