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 twenty-three Grade 5 students from Whyte Ridge Elementary School under the direction of Mrs. Ruthanne Dyck. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Vodrey).
We also have twenty Grades 4 to 12 students from Iberville Colony School under the direction of Mrs. Lee Stewart. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns).
Also, forty-seven Grade 5 students from Winkler Elementary School under the direction of Mr. Lawrence Siemens. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck).
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.
1995 Election
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the process under which elections take place, the integrity of that process and the respect for those democratic results are principles that underline this Legislature, in fact, underline all of democracy here in Manitoba.
New information from Mr. Darryl Sutherland, a native candidate in the Interlake, has stated that the PCs, the Manitoba PCs, paid all his expenses in the 1995 election campaign. Given the newness of these allegations, the seriousness of these allegations, the importance to the very principles of this Legislature, I would like to now ask the Premier to call a judicial inquiry so people like Mr. Sutherland can give testimony under oath for the sake of the whole democratic process here in the province of Manitoba.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, these matters, these allegations, were ones that were raised, I believe, by the New Democratic Party three days prior to the 1995 election campaign. They were then the subject of an investigation by Elections Manitoba, who are the nonpartisan objective review body that all of us, I believe, support. As parties in this Legislature, we choose to make decisions surrounding elections and all of the machinery of elections outside of any political influence or control. We put them in the hands of an organization such as Elections Manitoba, and we trust them to make the proper analysis and judgment on all issues surrounding the conductions of election campaigns.
We have had that matter looked at, all of us. It was not our choice. It was Elections Manitoba's choice to respond to the allegations of New Democrats three days before the election campaign, and I have no reason to doubt or mistrust their findings in that analysis and investigation.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we have learned a long time ago with this government that if they have something to hide, they will stonewall, and predictably and regrettably, this is what the Premier has done. Mr. Sutherland's allegations, his public allegations, his new information--in fact, Mr. Sutherland, according to his own statement, was not even interviewed or investigated by Elections Manitoba. The Premier knows that under The Evidence Act of Manitoba, a judicial inquiry can deal with any alleged attempt to corrupt or change an election result. It is clearly under The Evidence Act.
So I would like to ask the Premier: why will he not fulfill Mr. Sutherland's request so that he can divulge the sources of his finances, which he alleges is the Tory party? Why is the Premier afraid to have a judicial inquiry and have Mr. Sutherland testify under oath where he got the money and who was responsible for giving him that money?
* (1340)
Mr. Filmon: These allegations were ones that have been shopped around. I understand, even in the last week or two, the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) has been shopping them around to every available media outlet to see who would bite, Madam Speaker--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Crescentwood, on a point of order.
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, I have not shopped anything around, and imputing the motive, that he is obviously imputing to me in that regard, is unparliamentary. He should stick to the issue of why he will not call a judicial inquiry.
Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, on the same point of order.
Mr. Filmon: No, I have no further point of order to make on that, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood does not have a point of order.
Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, to respond to the question.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the information that has been alleged in the past with respect to any impropriety has been turned over to Elections Manitoba. They have chosen to interview people and examine people, and under those circumstances, they have decided--[interjection] That is why we have an independent body like Elections Manitoba, so that we do not deal with allegations of questionable intent and of questionable substance, that we have them looked at by Elections Manitoba.
There is a process in place. That process has been followed, and Elections Manitoba, I trust their judgment. If members opposite do not trust their judgment, then they ought to go and make that complaint and allegation to Elections Manitoba.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, this is Mr. Sutherland's first statement to the public. Mr. Sutherland was not even interviewed by Elections Manitoba, and it is Mr. Sutherland who is now confirming the Tories funded his campaign. I would think if the government could appoint Ted Hughes to study the integrity of the justice system dealing with the Pollock affair in 1991 and said, because of the stature and prominence of this case, an independent judicial inquiry is required, why will the Premier not have an independent judicial inquiry with the power to subpoena, the power to take sworn statements? Why is he afraid to have his staff and his campaign organizers appear before a judicial inquiry as we did with Ted Hughes in the Pollock affair?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I repeat: I will put the integrity of Elections Manitoba up against--[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Filmon: --the politically motivated allegations of members of the New Democratic Party any day, any time.
