Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): A point of order, I am not too sure, I understand that you ordered that we break off into Committee of Supply. Can you ask for leave when you are no longer in the Chair, Madam Speaker?

Madam Speaker: I recognized the honourable government House leader on House business and have not at this point vacated the Chair.

Mr. McCrae: It is my understanding of the practices here, Madam Speaker, that when any House leader rises on a matter of House business, it is essentially in the nature of a point of order, and so I was appropriately on my feet, may I suggest.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for The Maples, I understand, is withdrawing his point of order.

Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader has asked if there is leave then to waive the adjournment hour of 10 p.m., when the committees are in Supply this evening, and move it until midnight. Is there leave? [agreed]

Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair.

This section of the Committee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of the Department of Urban Affairs. Does the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs have an opening statement?

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Urban Affairs): Yes, I do, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Chairperson, I am pleased to introduce the Department of Urban Affairs Estimates for 1997-98. The government of Manitoba is committed to ensuring the long-term well-being of our capital city of Winnipeg and its citizens. During the past year, the government and my department specifically have been working to build on and strengthen our partnership and relationship with the City of Winnipeg in the support of this objective.

The province is aware of the significant challenges and opportunities facing the city, and we recognize the importance of working co-operatively with City Council to respond to these issues. In order to ensure effective communications with the city, provincial cabinet ministers meet formally and informally with the mayor and EPC, the Executive Policy Committee, on a regular basis. As well, provincial staff meet frequently with their counterparts in the civic administration to discuss and resolve issues of mutual concern.

I think it is important to acknowledge in my comments today in this committee the significant efforts which Mayor Thompson and her council are making to address the problems facing city government. I congratulate City Council for adopting the reshaping of our civic government strategy to achieve affordable local government. This strategy presents a host of innovations for restructuring civic administration and making it financially sustainable.

I would just like to point out a few of the initiatives that the city has brought forth after their election of 1995 and in its council of 1996 some of the initiatives that were put forth at that time in which they indicated the desire to work toward the contracting out of park mowing, the contracting out of library book delivery services and the shelving of materials, the contracting out of all of Handi-Transit service, which I believe they are in the process of doing right now, the increased contracting out of refuse collection services, the contracting out of quarry operations, the consolidation of their stores functions, the downsizing and/or the contracting out in their construction branch and the contracting out of janitorial functions in the Winnipeg Police Services.

In this year's budget of '97-98, some of the strategic initiatives that were also brought forth that are mentioned for recommendations for pursuit are in regards to the exploring the full contracting out of solid waste functions by the year 2000, including the introduction of a uniform user fee, the contracting out of the operation, the maintenance and the management of civic golf courses, the contracting out of additional janitorial functions in civic buildings, the contracting out of the Animal Services program, including enforcement functions as well as the operation of the animal shelter. They are exploring the possibility of contracting out water operations, the development of a business plan to contracting out of street design, the payroll, the library technical services, park planning and other services that could be provided efficiently by outside suppliers.

I congratulate the City of Winnipeg on these initiatives and looking at areas of where there are possible savings that can be generated, because any type of savings naturally will result in savings to the taxpayers of Manitoba and to the taxpayers of Winnipeg.

* (1440)

So these are some of the initiatives I believe that should be made of record as mentioned by the city and her councillors in trying to address some of the directions that the City of Winnipeg is taking with their taxation problems.

Another significant initiative of City Council was the announcement of a red tape review panel which was to eliminate administrative red tape and the duplication between departments and governments. I believe they looked at the success that was initiated through the Government Services department here in Manitoba and how we have been able to cut down on the red tape review within our administration, and the City of Winnipeg has adopted this. The exercise will enable better and more accessible civic services for the citizens of Winnipeg, and I am pleased to report that my department, the Department of Urban Affairs, is participating on this review panel.

Another initiative that was just undertaken by the City of Winnipeg and just announced also was the fair taxation commission in which a panel of individuals from various components of Winnipeg and areas are looking at a fair taxation commission and looking at the best way as to the levels of taxation, the administration of taxation and the direction of taxation that should or should not be taken by the City of Winnipeg. So I congratulate them on these types of initiatives.

Manitoba Urban Affairs plays a crucial role in facilitating and supporting intergovernmental relations between the city and the province. The department is responsible for the development and the maintenance of a legislative, financial and planning framework that supports Winnipeg's sustainable development and meets the needs of Winnipeg citizens.

There are several initiatives Urban Affairs will be implementing in 1997-98 to support our strong, ongoing partnership with the city.

In the area of finance, I am pleased to announce that operating grants to the City of Winnipeg in 1997-98 will increase to $89.32 million, which represents an increase of 1.3 percent over the previous year. I should point out that this is an increase that has been ongoing in regard to our allocation of funding to the city. As the funding allocation clearly illustrates, the province continues to place a priority on the provision of sustainable and stable funding assistance to the city.

I would note that our government's recently announced $6.2-million increase in municipal funding payments to the city has enabled City Council to significantly reduce its property tax increases.

The Manitoba government's generous funding support to the City of Winnipeg stands in marked contrast to the situation in many other provinces where governments continue to freeze or cut municipal support grants. I would just like to point out that in comparison to other areas, specifically in Canada, when we look at the operating grants, other provinces have been reducing their grants and some of them very, very significantly.

As I pointed out previously, our increasing has gone up continually. Over the last six years, our increase in funding to the City of Winnipeg has gone up by 24 percent. During that same time period in other parts of Canada, the government in Alberta has reduced their funding, their operating grants by 41.6 percent; the Ontario government has reduced their operating grants in Ontario by 23 percent; in Newfoundland they have reduced their operating grants to the municipalities by 17.9 percent; in New Brunswick it has gone down by 8.3 percent; Nova Scotia, 7.3 percent; and Quebec by 6.8 percent.

