4th-36th Vol. 54-Oral Questions

Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon Mr. Francis Flett, Grand Chief of MKO.

Also, we have forty Grade 5 students from Carpathia School under the direction of Mrs. Carole Arnason and Mr. Gary Thrush. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, on May 14 of this year the member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) proposed to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) that matters in dispute between the MMA and the government be put to binding arbitration. "All items in dispute," in fact, were the words used by the member for Brandon East. The Premier stated that he would not send all these matters to binding arbitration. I would like to know, in light of his statement today, May 27, close to three weeks later, or two weeks later, what has been the impact on patients of the flip-flop of the government to finally go to binding arbitration.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): First of all, binding arbitration is never, nor should be, the most desirable way to settle any contract because it takes away from both parties the ability in essence to influence their future and their needs and puts it in the hands of a third party. This administration has always wanted to negotiate these issues. We attempted to actually get into a new process with the MMA, which worked for rural emergency doctors, worked for other issues that we had to settle. Regrettably, that did not transpire. The MMA chose to withdraw services. We attempted to deal with those specific issues, and what we have seen is the continued view of the MMA and their commitment to continually withdraw services on all of these issues, case by case across the province, and putting Manitobans at risk. You reach the point where your efforts to try to resolve things in a fashion that gives more control to both parties just quite frankly is not going to work. It is going to put patients at risk, and so you are left with no other option but binding arbitration, and that is the decision that cabinet made this morning.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, this is a government that has been convicted of unfair labour practices in dealing with other employees just yesterday. We do not need lectures from this minister about negotiating.

On May 15 of the same year, the Minister of Health said that he does not need the MMA; they are an irrelevant body, and that he would impose a settlement on the people by making a unilateral settlement announcement, and then he proceeded to go on a week later and insult individuals.

I would like to know: what has been the impact on patient care of this intemperate and ill-advised comment made by the Minister of Health?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, where was the Leader of the Opposition with his comments and judgments last year when we had a contract and rural doctors providing emergency service withdrew them unilaterally? Where was he when we were threatened with a strike in urban emergency? Where was he commenting on this process when intensivists threatened to withdraw services, even though we had a contract in place?

The frustration that this government, in fact all governments across the country have had, is with the inability of medical associations, by the nature of the process, to have a collective bargaining relationship. I just point out to him today that Alberta, where a contract was agreed to and ratified, doctors within that ratified contract are withdrawing services because they are not particularly happy with it as individuals. It is the nature of that system, and it is not a good one.

* (1340)

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I think we warned the government four years ago not to give more powers to manage the system to the Manitoba Medical Association, that it would have an impact on specialists, and it would have an impact on the attraction and recruitment and retention of doctors in rural and northern communities, a warning we made four years ago. When he talks about losing this power, it was his Premier (Mr. Filmon) who gave it away four years ago in a settlement in terms of the public interest.

I would like to ask the minister: what has been the impact on patient care of his statement last week that he would only put some matters to arbitration, rather than all matters to arbitration? What has been the impact of his flip-flop today to finally put all matters to binding arbitration on behalf of the patients of Manitoba?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, any impact on the patients of Manitoba has to be borne by those who withdrew their service. If the member is looking to cast stones, then he should start casting them among those who withdrew services unilaterally while a contract was in place, which in any other collective bargaining would have been an unfair labour practice, would have in fact been illegal but is not in this case. But the Leader of the Opposition, in his desire now to defend the Manitoba Medical Association at the expense of Manitobans, takes that position.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we are pleased that the government finally took the advice from the member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans). We just regret they did not do it weeks ago on behalf of patients, and we had to go through the immature statements of the Minister of Health.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I have a new question for the Minister of Justice. We have been concerned about the backlog in court cases, and we have been concerned about the workload and stress on Crown attorneys. The Flett bail case, which was unopposed by a Crown attorney, the Crown attorney involved said that she had 70 cases on some days that she had to deal with.