* (1345)
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the official opposition, with a new question?
Mr. Doer: Yes, a new question, Madam Speaker. Mr. Sutherland has alleged that the money came from the PC Party and that the Premier's people were involved. Mr. Sutherland, under The Elections Manitoba Act return, who is now claiming he got this money from Conservatives, has filed a return that he donated $4,913 in 1995 to his own campaign. When you compare that to the Premier who donated $1,000, to Mr. Radcliffe who led the list of MLAs in this Chamber or on the opposite side in this Chamber with $2,300, people like Mr. Ernst, $1,300, it looks like Mr. Sutherland donated five times more money than the Premier or more than four times more money to the Premier. He donated more money than quite well-off Conservatives to their own campaigns. How does the Premier square this--the $4,913 donation to himself--with other donations that have been made by members of this Chamber when Mr. Sutherland is now saying that the money came from the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I think the member opposite makes my point. He is alleging either that Mr. Sutherland lied the first time or that he lied the second time. That does not necessarily make the grounds upon which we should have any further investigation, especially when you have a witness whose credibility is certainly in question and the matter has already been looked into by Elections Manitoba.
Mr. Doer: Well, the last time I looked, Madam Speaker, this kind of money does not grow on trees, but Mr. Sutherland is now claiming that it grew on the trees of the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba. These are serious allegations of corruption right in the Premier's Office.
Former Tory candidate, Tory candidate in 1995, Mr. Sigurdson attended a meeting with Mr. Sokolyk, a person who is at the right hand of the Premier, and Mr. Aitken in April of 1995. When Mr. Aitken, the campaign manager for the Progressive Conservative Party in Interlake, claimed that the money had been passed on to the aboriginal candidates, Mr. Sigurdson alleges, Madam Speaker, that his chief of staff said job well done. Why will you not have your chief of staff and yourself testify under oath about your connections with the funding of Mr. Sutherland, as requested, in terms of an inquiry?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I remind the Leader of the Opposition that that same Mr. Sigurdson's earlier allegations against the member for Steinbach (Mr. Driedger) and the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), which were proven to be false, were brought here by the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) again. This is the kind of false information, this is the kind of sleaze mongering that we get from the member for Crescentwood every time, and his Leader now stands up to support that. Well, they are welcome to it. They are welcome to it.
* (1350)
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, Beauchesne Citation 492 indicates very clearly that the language used by the First Minister involving the member for Crescentwood is unparliamentary. I would like to ask you to not only call to order on this but ask that the First Minister of this province answer very serious allegations about political corruption in this province leading right to his own office. Will you please have him come to order and answer the very serious questions we are raising in this House?
Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), I would ask that the honourable First Minister withdraw the word "sleaze." It has been ruled unparliamentary on two previous separate occasions.
Mr. Filmon: I will withdraw the term, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable First Minister.
Mr. Doer: If the Premier had nothing to hide, if members opposite have nothing to hide and Mr. Sokolyk has nothing to hide, why will they not just have a judicial inquiry and clear the air? What are they afraid of in terms of this process? Mr. Sale and Mr. Evans, Interlake, attended a meeting with Mr. Sigurdson on January 6, 1998, which was attended by the same Mr. Aitken who was present at the meeting with Mr. Sigurdson, with Mr. Sokolyk in 1995. Mr. Aitken also confirmed that he had stated, Mr. Sokolyk had stated job well done when he was made aware that the money had passed from the Tories to the Native Voice candidate in Interlake, a point that Mr. Evans is willing to testify to and Mr. Sale is willing to testify to.
Given the fact that we have Mr. Sutherland, Mr. Sigurdson, Mr. Aitken in the presence of two MLAs testifying that the money came from the Conservative Party to Mr. Sutherland, why will the Premier not have a judicial inquiry so Mr. Sokolyk, other members of the Conservative Party that were involved in this, the campaign manager for the Interlake, all can testify under oath for the sake of the integrity of the election process here in Manitoba? What have you got to hide?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the members of our party who have been alleged to be involved were interviewed by Elections Manitoba. Elections Manitoba did their investigation and they have reported. I will put my faith in their credibility versus the credibility of witnesses who have already been demonstrated to have been untruthful in their statements.