Mr. Chairman, as pointed out and as illustrated, our support for Winnipeg has always been and continues to be the envy of other municipal governments all across Canada. We have continually been there for the City of Winnipeg in the support of our municipal grants.

With respect to capital funding support to Winnipeg, I will be announcing shortly the details of a third Urban Capital Projects Allocation to be implemented over a six-year period of 1997-98 to the year 2002-03. UCPA-III, as it is called, has proven to be a very successful partnership for the revitalization and the enhancement of the city's capital structures and assets. I should point out that this would be the third UCPA-III that we are in the process of announcing.

Under UCPA-II, which has been in place since 1991-92, the province has provided $30 million in unconditional funds to the city for its capital priorities. A total of $66 million has been provided to cost-share joint priorities such as transit bus replacement, street renewal and community revitalization. The renewed commitment of long-term capital funding under UCPA-III will give the city continued certainty and stability respecting revenues as it develops its future capital expenditure plan.

As the throne speech noted, the government places a high priority on the revitalization of Winnipeg's older residential neighbourhoods. The Manitoba/Winnipeg Community Revitalization Program, our partnership initiative with the City of Winnipeg, has been the focus of these efforts. The province and the city are currently reviewing this program, and the results of this review will be considered in the development of a new six-year community revitalization program. Announcements concerning this new program will be forthcoming later on in the year.

The co-ordination of provincial participation in the Winnipeg Development Agreement is another important focus of the department. The objective of this five-year partnership agreement with Canada and Winnipeg is to implement programming which supports Winnipeg's long-term sustainable economic development through three major components, Community Development and Security, Labour Force Development and Strategic and Sectoral Investments.

Many exciting initiatives were announced by WDA, Winnipeg Development Agreement, programs in 1996-97 such as the Downtown Watch; CounterAction, a project to help businesses prevent crime; the establishment of a drop-in centre in the Central Park area to provide youth in the area with an alternative to gang activity; the restoration of the Low Line bridge at The Forks to provide pedestrian access to the historic South Point; also, other initiatives involving Rossbrook House which have proved to be very, very beneficial.

A program just this weekend that is in the continuous stage is called camp, which is for children, that kept them busy during the spring break in teaching them magic and circus tricks and the idea of accomplishment and participation. I had the opportunity to be there for the windup and to see the pride and the joy on these young people in performing before their peers and also their parents. It is something that I think that it is hard to put a dollar figure on, but it was very, very impressive and very satisfying.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson, 1997-98 promises to be a year of even more intensive activity as all our programs come into full effect. Urban Affairs is also implementing several WDA programs. These include the North Main Economic Development. In 1997-1998 a commercial development action plan will be prepared which will set out funding criteria and priorities for this program.

Urban Safety, to date this program has funded nine projects for a total commitment of just over $1 million. More announcements of these projects will be made in the future and, while I am talking about urban safety, I should point out that this has proven to be a very beneficial area in forming new partnerships, good-faith partnerships with various nonprofit organizations. The $1 million that has been committed, as pointed out, has generated almost $4 million in good-faith partnerships with other areas to continue the program, so it is almost a three-to-one or a four-to-one type of return on monies that are invested by the province. It is good catalyst money. It gets other departments involved, like I mentioned before, Rossbrook House, the City of Winnipeg police force, Winnipeg Boys and Girls Club, the Downtown BIZ, North Main BIZ, just to name a few of the organizations that have taken advantage of the Urban Safety program.

Under the neighbourhood improvement program in 1997-98, a program delivery agreement will be signed with the city and a number of neighbourhood infrastructure projects commenced.

Riverbank development: New projects in addition to the Low Line bridge will be announced shortly, and we are in the process of looking at applications and evaluating them at this particular time.

Strategic initiatives: Various projects have been funded to date by the program including a feasibility study on establishing a Canadian fashion technology centre in Winnipeg. Further initiatives will be identified shortly along with this, too.

* (1450)

All of our programs are anticipating a very busy year of project activity. Over the next 12 months, Urban Affairs' programs will be making another significant announcement on projects which support Winnipeg's sustainable economic development.

I am pleased to report that progress continues to be made in the province's effort to address interjurisdictional issues in the Capital Region and to build regional co-operation. The Capital Region Strategy developed jointly by the Round Table on Environment and Economy and the Capital Region Committee was adapted by the government on March 20, 1996. The strategy provides a framework for planning and development in the Capital Region well into the next century.

Urban Affairs co-chairs the Capital Region Committee with the Department of Rural Development. This body which includes all mayors and reeves in the region is the focus of the government's efforts to forge an effective partnership between Winnipeg and its neighbours. The committee will play a key role in implementing the Capital Region Strategy. With the strategy now in place, the province has created a task force composed of members of the Capital Region Committee to make recommendations respecting the enhanced operation and the structure of the committee and the effective implementation of the strategy. A task force has also been established under the Minister of Environment (Mr. McCrae) to develop a waste management action plan for the Capital Region.

In the area of transportation, now that public consultation has been completed, Urban Affairs is looking forward to the finalization shortly of the City of Winnipeg's new transportation plan, TransPlan 2010. This plan which has been jointly funded by Urban Affairs and the city will provide a 15- to 20-year framework to guide both short- and long-term transportation decisions in Winnipeg. Urban Affairs staff have participated in the TransPlan advisory committee and on the city-provincial management committee.