I would like to ask the Minister of Justice: how many Crown attorneys vacancies are there, and what is the impact on workloads and backlogs in the court system?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I know that our Crown attorneys are working very diligently. If there are any vacant positions, those are positions that I have instructed my staff to fill. I know that, in terms of the availability of trial dates, our trial dates are among the best in the country.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, can the minister confirm that three Crowns have just recently been hired by the federal justice system, two have gone to private practice, one has left the service, and two judges last week were appointed by the minister--two Crowns were appointed as judges, leaving at this time eight vacancies in the Crown attorney's office, eight direct vacancies? The workload is already too high, the backlogs are already too long. What kind of stress will this place on the existing Crown attorneys, and what impact will this have on the backlog in our court system?

Mr. Toews: Well, Madam Speaker, I know that, in fact, our backlogs are not as serious as they are in other provinces such as British Columbia, where literally thousands of cases are in danger of being thrown out because of the NDP government there simply refusing to appropriately fund those positions. I can indicate that my staff has the full authority to fill those positions, and I understand that they are proceeding to do so.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, is the minister not aware that there are eight vacancies, or if he is aware, is he not acknowledging that there are eight vacancies? Is the minister not concerned about the stress this produces for other Crown attorneys? Is the minister not concerned about the number of Crown attorneys that have been lost and will be lost to youth prosecutions and adult prosecutions? I would like to ask the minister: why has he got eight vacancies right now in the Crown attorneys office? What kind of stress and other conditions are in play here to lose so many Crown attorneys at such a vital time in trying to deal with our criminal justice system here in Manitoba?

* (1345)

Mr. Toews: Well, as the member has indicated, two were recently appointed to the bench. I understand that the federal government has come to many of the prosecutors looking to fill positions, and so they have gone over to the federal government for one reason or another. I know that, in our own department, we have a number of term positions that can be used to fill in behind those individuals. I am very proud of the length of service in our department of Crown attorneys. I remember when I was a Crown attorney under the NDP government, a senior person would have three or four years before leaving. We have managed to retain Crown attorneys for 20 years or more, and we are very proud--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Toews: Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I was indicating, we have had a very stable workforce with the Attorney General's department in the Crown attorneys department. I know that we have also had some retirements as people reach retirement age and they retire. We are committed to filling any of those vacancies, and my staff is quite aware of my desire that those positions be filled as quickly as possible.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): To the Minister of Justice: we asked the minister if there was enough support for prosecutors when a prosecutor failed to show up for a high-profile Internet hate case; when a prosecutor showed up with no witnesses; when an accused murderer was mistakenly released; when the prosecutor gave an inaccurate opinion, leading to the banning of a book; when a rape case of a 12-year-old was bungled; when the Court of Appeal said the Crown wrongly reduced Fabian Torres's conviction to manslaughter and seriously delayed the appeal; and when the Crown did not oppose Duncan Flett's bail, and he is now accused of sexual assault.

To the minister: would the minister, instead of ridiculing our questions in this regard, now admit that indeed there was not enough support for his prosecutors?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, the member knows very well, I have about 45 seconds to answer about seven or eight questions that he has put to me. As I can indicate, if he is really serious about answers to these questions, I am prepared to provide those to him in Estimates, which he can ask, and I would be more than happy to give them fact by fact, detail by detail.

Mr. Mackintosh: Since the minister did not answer that single question, if the safety of Manitobans is threatened now, when bail prosecutors have up to 70 files a day, when there are backlogs of up to two years now even for child victims, how will the added caseloads and backlogs impact on the ability of prosecutors to protect our safety now that eight prosecutors have said enough, four more have gone to Family Violence Court, one has retired, two have seconded, for a total of 15 losses?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, those figures are not correct, but I am more than happy to answer those accusations one at a time. I am certainly comfortable that my department is in fact proceeding to fill the vacancies that do exist and, in the interim, without filling any specific positions on a permanent basis if that cannot be done, there are term people who do fill in for those Crown attorneys that are not there.

Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister not admit that losing over a quarter of his prosecutors almost at once from the adult and youth divisions--and if he has other numbers, we want him to tell us what they are; that is our understanding--that this is both a crisis and a symptom of a crisis this government created by cuts, by decisions not to spend, resources directed by this Legislature to Prosecutions and Safety, and tough talk that is just that? Will this minister stop looking to blame everyone else in sight and look at his own department?