1995 Election
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, during the 1995 election we in the Interlake felt that we were running against two Tory campaigns, one against the official Progressive Conservative candidate and the other against an independent candidate who was widely rumoured at that time to have been financed by the Conservative Party. Those rumours were confirmed to me personally by Al Aitken, the Conservative Party organizer for the Interlake, in a meeting we had with him in January. Will the Premier do what has been asked of him and call a public judicial inquiry so that I can give my version, Mr. Aitken can give his version so that we can testify about this matter under oath?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I repeat that I am satisfied from my investigations, as Elections Manitoba was satisfied from their investigations, that our party and our central campaign were not involved in that. The individual that he named was the subject of inquiry. He acknowledged that he had had various meetings. In fact, he talked about his role, and it was in the news media at that time.
I repeat: the matter was investigated by Elections Manitoba, and they are an independent party. They are not people who are politically motivated, as New Democrats opposite are.
* (1355)
Mr. C. Evans: Madam Speaker, we have new evidence that is now in place. Will the Premier allow the implicated parties, Darryl Sutherland, Kim Sigurdson and others who have been implicated in this new evidence from the 1995 election, a chance to do so under oath? Will he call this public judicial inquiry?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, this clarifies exactly the substance of the allegations. These are two people who both have been demonstrated publicly to have falsified information in the past, who are the substance and sum of the allegations that New Democrats will be putting forward. I will put my faith behind Elections Manitoba.
Mr. C. Evans: Madam Speaker, again I ask the Premier if he will provide a public judicial inquiry so that we may testify, so that I may testify, so that others may testify on the allegations. If this Premier does not feel that those that have made accusations are credible, then will he provide us with an opportunity to have the others, Mr. Cubby Barrett and Mr. Taras Sokolyk, testify under oath?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I repeat: that is what the process was that resulted in the inquiry by Elections Manitoba, a nonpartisan group in Manitoba that is not controlled by any party in this Legislature, that I believe is supported by all parties in this Legislature, and that is why they conducted their review. I put my faith and trust in them.
1995 Election
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, Elections Manitoba and Darryl Sutherland have both confirmed that he was never interviewed. He was the candidate in receipt of $4,913 for his election. Allan Aitken, uncoerced in a meeting with four people, confirmed the entire story of a plan to recruit and run aboriginal candidates. He confirmed that story to myself and to my colleague and to Mr. Sigurdson. Mr. Sigurdson signed an affidavit to the extent that he confirmed the story having happened, and he confirmed it before our meeting in January. These are new facts, new evidence--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Will the honourable member for Crescentwood please pose his question now.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the First Minister not recognize that there is substantial and extensive new evidence which was not on the record, which was not on the record for Elections Manitoba in their so-called complete investigation? Will he recognize that there is money that has flowed, that there are meetings that took place? These allegations are there. Why will he not call a judicial inquiry?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the so-called new evidence is brought forward based on the comments of two individuals who have been demonstrated to have falsified information in the past. I would rather put my faith in Elections Manitoba and their investigation.
* (1400)
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood, with a supplementary question.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the First Minister not acknowledge that an Elections Manitoba investigation, which failed to even talk to the recipient of the money that came to finance his campaign from the PC Party, failed to even talk to him, can hardly be used as evidence of a complete and thorough investigation? Will he not recognize the investigation was incomplete and call a judicial inquiry?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, without accepting any of the preamble from the member opposite, all he brings forward is so-called new allegations by two individuals who have already been demonstrated to have provided false information in the past. That is not the basis on which you call a new inquiry.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood, with a final supplementary question.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the First Minister not recognize that a campaign manager for his own candidate in the Interlake confirmed all of these allegations? He confirmed them to two MLAs; he confirmed them to a former candidate. Will he not recognize that it is not just Mr. Sutherland's new evidence, it is Mr. Aitken's? He confirmed the whole story. Will he not recognize this is new evidence and call an inquiry?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the members opposite continue to deal in innuendo and hearsay evidence, hearsay evidence from two individuals who have been demonstrated to have been given false information in the past. That is not the basis of throwing out--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, on a new question. Mr. Aitken, in conversation with myself and with Mr. Evans and with Mr. Sigurdson, told us that the plan that he took part in was a plan that was hatched in the highest offices of the Conservative election campaign with Mr. Sokolyk, that when he met in the hotel, the Norwood Hotel, with Mr. Sokolyk and Mr. Sigurdson during the election campaign, he confirmed to Mr. Sokolyk that monies had been passed at the party's request, and the reply from Mr. Sokolyk was: good work; job well done.