A steering committee of five citizens appointed to direct the development of TransPlan 2010 is presently putting the finishing touches on this report to the province and the city. The study of the feasibility of developing a permanent voters' list for use by all levels of government is a special project currently being co-ordinated by Manitoba Urban Affairs. A consultant has been hired to conduct the study under the direction of the trilevel steering committee. We expect to receive the consultant's final report before the summer of this year.

With respect to legislation, I will be introducing a bill to amend The City of Winnipeg Act during this session. The 1997 legislation will reflect Urban Affairs' ongoing efforts to update and streamline The City of Winnipeg Act and to respond to specific requests for amendments from City Council.

I would like to say in closing that the Province of Manitoba recognized the importance of a healthy and a vibrant Winnipeg to a strong Manitoba. The mandate of my government and this department and the initiatives that I have described are clear evidence of the emphasis that this government places on Winnipeg's development. My staff and I look forward to building further on the partnerships with the city as we work together to address the urban concerns of Winnipeg citizens.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the Minister of Urban Affairs for those comments. Does the official opposition critic, the honourable member for Wellington, have any opening comments?

Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Yes, Mr. Chair, I do. I noted with interest the comments of the minister in outlining the activities, past, present and future, of the Department of Urban Affairs. As I have stated before in these Estimates, I think the actions of the government belie the comments that the minister makes and has made in all three now of his opening remarks about the long-term well-being and partnership between the City of Winnipeg and the government of Manitoba.

I think that we only need look at the answers of the government today and the questions that were asked about what is the province planning to do or does the province see any concern about the record snowfall that happened over the weekend, any assistance that might be presented to the city reflecting that. The minister's response--not the Minister of Urban Affairs' response but the minister who responded in Question Period today--I felt was flippant, especially coming from a former city councillor who should know better about the cycle of snow clearing and snow removal in the city and the budget process in the City of Winnipeg.

Anybody who was listening to his response to this very potentially problematic issue would see that the government does not care about the city of Winnipeg. They have turned their backs in many important respects on the city of Winnipeg. Their actions do not lead and are not going to lead to a healthy and vibrant city, but they continue to lead towards more, not to a coming together but a spreading apart between the city and the province.

I found it also very interesting that the minister, for the first time in my recollection, actually spoke about some of the initiatives that the city was undertaking. It is interesting because the only reason I think that the minister commented on the reshaping the city strategy that has been presented by the mayor and her EPC is that it is all dealing with contracting out and downsizing and privatizing. In the past years the province has made very little comment on the actions of city government other than the Premier (Mr. Filmon) spouting off the odd time about how they should keep their house in order the way the province has kept its fiscal house in order. Now, finally, for the first time, the city is doing something right.

While the minister outlines the summary of what the city is suggesting, I found it very interesting to note that the minister did not reflect the very good brief that was presented to City Council on behalf of the Canadian Union of Public Employees and their president, Paul Moist, refuting virtually every single one of the arguments that the Reshaping Our Civic Government document brought forward. I could go along and refute on record this afternoon some of those concerns that the minister brought forward, but I will not spend much time on it.

I think it was very interesting that the minister is saying: Go for it; as long as you are talking about contracting out and downsizing and privatizing, you are right on our wave length. It does not matter that there is another side to this issue. It does not matter that virtually all of the financial concerns that were theoretically raised in this mayor's document could be addressed without the wholesale contracting out, downsizing and privatizing that this document outlines, that there are other ways to deal with the financial concerns of the City of Winnipeg. The minister is choosing to just come down on one side rather than recognizing the possibility of other answers to the issues.

There is no question that there are major financial issues and service delivery issues facing the City of Winnipeg, but for the minister to say that to reflect only the document brought forward by the Executive Policy Committee and the mayor without referencing at all the other suggestions brought forward by the workers who work at the City of Winnipeg is to my way of thinking not only unfair, but it does a disservice to the workers of the City of Winnipeg. It does a disservice to many of the citizens of Winnipeg who do not want to see their services further privatized, downsized and contracted out. It just sets the cat among the pigeons yet again and puts the provincial government on one side of this issue without recognizing the fact that it is a very complicated set of concerns that have a number of possible answers to them.

* (1500)

I think the idea that the provincial government says that the city should look at contracting out or privatizing its water services, for example, is a dreadful idea and one that, yes, was in that document but should not have been supported by the provincial government without a reflection on the concerns that are raised by this. The minister, in outlining his support for this document, in effect is turning his back on many of the citizens of Winnipeg, that the solid waste functions should be downsized, privatized or contracted out. Again, that is very consistent with the government's support for BFI and the way the Clean Environment Commission process was hurried through and the way the Clean Environment Commission did not follow its own mandate and its own terms of reference in dealing with the whole issue of solid waste management in the Capital Region. But that is consistent with what this government wants to have happen. It is also consistent with the lack of awareness, whether it is done through legitimate lack of awareness or an ideological blindness, I am not sure, but it is consistent with everything that this government has come down in as far as solid waste management is concerned. That is a whole huge other issue that we could discuss for quite a long period of time.

The fair taxation commission that has been established by the city, chaired by the former Minister of Finance and the former Education minister, is interesting, not the concept of a fair taxation commission, I think that potentially has some positives to it, but asking Clayton Manness to chair this commission because the mayor says he has the ear of the government is quite telling, putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop, one might say. A man who has been in the forefront in causing some of the financial problems facing the City of Winnipeg is now being asked to chair a fair taxation commission. Please. If it were not so potentially damaging for the City of Winnipeg, it would be laughable. The minister says the mayor chose Mr. Manness, and that is true. I am just saying that this is not a positive statement for the City of Winnipeg.