Mr. Toews: I can indicate that in fact the resources and the funding are available there to ensure that we do have the appropriate supports, but I want to be careful before I answer any particular question raised by this member. This is the member who--in the first time in the history of the Manitoba Association of Crown Attorneys, they had to release news releases to ask him to stop misrepresenting what they were doing about their cases, to stop criticizing Crown attorneys who were doing a good job, and the allegations that he was making in respect of those Crown attorneys were simply not founded. So I am prepared to deal with them in a very lengthy detailed way in the Estimates process, but I am not prepared to answer scurrilous accusations that even the Crown attorneys have indicated in news releases are groundless.

* (1350)

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): The reference by the minister to "scurrilous" is unparliamentary, and in addition, the minister spent quite a bit of time not only not answering the question but putting irrelevant comments on the question, only to conclude his supposed answer by saying he was not actually really going to answer the question but might deal with it in Estimates. On both those grounds, the minister is out of order. I would like to ask you to call him to order and specifically to withdraw the phrase that he used.

Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order.

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): On the same point of order, it is true that the word "scurrilous" can, in some circumstances, be found to be unparliamentary. Indeed, I recall a day when I was sitting on the other side of the House, listening to Howard Pawley over on this side refer to some scurrilous comment that had been made, and the former First Minister of this province was found, even by Speaker Phillips, to be in breach of the parliamentary rules. He then withdrew that word in the context within which it was spoken.

So I would ask that you and the minister, and obviously the member for Thompson has already done so, perhaps review the word in the context that it was spoken, and if indeed it is unparliamentary, that the appropriate action be taken.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, indeed the word does appear on the Beauchesne listing of unparliamentary words. I would ask that the honourable Minister of Justice withdraw the word.

Mr. Toews: I withdraw the word "scurrilous."

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable Minister of Justice.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Transportation. Yesterday I raised some questions about the orange cones being replaced by trees in Gods River at the Gods River airstrip. I would like to ask the minister what action he has taken with his government with respect to that accident that occurred there a couple of years ago. Also, what action has been taken to upgrade the runway, which has more than 2,500 flights a year?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, the Department of Highways and Transportation is consistently and continuously doing what they can to improve the safety at our airports, given the fact that weather conditions sometimes can be variable. We work with Transport Canada guidelines, and all the aircraft accidents are reviewed by the Transportation Safety Board, which is under the auspices of Transport Canada.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister, as well, when the provincial government will begin a capital program to add rotating beacons, the APAPI system, the snowblowers, fencing, runway lights and other necessary equipment that is needed in the 22 northern airports run by this government which annually ship more than 9,000 tonnes of freight and handle on an average of 160,000 passengers annually?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, we are fully aware of the value of the airports to the North. There are some 60,000 aircraft movements per year in these airports. They are very significant for tourism, economic activity and movement of passengers in and out of those areas.

I am sure the member is aware that we have struck a working group to analyze those recommendations they want to make to the government for federal-provincial action to improve those airports. That task force will be reporting in due course. It has just held public hearings in Thompson, on the 25th and 26th of this month, which was yesterday and the day before.

* (1355)

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, since the federal government now claims that their April 17 letter cancelling support for the Wasagamack airport was sent in error and has released a letter confirming this--I would like to table a copy of both those letters--I want to ask this minister whether he is prepared to make this project a priority, or do we have to wait another four years before construction can begin at the Wasagamack airport.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, it has been a priority of this government. We have budgeted for it for the work for this year. The member seems to be supporting the federal government, who chose to remove it from their list of projects. Now they have put it back on their list of projects. We are the only government that stated that they were prepared to continue to move, and we are pleased that the federal government has come back to the table. The member makes some comments that seem to me to support the federal government instead of supporting the provincial government, who continues to push this forward.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Madam Speaker, my questions are also for the Minister of Highways and Transportation. Contrary to the assertions of the minister yesterday, none of the construction materials for new houses and renovations were shipped to Lac Brochet or Tadoule Lake this winter. This keeps another 51 northern families in deplorable housing. I would like to know why this government continues to deny that these communities have been put in an impossible situation in which the cost of shipping goods by air exceeds 50 percent of their value.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, when the circumstances unfolded in late winter, when the winter roads became impassable because of warm weather, the officials made decisions on what goods needed to be moved in on an emergency basis. Those decisions were made and the emergency goods were moved into those communities.