Will the Premier not recognize that this is evidence that is both substantive and new, and it cannot simply be brushed aside as having been previously investigated by an investigation which was manifestly incomplete? Will he simply not do the right thing and call a judicial inquiry?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, Mr. Aitken was the subject of the inquiry that was conducted by Elections Manitoba. He was interviewed at that time. His role was enunciated publicly in the affair. I will place my faith in Elections Manitoba rather than the allegations of a New Democratic member of this House.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood, with a supplementary question.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, a new question. Mr. Aitken confirmed to Mr. Evans, myself and Mr. Sigurdson, and in fact to others, that the Elections Manitoba investigation consisted of having a long discussion over coffee in a public restaurant. No sworn statement was ever taken. No written statement was signed. This was not a statement under oath. Mr. Aitken simply fenced and toyed with an investigation that was incomplete.
Will the Premier not recognize that Mr. Aitken was not sworn under oath? None, in fact, of the testimony taken was taken under oath. It is time for a judicial inquiry. Will he call it?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I repeat that I will put my faith in Elections Manitoba and their investigation. That is why they are there. They are there on a nonpartisan basis to represent all parties in this House. They have the responsibility to do these investigations, and I put my faith in them.
Foreign-Trained Physicians
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, once again, over the weekend there was an article that appeared in which it talks about foreign-trained doctors. Again, foreign-trained doctors are being somewhat neglected when we have the government of the day trying to bring in doctors from abroad.
My question is for the Minister of Health. Over the years, we have constantly asked what the government is doing with respect to the foreign-trained doctors, and we have not been able to deal with that issue. My question specific to the Minister of Health is: does the government have any intentions whatsoever to bring in programs or to deal with this issue once and for all?
Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member for Inkster and I share the same interest in this particular area. There are two other parties involved in it that are not under direct control or, in some cases, even indirect control of government: obviously, the College of Physicians and Surgeons, which is the licensing body, and of course, the University of Manitoba. We have been working with both to try to move them to the same conclusion that we have come, that more opportunity should be made available for foreign-trained physicians.
It is not a simple issue. There is a great complexity of the whole licensing scheme around physicians, and it is one that is a very restrictive one, one, some would argue, for good reason, others would argue for other reasons. But we are working away at it, and I wish, of course, for faster progress, but there are two bodies with which we have to deal.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would ask the minister to give consideration to the patients, in particular, in rural Manitoba and, in fact, to those who do have the expertise, do have the abilities, that need to get that internship program, so that in fact instead of sitting at home watching this government try and get from abroad to bring to Manitoba--their needs are not being met.
I ask the minister specifically: when can we anticipate that this issue is going to be dealt with? The government has been putting it off for years now.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the crux really of the issue is to prove qualifications and the ability to practise medicine in the province of Manitoba. The College of Physicians and Surgeons has that power, that authority, granted by this Legislature to be the governing body for licensing of physicians. The argument that they put forward continually is about ensuring that there is a proper check on qualifications, and not only qualifications to practise medicine but to be able to practise medicine in a style and a manner that is acceptable in the context of Canada and North America. One of the tests that seems to be a continual difficulty for foreign-trained physicians is, I believe, the Part 2 Examination which has to deal with style of practice, sensitivity and those types of issues.
So this is not just a simple question of yes or no by the ministry. It is one of checking and ensuring proper qualifications to practise medicine in the Canadian context.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I think there is a certain argument to be put forward.