The minister talks about partnerships and he talks about how there is a 1.3 percent increase to the overall sums spent to the City of Winnipeg and how good this is. Well, my understanding, and I may be wrong on this, but it seems to me the overall budget increase for the whole government of Manitoba is about 1.8 percent. So the grants to the City of Winnipeg are less than the overall government increase in expenditures and less than, I might add, the estimated cost of living increase, or inflation rate, which is running at minimum 2 percent and maybe quite a bit higher if interest rates go up. So I would just like to tell the minister, that 1.3 percent increase, in light of the government's other budgetary actions and in light of the cost of living increases, is not even standing still. It is in effect a reduction in the support that the province is giving to the City of Winnipeg.

Then the minister talks about the fact that while other provinces are decreasing their grants to their cities and that while Winnipeg continues to be the envy of other cities in the country, one of the reasons why Winnipeg gets a high percentage of its money in the form of grants from the province is because the province has not given the City of Winnipeg or other municipalities the kind of ability to raise their own revenues that other cities do.

The City of Winnipeg has a higher reliance on property taxes than virtually any other major and middle-size city in the country. A reliance on property tax, as I think everybody would agree on, is not the kind of taxation reliance that is fair or equitable or can engender the kinds of revenues a city needs to do the business of keeping a quality city going. Winnipeg has to rely on that kind of proportion of property taxes because the province has kept for itself virtually all of the revenue generating methods.

Let us have all the facts on the table here. Winnipeg may be the envy of other cities in the country, but I am not sure that Calgary or Edmonton or Regina or Saskatoon, cities in the west that are comparable in, if not size, in composition to Winnipeg, would want to exchange their taxation ability, their revenue generating ability with the City of Winnipeg continually having to go to the province cap in hand. Nor, I suspect, would they want to give away their autonomy to the reliance that the City of Winnipeg has on the provincial government.

The minister does not talk anything about urban sprawl in his opening remarks. He does not talk anything about the concerns about Eaton's in his opening remarks. He does not talk anything--well, he mentions the Main Street redevelopment project that is underway. He does not talk anything about the major issues that are facing downtown urban Winnipeg. He does not talk anything about the poverty that is becoming a huge problem, continuing to be a huge problem for Winnipeg neighbourhoods, does not talk anything again, as I have said, about the province's responsibility to work with and assist its two-thirds of the residents who live in the city of Winnipeg, residents of the province, with their huge problems with the floods and the snow and does not talk at all about the whole problem of gangs that is becoming a huge problem for the residents of the city of Winnipeg and the underlying causes for the rise in gang membership and gang violence.

He does not mention anything about Winnport. Now, Winnport has, over the last few years, been a major feather in the government's cap and a concept that we on this side of the House have continued to support all the way through. There are some major problems currently with Winnport. I am wondering if the minister did not mention it, because there are some major problems with Winnport right now, and I will be asking him some specific questions in that regard.

In conclusion, I would just like to say that I do not think the Urban Affairs Estimates nor the record of this government over the past years leave any room for positive thinking on the part of the residents or the government of the city of Winnipeg. It does not address the major issues that are facing the city of Winnipeg. It does not deal with an understanding other than on the most cursory fashion in the overview of the fact that what benefits the city of Winnipeg ultimately benefits all of the province of Manitoba and what is a problem for the city of Winnipeg ultimately is a problem for the entire province of Manitoba. Those words may be stated, but the actions of this government give the lie to those words this year as they have in years past.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the official opposition critic for those comments. Under the Manitoba practice, debate of the Minister's Salary is traditionally the last item considered for the Estimates of the department. Accordingly, we shall defer the consideration of this item and now proceed with consideration of the next line. Before we do that, we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table, and we ask the minister if he would introduce his staff present.

Mr. Reimer: Certainly. With me is my Deputy Minister, Mr. Bill Kinnear; my financial analyst Henry Bos; Ray Klassen, one of my senior analysts; Jon Gunn, another senior analyst; and Marianne Farag, who is one of my senior analysts, who knows everything about urban affairs.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister.

Ms. Barrett: A procedural matter, Mr. Chair, in the past, because it is a small department, although a very important one, we have not gone item by item but have generally discussed issues and then dealt with the Minister's Salary at the end. So I am wondering if there is a willingness on the part of the minister to carry on that process this time as well.

Mr. Reimer: I have no problem with that. I think the member and I have sort of informally talked, and if there is something that we do not have the information right readily that we will certainly get it for her at the earliest convenience. I have no problem with sort of a free ranging discussion on the department.

Mr. Chairperson: If I might just summarize then that in fact it will be a, what would you call it, free-ranging discussion, and that is it. After that discussion, of course, we will pass all those lines that we have in fact discussed within the report. We thank the minister.

We now proceed to line 1(b) Executive Support $218,100, on page 126 of the Main Estimates book. Shall the item pass?

* (1510)

Ms. Barrett: Having just said that I would like to go free ranging or, as my colleague the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford) said, free-for-all, I would like to ask a couple of questions about the Estimates book itself. First of all the org chart, there are some changes from last year. I would just like to ask the minister about some of those changes, at least from my reading. Now, if I have made some mistakes, I am sure that the minister will point that out to me.

It appears to me that the job of assistant to the deputy minister is a new position?

Mr. Reimer: Yes. I was pleased to see that there was a promotion of one of our senior analysts, Ms. Heather MacKnight, and we do now have what you call an ADM or assistant deputy minister in this department.

Ms. Barrett: And there is an assistant to the deputy minister as well, so there is a second additional staff addition?

Mr. Reimer: I am sorry. I was looking down the line. I believe what you were talking about was the assistant to the deputy minister I need to keep. Yes, this was a promotion to that department for this individual, yes.

Ms. Barrett: So in the deputy minister's area then, there are two new positions.

Mr. Reimer: In a sense, we have always had two positions there. It is in the definition, I guess, of the two individuals is what is now transcribed in the organizational chart, but there were always two individuals working with the deputy minister. Previously, there was a secretary to the deputy minister and then another individual working there which was what they call an AY3. We have now just raised them to one category above so that there is the assistant to the deputy minister and the secretary to this deputy minister.

Ms. Barrett: I am sorry, I do not have my last year's chart in front of me, but I do not see--well, I see two positions that are no longer there. One is the director of Urban Planning and Development and the other is the WDA Program Manager position which was a term that is now vacant. There are a couple of other new positions, so I guess what I am asking is, has the staff complement increased?

Mr. Reimer: The number in the department has remained the same. There has been no change. As mentioned by the member for Wellington, the WDA Program Manager term position is vacant. It is in the process of being filled from within the department right now, but the complement of people has remained the same.

Ms. Barrett: So the WDA Program Manager when it is filled, when the position is filled, there will not be another name attached. It will be someone who is currently doing a job within the department.

Mr. Reimer: Where we are looking at moving someone on a career enhancement situation is out of our Housing department. The member is aware that the Department of Housing and the Department of Urban Affairs work within the same facilities. There is an overlap of various components, so we feel that there is an opportunity for someone out of our Housing department to move as an enhancement. This is where we feel that we can fill this position from.

Ms. Barrett: All the way to the left-hand column, the Admin Secretary position. Is that a new position?

Mr. Reimer: No.

Ms. Barrett: Okay. To the far right, finally. I am assuming that what this whole set of columns starting with the Winnipeg Development Agreement and going down to Capital Region Committee, these are the roles that the minister undertakes.

Mr. Reimer: Right.

Ms. Barrett: Again, on chart 1, which is a pie graph there, the financial assistance to the City of Winnipeg, my reading from 1996-97, the estimates were that 94.2 percent of the department's expenditures would be for financial assistance to the City of Winnipeg as compared to 92.4 estimated for '97-98. I am wondering if the minister can see if my math is correct and, if so, why that reduction?

Mr. Reimer: Yes, I think that that pie shape there, the 92.4 will continue to go down a bit as the Winnipeg Development Agreement funding and the allocation of funding on that will increase. So this is why there is a difference in numbers, but it is mainly because of the fact that the Winnipeg Development Agreement funding is starting to flow more through that piece of the pie. So that will grow and the other area will even though it is still going to the City of Winnipeg.

Ms. Barrett: I have a few questions, if I may bring forward, if you will, minutes or business arising from last year's Estimates. The first thing is, and this is, I think, the third time I have brought this up, the suburban Growth Management Study.

In the annual report of '95-96 on page 36, it is called the Growth Management Study, and I am wondering if the minister can give me an update on that. What happened in last year's Estimates was, we were talking about at the Urban Development Institute, I believe, and the city and the province were all going to get together, come up with terms of reference for a Growth Management Study and the institute was having problems and was unable to complete their part of the terms of reference or doing that. I am wondering if anything has happened in that regard at all.

Mr. Reimer: It has been brought to my attention or I am of the understanding that the other two partners of the joint venture, if you want to call it, the city and the UDI are the ones that have come back and said that they do not want to proceed with this at this time. So, as the third partner, we have not initiated any type of further action on it, as mentioned, mainly because the other partners have no willingness to proceed at this time.

* (1520)

Ms. Barrett: Could the minister share with us the reasons for the city as well as UDI being unwilling to deal with the situation at this time? My understanding was that last June when we discussed this, the city was willing. It was UDI that was having problems, and now the minister is saying both other partners are not prepared to go ahead at this time. Could the minister explain the reasons that they have given to the government for not going ahead with the study?

Mr. Reimer: The only thing I can refer to is the fact that I have a letter from the city that has indicated that they have been in contact with UDI, and they, I guess in conversation, concur that the study be held in abeyance. To the best of my knowledge, we were not made privy to their discussions as to the why and how they came to that decision other than they conveyed that decision to us in saying that they felt at this time that they would like to hold it back. It does not say that they would not reconvene it or reintroduce it or restart it. It just said to hold it in abeyance at this time. So I can only surmise that, if there is a willingness on their part to revisit it, that is how it would come up again. But, to the best of my knowledge, it was in conversation between the city and UDI that they came to that decision, and they gave us that indication.

Ms. Barrett: I wonder if the minister has something further to add in that answer before I carry on with my questioning.

Mr. Reimer: Other than the fact that the point has been made that, I guess, in the discussions, the resources with the UDI were not available, and that was part of their decision, I guess, in talking with the City of Winnipeg.

Ms. Barrett: Could the minister tell us the date of that letter from the city, and, if possible, who sent the letter?

Mr. Reimer: The letter that I am referring to, which we have a copy of, was sent from Mr. Holmes of Land Development with the City of Winnipeg to Mr. Chris Leach in our department of January 8, 1996.

Ms. Barrett: Mr. Deputy Chair, so in effect, six months prior to our discussion of last year's Estimates was the last time there has been any communication on the part of the province--not communication on the part of the province--communication on the part of the UDI and/or the city dealing with this study?

Mr. Reimer: To the best of my knowledge, that is the last written communique that we have had from the city regarding their position.

Ms. Barrett: Well, I do not want to spend a whole lot of time on this, but I think that this is a really important issue. I think part of the importance of this issue is the lack of action or even reaction on the part of the government. Now, when we discussed this last June, the minister stated that it was not the province's role to take a proactive, initiating function in this regard. Well, I disagreed with the minister in that context then; I will disagree with him now. But I want to know why the minister has not directed his department to contact the city and say, why are you not prepared to do this or we should be doing this because in the annual report of '95-96 under the Growth Management Study it says that there was to be "a joint Provincial/City study of the costs and benefits associated with development in Winnipeg. City and Provincial staff were requested to prepare draft terms of reference . . . in consultation with representatives from the Urban Development Institute. City and Provincial staff met on a regular basis and completed the draft terms of reference for the Growth Management Study in 1995-96. Decisions by the Province and the City relating to the draft terms of reference and implementation of the Growth Management Study are pending."

Now the way I read that paragraph in the annual report for '95-96, UDI was a consulting member; the province and the city were the initiating members. It was a joint study. Now the minister in June of 1996 says that because the other two partners, and he intimates that both UDI and the city are peer partners with the province in this--that because UDI was having a problem and the city was not responding, nothing was going to happen, and the province was not going to take any initiative in this regard. According to the annual report, the province is at the very least on a par with the city and UDI in developing this study, that the draft terms of reference had been done.

Can the minister explain what the situation is now? Is the annual report incorrect, or is the annual report correct, and the city is a full, functioning partner who could and, I would say, should have taken the initiative in getting this Growth Management Study off the ground?

Mr. Reimer: Well, I guess it is like any type of good-faith partnership that you develop with any types of organizations, and when you have a three-tiered partnership--a good faith-partnership, I should say--in trying to come to some sort of understanding, that you have to rely on the other partners' willingness to participate. If the partnership is one-sided by the insistence of the province to initiate all the actions, with the other two partners saying that they are not willing to proceed at this time, it makes it a very difficult situation to come to any type of resolve.

We as the Province of Manitoba can always take the position, because we are the administrators of The City of Winnipeg Act, that we should be the be-all and end-all to all decisions, but at the same time I think it is much better--and I know the member would agree--that to work in co-operation and consultation and try to come to some sort of resolve whether it is a growth management study or any type of situation that develops as a potential of a conflict between two governing bodies.

The fact that we have three partners here even makes it more tenuous because we have to be cognizant of the fact that UDI has priorities and directions that they feel they would like to go, and that the City of Winnipeg has their considerations that we as a province have to take into consideration in any type of decision making that we do. So I think it is better for us to work in a consultatory and consensus-building manner and try to come to some sort of resolve. The fact that I have been told that there have been conversations between the department and the various components in trying to come to some sort of resolve or a possibly more definitive direction and answering of questions as to what is going to happen with the Growth Management Study, that these are some of the things that we can continue to work on.

But I do not believe that it would be apropos for the province to be the total instigator of direction on something that involves a partnership with another level of government and a part of the private sector as to how things are implemented. I would think that there is still room for a direction on this, but we will continue to try to work in a co-operative manner with the other two partners here. I feel that there is room for optimism, that this is the best way to proceed with it.

* (1530)

Ms. Barrett: Mr. Deputy Chair, first the minister answered my first question about the status with a reading of a letter from January of 1996, six months before last year's Estimates, in which the city stated that the city and the UDI did not want to proceed at this point. I assumed from that, that was the last communication on this issue that had been undertaken on the part of the Urban Affairs staff. Now the minister is saying that there have been communications ongoing between the department and the other partners in this process, so I would like clarification on that.

I would also like clarification on the statement in the annual report from Urban Affairs '95-96 that stated that there were draft terms of reference for the Growth Management Study undertaken. If there are draft terms of reference, is the minister prepared to share them, and does the minister know, after these ongoing discussions that have taken place between the partners after January 1996, what the reasons are for the city and UDI being unwilling to carry on the Growth Management Study process, and if he does know that, could he share that with us?

Mr. Reimer: I have not been made privy to the draft terms of reference that the member is referring to, but what I can do is I can instruct the department to try to get some sort of more definitive answers regarding whether there has been something that has been completed and whether there is the ability to share this type of information with the member, taking into consideration whether the information is of a proprietary nature because of the fact that we are dealing with the other two partners of it.

If there is information that is available and there is a willingness to share this by the other partners, I would certainly make every effort to try to make this available to the member for Wellington. So I really have nothing to hide on this or--I can only share what I have, and I do not have anything of that nature, to my knowledge, before me now.

Ms. Barrett: I am not for a moment suggesting that the minister is hiding anything or trying to hide anything. If I left that impression, I apologize for that, but I do think that--[interjection] Mr. Chair, if I may, I would like to ask that the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) keep his comments to himself, or if he must share his comments with the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) across the table, that he get on the same side of the table. I am finding it very difficult to hear myself and the minister.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: For all members around this committee table, if any of you would like to carry on conversations, I would ask that you do it at the back of the room or out in the hall, and the member for Wellington can continue her comments.

Ms. Barrett: Thank you, Mr. Chair, I appreciate that.

I am actually trying to get some clarification on what I see as a cloudy--not a cloudy issue but a lack of clarity in the comments that were made by the minister in last year's Estimates regarding the Growth Management Study and the statements that were made in the annual report, so I would appreciate whatever updating the minister can get, not only about where the draft terms of reference are, if there are any, and sharing those with me if they are not proprietary--that would be great--but, also, if the minister could find out why the city and the UDI are saying that they do not want to proceed with this management study.

I would think that that would be something that you would want to do because it is going on now six years since the province and the city agreed to undertake this study. Costs associated with development in the city of Winnipeg are very important, and the knowledge of what those costs are, who they are currently charged against, is essential in determining, I would think, the future direction of development in the city of Winnipeg.

There are a lot of issues surrounding that that we could go into, but I think that there was a commitment made on the part of the city and the province six years ago that the province has, I would think, not only an interest but a responsibility to carry through on or to find out why the other partners are unwilling or unable to deal with this issue at this time. I would really like to have it done, so I do not need to bring it up next year.

Mr. Reimer: I share the concern that the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) has because you know anything that has a benefit to any type of planning for the city of Winnipeg that the province can assist in is something that we should all be conscious of.

Just in talking with staff, they have informed me that, even just before Christmastime, there were conversations to the effect of regarding the Growth Management Study and where it was happening. It has been indicated that there seems to be a fair amount of reluctance, as indicated, that UDI did not want it to proceed at this time because of a lack of the resources available to put into the project. The city's Land Development department has also indicated this report is not a priority on their side, so this seems to be more of an indication as to why the reasoning behind the nonaction, as the member has indicated, is coming about. So it is something that has been conveyed to us outlining the positions by the city and by UDI as to why we are not going to proceed with it.

I think as conscientious as the department is in regard to the City of Winnipeg and its relationship that there will continue to be an ongoing contact by Urban Affairs with the city just to keep an update anyway as to what type of enthusiasm they have to initiate the Growth Management Study. I can only give the member the assurance that our department will be diligent in its--the bell is ringing.

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. We will recess this committee to return to the Assembly for a vote. Thank you.

The committee recessed at 3:38 p.m.

The committee resumed at 4:41 p.m.

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. We will resume the Estimates of the Department of Urban Affairs. I believe that the minister was answering a question. I cannot remember what the question was, offhand, but--

Mr. Reimer: I cannot either, so we will go on.

Mr. Chairperson: Well, everybody else seems to be happy to go on.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Mr. Deputy Chairman, I would like to direct my questions in two areas: one, a constituency-focused series of concerns that is related to Omand's Creek; and the other area is related to potential mineral resource sterilization due to the effects of Winnport, airport development and urban sprawl. So one is based on my critic area, minerals, and the other one is constituency based and that is Omand's Creek in the heart of Winnipeg.

I am going to start with Omand's Creek. It is the centre of a great deal of my attention lately as we attempt to pull everyone in together to develop the creek, primarily north of Portage, which has been basically left to its own meanderings and not many of those since it was actually reconfigured into a fairly straight ditch used for water runoff, but the community has a vision to use that creek, in fact, as a natural green space, linear parkway. I have talked to the minister about looking ahead, becoming more visionary in terms of the creek itself, looking in the long term and asking the minister to look at all types of aspects, such as the linear parkway development, which I just mentioned; water quality; the impacts of the airport development which we will anticipate higher water levels runoff in the creek. So there are a number of impacts that we anticipate, and I think that clearly what is needed is co-ordination as we are looking at a development of something that goes through the heart of Winnipeg in an area that has high levels of tourism and can also play a community resource facility.

I ask the minister: Is the ministry prepared to take co-ordination lead? Do they have plans, or are plans underway, in terms of developing Omand's Creek?

Mr. Reimer: I think the member for St. James brings up a very interesting topic in the sense that through the Winnipeg Development Agreement we do have the availability of looking at riverbank enhancement projects, and Omand's Creek would definitely fall within the category of any type of projects for redevelopment or for greening or for any type of enhancement along there.

I am not exactly privy to all the applications that have come forth through the Riverbank Development agreement. I know we are in the process of doing an evaluation on the proposals rights now, and we will be looking at proceeding through the Winnipeg Development Agreement, through the various strategies.

I believe that we have $2 million earmarked through the Riverbank Development program as the Manitoba contribution, and also Winnipeg has $1.5 million allocated through the Riverbank Development project.

Omand's Creek, being part of not only the member for St. James' constituency but also the member for Wellington's constituency--

An Honourable Member: And Wolseley.

An Honourable Member: And River Heights.

Mr. Reimer: --and Wolseley, pardon me, and River Heights--my gosh, I am being inundated by MLAs--is something that I think that warrants attention. I know that the members along the Seine River have done the same thing in looking at enhancing that stretch of the waterway; it has become quite an attraction not only, as the member pointed out, as a tourist attraction but also as a place for community, for people to gather and to partake in the amenities of any type of water, river or waterways through our city. So I would look forward to applications, working with the member if she is willing to bring forth applications to my department for Omand's Creek. It is something that I believe that is warranted here in Winnipeg.

Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Deputy Chairman, a recent development on the creek is actually under construction, and that is the Home Depot site, and one of the concerns that the local community has was the impact of that development on water quality and specifically the surface drainage from the parking lot in terms of contaminants coming in, both particulate and oil and transmission fluids, from the parking lot, which will be a substantial size coming into the creek. The development has followed what the required regulations are. However, it seemed there was unanimity between the people that meet in terms of environmentalists, the Department of Environment, consultants, that further improvements or regulations requiring certain filtration systems, which have been used in other jurisdictions, would actually improve water quality by limiting particulates and capturing pollutants. Has there been any consideration, or would the Department of Urban Affairs look into the measures suggested such as a storm receptor or other pollutant control measures which have been used in other jurisdictions? Has the ministry--or would the ministry take the initiative to look at upgrading the regulations to ensure that water quality will actually be enhanced? What we need is leadership, and so I am asking the minister to take that visionary role and ensure that developments in the future will include that type of pollution control systems.

Mr. Reimer: One has to look at the flow of Omand's Creek and some of the areas that it goes by and some of the various industries that are located along Omand's Creek. I am sure the member knows that it runs very, very close to a fairly large marshalling area for the railway where there is a certain amount of runoff. It also runs very, very close to a steel foundry where there is a possibility of runoff from that side also--not saying that there are contaminants, but it should be recognized where there is the possibility that various components of contamination can enter Omand's Creek, plus the fact that it is right--it runs very, very close to the old Saskatchewan Avenue dump, which is continually leaching contaminants out of the hill back into the water source.

* (1650)

I am quite familiar with that area as I have a business that is right on Omand's Creek. So I am fairly familiar with the creek itself. In fact, I have noticed quite regularly that there is a testing that is going on there quite regularly that I have witnessed. In fact, it happens right in front of the business that I am located where there is a group that comes in with testing materials, and I know that I have personally seen them test at least half a dozen times at various times during the summer when there are various flows on the creek.

In the springtime when there is a heavy flow, it is monitored right through to when Omand's Creek is almost a trickle where you can almost walk across it and this testing crew still comes down to test it. I do not know where they are from. I am only assuming that they are there under some official sanction from either the Department of Environment or possibly the City of Winnipeg or possibly even the University of Manitoba or some other testing outfit, but they are there quite regularly test-monitoring that water. That is doing it very, very close to the dump site.

Now, as to where the member is referring to with Home Depot, my recollection is that the water that is coming off the Home Depot parking lot is going into the storm retention sewer system and not into Omand's Creek. That is what I have been led to believe. So I would think that it would appear that there would be minimum flow from the parking lot into Omand's Creek.

Ms. Mihychuk: Well, just for the record, the project for Home Depot in my riding, actually the parking lot is going directly into the creek. The loading dock facility is going into the storm, the combined storm and sewer system for the city, which is a higher potential for contaminants than the parking lot, as I understand it, but the parking lot itself has been directed to flow right into the creek at this time.

I would like to move away from Omand's Creek and just ask the minister if Urban Affairs has done an analysis of the potential loss of mineral resources, the value of mineral resources due to further development along the northern corridor, the Winnport-Rossburn development area. Has there been an assessment of the potential loss of revenue due to mineral sterilization?

Mr. Reimer: Regarding the mineral rights, I would not be able to comment as to the ownership of the mineral rights in the proposed section of the property that has been looked at for the Winnport development. The lead departments on that would be Industry, Trade and Tourism and also Transportation. We would not have, to the best of our knowledge anyway, any type of input as to the land rights or, pardon me, the mineral rights on those properties.

Ms. Mihychuk: Recently at the mines convention that was held before Christmas there was a display by a geologist who had assessed the mineral potential that looked like it was going to be impacted by urban sprawl. It worked out to millions of dollars worth of potential there. So I am not talking specifically about mineral ownership. My concern is that there is co-ordination between the Department of Mines and Urban Affairs which, I understand, provides urban policy formulation, planning advice and intergovernmental advice. So I would urge the ministry to in fact take that role and look at providing urban policy in this area.

Mr. Reimer: So noted.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): I wonder if I could shift gears for a minute and ask the minister a question with regard to libraries.

Earlier when the minister delivered his introductory address he spoke about the document Reshaping Our Civic Government, and in his discussion of this document he spoke about the practice in the city, current practices of contracting out. He specifically spoke about library services, and I know that he identified certain activities within the library with regard to contracting out. I think shelving was one of the activities, and I cannot quite recall what the other activities were, but in view of this contracting out, this move to contracting out, which apparently is embracing certain parts of the Winnipeg Public Library system, I would like to ask the minister if he could make a commitment today that he will not be putting forth the enabling legislation which would allow the Winnipeg Public Library to implement fees for library services.

Mr. Reimer: When I was referring to the City of Winnipeg's Reshaping Our Civic Government, I was referring to one of the initiatives that they had brought forth for consideration. What it was was the library book delivery services part of it and also the shelving of materials. To the best of my knowledge, that is the only thing that they have indicated towards that particular component of libraries.

The member's comment about a library card, I believe she called it--[interjection] A fee, yes, that has been brought forth in previous times to the Department of Urban Affairs for enabling legislation for The City of Winnipeg Act, and we have rejected it. We have no plans to reintroduce that.

Ms. McGifford: As well, then, the minister spoke about certain amendments or certain legislation that would be tabled in the House in this session, and I believe the minister said that the legislation would reflect the wishes of the city councillors.

Mr. Chairperson: The honourable minister, with a very short answer.

Mr. Reimer: The City of Winnipeg Act is under the jurisdiction of the Province of Manitoba. Any time there is a change that is requested by the City of Winnipeg, it comes through in a resolution put forth by the City Council.

Those are the initiatives that we respond to. Some of them we take under consideration. Some deserve further input. Some deserve further discussion, but in general we try to accommodate the city in their requests. They are brought forth in a priority manner in discussions with the city as to what they feel they want to have done as soon as possible, and we try to respond in a manner that way.

Ms. McGifford: Then, Mr. Chair, I understand the minister to say from his previous answer that the legislation would not include user fees for library cards.

Mr. Reimer: That is correct.

Mr. Chairperson: The hour is now 5 p.m., and I am interrupting the proceedings of the committee for private members' hour. The committee will reconvene at 8 p.m. this evening. Thank you.