Mr. Jennissen: Since the federal government has put on hold the air and food lift into communities on the east side of Lake Winnipeg until it completes further negotiations with the province, including the usage of the disaster assistance fund, could the minister tell this house the status and projected time lines of these negotiations?

Hon. David Newman (Minister of Native Affairs): Madam Speaker, I have had occasion today to send a letter to the Honourable Jane Stewart. In that letter, which I only have one copy of because I did not anticipate this question for me, I have indicated that the federal minister, Jane Stewart, responsible for Indian Affairs and Northern Development of Canada, should work together with the regional manager, Lorne Cochrane, and enter into discussions with Emergency Preparedness Canada to reimburse INAC if INAC does not want to be burdened with the entire responsibility it assumed under a memorandum of agreement with the province. We indicated we would be prepared to work with Mr. Cochrane, through my deputy, and I would work with Minister Stewart to try and access the appropriate funds to reimburse and allow Manitoba aboriginal citizens to have nothing taken out of their budget and have the federal government pay for it out of a proper extraordinary emergency program within the federal government.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question is for the Minister responsible for Hydro. Madam Speaker, I have raised the issue before and I raise the issue again today in the need for the Manitoba government to take some form of action in terms of acquiring Winnipeg Hydro. My specific question to the minister responsible is: has the minister indicated to Manitoba Hydro this government's desire to acquire Winnipeg Hydro so that Manitoba is not being serviced by two publicly owned Crown corporations with hydroelectricity?

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, I had answered the question previously in the way that it was done because we do not--I do not consider it to be appropriate for the Manitoba government, without full knowledge of all the facts and the expert opinions and the implications, to presume in a paternalistic way to suggest to the City of Winnipeg and all Winnipeggers what is best for them. When all of the information becomes available, and hopefully this can be a matter of some discussion, even in the civic election campaign, so that the candidates for mayor perhaps could deal with this as an issue and share with the people who can help to make a choice as to what is in their best interests. Through that process, we are interested very much as a government, and Manitoba is interested in doing what is best for the citizens of Winnipeg and indeed all citizens of Manitoba in that respect.

* (1400)

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, will the minister recognize that this government's inaction on such an important issue has had a very negative impact on the development of hydro in the province of Manitoba? We are asking, not for the City of Winnipeg to take leadership, but the province has a role to take leadership. Will the minister indicate today that this government is in fact in favour of acquiring Winnipeg Hydro and amalgamating it with Manitoba Hydro? It is definitely in all Manitobans' best interests that that take place.

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, I can say unequivocally that Manitoba Hydro is interested, but until the price is known, until the implications are fully known and the sorts of expert opinions that have been obtained are shared, it would be presumptuous to impetuously come to a conclusion on a speculative basis. I would ask the honourable member for Inkster to put on the record that the Liberal Party of Manitoba is supportive of doing that--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for The Maples, on a point of order.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): This is not the first time, when my colleague for Inkster has asked questions, that ministers have asked him a question. This is Question Period for us to ask the government questions. It is not a time for debate, and asking a question is the best way to invoke debate. So, I think by the minister asking the member for Inkster's position, he is invoking debate, and he is out of order.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, on the same point of order.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would like to suggest the member for The Maples is most definitely appropriate. In fact, the proper citation is Beauchesne Citation 417, which states that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised, and should not provoke debate.

I would, Madam Speaker, urge you to rule that the member has a point of order and ask the minister to follow our rules.

Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order.

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Well, Madam Speaker, it is very difficult when you not only have the member for Thompson but also the member for The Maples taking the same position, because that makes it confusing for us over on this side.

The honourable minister was attempting to be responsive to the issues being raised by the honourable member for Inkster. I think that we are being just a little bit picky when we try to force ministers into a certain way of dealing with a matter. I thought the whole idea of Question Period was to have matters canvassed and issues raised and dealt with, and that is what the minister was trying to do.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro, on the same point of order.

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, having put myself at risk of possibly losing my first point of order in this Legislature, I want to say that this modest act of potential civil disobedience was worth it.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for The Maples, I would indeed agree that he does have a legitimate point of order. The minister, in response to the question, should be as brief as possible and should not provoke debate.

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, I would repeat the former two responses I gave and simply add that I am sure that the union representing Hydro, Winnipeg Hydro employees, the citizens of Winnipeg who are concerned about the implications to their rates, the different councillors of the City of Winnipeg and the mayor of the City of Winnipeg and those who have a future there are all concerned about doing what is right for the citizens of Winnipeg, as is my ministry, and as is our government.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, I have some questions for the Minister of Justice.

The family of the late Dorothy Martin have endured two years of suffering and have waited almost a year before the appropriate charges were laid against the person that took the life of their loved one, and most recently I have waited just about a month to hear whether or not the Crown will appeal the lenient sentence that was given to Gerald Wilson for her murder. I would like to ask the minister whether or not the Crown has made a decision and when will the action on this issue be brought to the attention of Manitobans.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I did want to indicate that the department has been very actively involved with the RCMP in respect of that particular issue. I know that the particular case went to the jury; the jury came back with a particular decision. I know that the Crown attorneys in that particular case were thanked by the family. They appreciated the efforts, and I certainly appreciate the efforts of both the Crown and the police.

In respect of the appeal, I can advise the member when I have the specific information. I believe a decision in respect to that matter had been made, but I could be mistaken and I will let the member know.

Mr. Robinson: I am sure that most aboriginals and Manitobans in general are looking forward to that decision by the minister.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): I would like to ask the minister a further question and that is whether or not he has set in motion an investigation into why the original charges were only for unlawful possession of a restricted firearm when it was obvious all along to Manitobans that a murder charge was warranted in the Wilson case.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I will not second-guess the RCMP and the Crown attorneys who made the decision in respect of the appropriate case to proceed upon. I know that the RCMP are looking into the issue generally, and if there is anything to report to the member, I will report to him on that issue.

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, this government has a history of breaking the law in this province. First it was the former Minister of Labour when he made statements to the striking casino workers when the minister stated that he would extend the strike for every day that the casino workers picketed in front of his home, breaking The Labour Relations Act of this province. Then we had the same minister, who is now Minister of Justice, who interfered in the selection and appointment of judges in this province, again breaking the laws of this province.

Yesterday, the government lost a case, was found guilty of bargaining in bad faith, of breaking the laws of this province once again and was fined $2,000. I want to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon), specifically the Premier, why he thinks that his government is above the laws of this province when his ministers continue to break the laws of this province.

Hon. Glen Cummings (Acting Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, certainly we are not. We have received a ruling and we will abide by it.

* (1410)

Mr. Reid: Madam Speaker, that does not answer the question. I want to ask the Acting Minister of Labour, I want to ask the Premier why he thinks his government is above the laws of this province when every other citizen of this province has to respect and obey the laws, why his government does not have to obey the laws, why his government sent letters to the engineers of this province telling them that they would be laid off if they did not abide by the wishes of the government.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I will repeat for the member for Transcona the answer that was given to him by the Acting Minister of Labour. This government is not above the law. We have received a ruling and we will abide by it.

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): The last two days the Minister of Family Services has claimed that her department does not have responsibility for high caseloads that make it impossible for workers to meet standards. I would like to remind her of her own legislation which states that, under the control and direction of the minister, the director shall ensure the development and establishment of standards of service to be provided to children and families, ensure that agencies are providing the standard of services that are following the procedures and practices set out by the provisions of the act, and above all, protect children in need of protection.

My question for the minister is: in light of her own legislation, how can she justify her remarks that her government does not have responsibility for caseloads and standards to protect children in this province?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I thank my honourable friend for that question today because it does allow me to clarify for Manitobans exactly what our responsibility is under The Child and Family Services Act, and that is to protect children. That is why we have raised our funding from $38 million for Winnipeg Child and Family Services back in 1990-91 to $63 million today.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. We have increased significantly the funding, as I have indicated already, so that in fact the Winnipeg Child and Family Services agency can deliver the protection services that are needed in the city of Winnipeg. I make no apologies for ensuring that the system is funded to protect children.

Mr. Martindale: Madam Speaker, I asked my questions about funding in Family Services Estimates.

The question today is: will this minister, who says, even acknowledges that she has legal responsibility to protect children--what will she do to follow the legislation and to listen to the advice of the Advocate, of workers, and now of a judge in an inquest, of internal reports, and conduct a workload review? This is separate from the question that she is trying to answer. Will she conduct a workload review?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I indicated in answers to questions in the last two days that Mr. Lance Barber, the new CEO of the Winnipeg Child and Family Services agency, has done a strategic planning process with all of his staff to address exactly the issues that my honourable friend is talking about. We have provided the Winnipeg agency with the resources that they need in order to serve the children within the city of Winnipeg. I have every confidence that that planning process will lead to better services for children.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, this government committed itself to having intersessional committee meetings of standing committees of the Legislature. None were held until the last moment just before the session, and one finally was held for Public Accounts. At that meeting there appeared to be some agreement on both sides of the House that there would be a very quick meeting of Public Accounts to get on with the process of strengthening and improving Public Accounts and bringing its function into line with the other public accounts across Canada, as recommended by our Auditor. Why have there been no Public Accounts committee meetings since that agreement was reached by both sides of the House, that we should get on with reforming this committee and bringing its function up to some reasonable level of standard in Canada?

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Indeed, Madam Speaker, since the meeting to which the honourable member refers, there have been discussions between the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and myself. I have been talking with the opposition House leader. We expect to be doing some more of that as soon as tomorrow. So we do look to honourable members in the opposition for proposals so that we can review those proposals and see if there are ways that we can improve the system that we have of Public Accounts here in the province of Manitoba. So we look forward to proposals coming forward and a useful discussion of the proposals.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, the government House leader knows and the Minister of Finance knows that the Auditor has proposed at least 10 specific recommendations. Why will the Minister of Finance not convene a meeting of the Public Accounts committee and put proposals before that committee that can be responded to by all members so that we can get on with the evolution of this committee's function? We are so far behind that the Auditor says it is the worst in Canada.

Mr. McCrae: Well, first of all, Madam Speaker, the convening of committees or the calling of committees is something that falls to the government House leader to do, and that is usually done in consultation with the opposition House leader. That is the way we have been doing things and--[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. McCrae: Well, the honourable member for--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. McCrae: If the honourable member for Crescentwood is suggesting some less co-operative approach than the one that we are using now, let him come out and say so. I happen to work quite well with the opposition House leader and my colleagues to try to make business run smoothly, but any review of Public Accounts handling in this province needs to be done in association with an examination of the Estimates system that we have in this House and all of the accountability initiatives that we work with. We need to look at the whole system in order to find the most effective way to give the people of Manitoba the accountability they need and want.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): My question is to the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro. In February, in committee, we called on the government to conduct an independent review of Lake Winnipeg water levels. Now we hear that the South Lake Winnipeg Basin Shoreline Erosion Committee, formed by the southern municipalities around the lake, are calling for an independent review.

My question to the minister, Madam Speaker: will the minister now conduct that independent review of Lake Winnipeg water levels, so that the record could be straight?

* (1420)

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, I always appreciate applause when I stand up to respond to a question. The question is very timely because the group, the South Lake Winnipeg Basin Shoreline Erosion Committee, has just made a resolution about appointing an independent consultant. We welcome that suggestion.

They also made other suggestions: that the design of generic erosion protection plans for each shoreline type on the lake should be done; research into innovative ways of protecting shorelines--the concept of floating wave barriers was raised as an example; a literature search into the existing methods of protecting shorelines--reference was made to Florida beaches; development of shoreline protection guidelines; the provision of tax credits to property owners who have adequately protected their shoreline; the provision of information on Lake Winnipeg to the property owners in the form of the presentation that was made to the committee.

So all of these kinds of things that come from the committee, this is welcome and will be considered very seriously. Thank you.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): My question to the minister: will he look at developing a comprehensive Lake Winnipeg shoreline erosion strategy, which includes all the partners, and looks at the lake in a comprehensive way and does not have to come from the users but actually is initiated and guided by the government?

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, I will be very humble about the part the government played in stimulating and encouraging this kind of grassroots, multiparticipatory approach, but I do congratulate those who are participating in it, and the product is obviously very positive. I believe that a comprehensive result will come about. It is for the benefit of all Manitobans affected by Lake Winnipeg.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.