Madam Speaker: Question.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would ask the minister if he acknowledges that there is an argument that can be put forward with respect to cultural differences and that there are individuals--and I would ask the minister: does he feel that the 70 individuals that are often referred to do not have the types of qualifications that are required in order to be meeting some of the demand in rural Manitoba, or is it maybe, quite possibly, that the internship program is really what needs to be expanded, and there needs to be a better will towards these potential physicians?
* (1410)
Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, two parts to the equation. One is the qualifications and training in the practice of medicine, which is a matter of verifying the standards of the schools in which education was obtained. That becomes very complex, and I would even suggest over the last number of decades, within colleges across the country, has become more and more restrictive as opposed to less restrictive. The second is one of style of practice and mannerisms of the country. The College of Physicians and Surgeons has proposed some options to us. One, of course, is that of physician assistants, which would allow the licensing of certain individuals to be able to practise under a physician and gain the experience to be able to pass the Part 2 Examination. That is something we are examining now.
1995 Election
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, in any process of justice, justice must not only be done but seen to be done. In this instance, the key individual involved in the investigation, Mr. Sutherland, was never interviewed by Elections Manitoba. His funding of $4,900 that he says came from the Tory party was never investigated by Elections Manitoba. Mr. Aitken was not under testimony under oath. Mr. Sokolyk, the Premier's chief assistant, was not investigated under oath. The Premier is acting as judge and jury saying we are going to accept that and we are not going to believe anybody else.
Madam Speaker, for the sake of justice, I am asking the Premier: if what he says is true, will the Premier be prepared to stand up and launch--and he ought to since he is Premier--an independent judicial review of this scandal to clear the air and clear the minds of all Manitobans, particularly the new evidence?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, you know, the members opposite always try to turn everything into a scandal. We see the motivation right here. Members opposite have access to institutions that we have set up as members of this House to guard and protect our rights in election campaigns. That is what Elections Manitoba is all about. It is nonpartisan. If members opposite want to argue that somehow they are partisan, that they are acting in a way that goes against fairness and the electoral process, then let them make that allegation.
The fact of the matter is that all of us, as political parties, co-operate to the fullest extent with Elections Manitoba. We on this side have always done that. We have made our people available, our information available, and that is why Elections Manitoba is able to do its job as well as I believe it does. If the members opposite think that Elections Manitoba is a problem, is somehow acting in a partisan way, then they can make those accusations. They can go directly to Elections Manitoba and they can do that. But, you know, Madam Speaker, there is a certain irony to this, that all of this was investigated right after the election campaign when memories were fresh, when information was right at hand and all of those things.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable First Minister, to complete his response.
Mr. Filmon: And now, Madam Speaker, we have members opposite who claim to have acquired this information in January, over five months ago, but they waited until the last week of the Legislature to bring it all forward. They waited until then to try and create a scandal out of this. Why? For their own political interests. Why? Because they do not have any other issues upon which anybody should elect them, and that is why we have this whole thing happening today.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Kildonan, with a supplementary question.
Mr. Chomiak: Will the Premier not agree that, whatever the forum, be it criminal justice or inquiries or whatever, if a key witness was not investigated, if the key witness is Mr. Sutherland, if the key witness's financial accounts, which served as the very basis of the investigation, were not investigated, and if two other key witnesses were not investigated under oath--is it not incumbent upon the Premier as head of the government, as not being above the law, not acting as judge and jury, is it not his role to clear the air and to call a judicial independent inquiry to even prove his own case, never mind the allegations that are flowing from the mouths of those individuals who were not even investigated by Elections Manitoba? He has the power in The Evidence Act to do that, and he has done it before; he should do it now.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, as a lawyer, the member opposite should know that another one of the principles of justice is that it is up to the accusers to prove their case. Because they do not have substantive proof, they therefore want somebody else to have an inquiry to try and get some proof, but the fact of the matter is another one of the principles is having credible witnesses. The two witnesses they have got, one has acknowledged or at least is now saying that he falsified the information the first time that he registered with Elections Manitoba, and the second one is the same one who made false allegations against the member for Steinbach (Mr. Driedger) and the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns). So there is a certain degree of credibility lacking in the case, and that is the whole principle behind this so-called scandal. The scandal is that members opposite would seriously try and make this an issue in Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired.