Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw all honourable members' attention to the public gallery where we have this afternoon seven Grade 12 students from St. Claude School Complex under the direction of Miss Sharon Olson. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns).

And, thirty-seven Grade 5 students from Dr. D.W. Penner School under the direction of Mrs. Pat Brolund and Mr. Ken Bartel. This school is located in the constituency of the Speaker.

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

* (1335)

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, Athena Educational Partners, which is owned by Telescene, is proposing five-year contracts to Manitoba schools, an issue that the minister will be aware of. The contract includes, in the five-year agreement, TVs and computers in exchange for a 12.5-minute daily program, 10 minutes of which is allegedly news and two and a half minutes is direct commercials.

I would like to ask the minister, in lieu of the responsibility of the government on curriculum, what is the position of this government on the purchase of commercials during the curriculum time for kids in our schools.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, as to whether advertising should be present in classrooms, this would be a matter best addressed by school boards themselves in consultation with their communities, parents, students, and educators. My department, of course, in turn would examine whether there are any administrative issues to any arrangement. I would not want the issue being raised here today to be confused with other private-public partnerships, and I believe that is understood. Honourable members opposite would be aware of the private-public partnership announced yesterday with the Anokiiwin school in the city of Winnipeg, where Morris-MacDonald School Division partnered with Anokiiwin school to assist in ensuring that adults of aboriginal or Metis or Inuit ancestry could access a Grade 12 education to help prepare themselves for a better future.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, of course we are aware of Tech Voc and Boeing co-operative arrangements but always with the public owning the curriculum. The commercials that are shown in these shows, Nintendo commercials, corn pop commercials, as part of the curriculum time being devoted to children in the classrooms–part of their kids' attention is now being directed to watching these commercials under this program, which is built on the concept developed by Channel 1 in United States.

Surely, if this government can take a position on issues like God Save the Queen and on issues of other curriculum issues–and the minister knows in the annual report that we are responsible for leadership–why can this minister not take a leadership position on commercials like corn pops and Nintendos in our classrooms? I am opposed to it.

Mr. McCrae: Well, Madam Speaker, I think that I respect the positions taken by honourable members opposite on any number of issues. I respect them. It does not always mean I one hundred percent agree. In fact, we know that there are occasions when agreement eludes honourable members opposite and myself on various issues. I, too, would have concerns if my children or the children of my contemporaries in Manitoba should be subjected to things that are not appropriate or that in any way would interfere with the curriculum requirements of our New Directions in education.

Having said that, I also respect the autonomy of elected people at the school division level and matters like this are, in my opinion, best left to elected officials at the school division level to make decisions in consultation with the teachers, with the school business officials, and with the parents in the division. A debate like this is a good and healthy debate, and it ought to take place at the level of the school division. The honourable member wants to have that debate here, and to some extent I can agree with his sentiments. I do not want the children of this province subjected to things they ought not to be subjected to either. But, on the other hand, school divisions have to be allowed some measure of autonomy; after all, they are a taxing authority, as well.

Mr. Doer: Well, in the annual report of the Department of Education–and we have had numerous interventions by previous ministers of Education on establishing the responsibility of curriculum and taking leadership in curriculum in Manitoba. Madam Speaker, if the proposal was for an hour of commercials a day, would the minister take a position, or if it were two hours a day, would the minister take a position? Of course, he would. Commercial time in the curriculum shown to kids takes away from teaching time in the curriculum for kids. I want my kids to be learning something from a teacher, not getting Nintendo ads and corn pop ads in school.

The province of New Brunswick, the Premier of New Brunswick, the minister in Nova Scotia and also the minister in British Columbia have said no. They have taken leadership on these curriculum issues. Would this minister just say no to commercials during curriculum time in the classroom?

Mr. McCrae: I think the honourable member maybe should show a little more respect for our colleagues who are elected school trustees across this province. I would be as shocked as the honourable Leader of the Opposition if children were subjected to hours of commercial television ads on any given day, which is what the honourable member said. Obviously that is ridiculous.

Does the honourable Leader of the Opposition think that our elected trustees across this province are so irresponsible that they would allow that sort of thing to go on? Does the honourable member want to get rid of school boards altogether and take over their jobs for them? That is what is implicit in his question. Let him let his whole position be known, not just part of it.

* (1340)

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, our children live in a world surrounded by commercial advertising, but what we have not done before in Manitoba is to bring TV commercials into the classroom on a daily basis. What I would like to ask the minister is if he would confirm that school divisions that enter into such agreements for commercials in the classroom are in fact selling our students' attention. This is a captive audience, no clicker, no off button. Is that not exactly what would be happening here?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): The honourable member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) would like to use his remote control to turn me off. There are times when we hear about accountability, and sometimes I think honourable members opposite are not very interested in accountability.

I believe the reason for that is I do not think they are able to handle the truth sometimes. The truth is that New Directions in education has indeed been preparing our children for a future full of change, preparing them to be able to respond effectively to that change and to benefit themselves and their families in the future.

That being said, I repeat that the scenario painted by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) would be just as unacceptable to me as it would be to any right-thinking school trustee across this province. I do not hear honourable members opposite complaining when there are other commercial relationships with our schools, for example, materials supplied in schools, things like clocks and coke machines and those sorts of things. I do not hear too much from honourable members there.

The honourable member has to keep in mind that there are curriculum requirements mandated by the Department of Education and Training, and we expect those curricula to be met and taught.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister confirm that schools which enter into such agreements for commercials in the classroom will be required to report their enrollment figures and their daily attendance figures to these outside companies? Could the minister tell us whether this is in accordance with the spirit and intent of The Public Schools Act of Manitoba?

Mr. McCrae: I understand that Athena Educational Partners, which owns and markets the YNN, has approached a few school divisions in the province and that discussions are underway with those school divisions. I fully would expect to be kept up to date on what is going on in those discussions. However, again, school divisions and their trustees recognize the responsibilities they have to our children. They are responsible to ensure that the children are meeting the standards set by the provincial government, something that it took this provincial government to bring into effect in this province. The school divisions are responsible for ensuring that our children can address and achieve the assessment process that is part of New Directions. With all of that in mind, I would expect them to be extremely responsible in their negotiations with a company like Athena Educational Partners.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister who represents a government which has cut year after year the actual dollars out of the classroom and who is not prepared to take leadership on this issue–will he at least take the prudent step of waiting, of advising school divisions to wait until the independent study done by the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education is prepared and released on this subject?

Mr. McCrae: I would be happy to take the honourable member's suggestion under advisement and consider it very carefully, but I simply cannot accept what she said at the beginning of this question. Indeed, when the New Democrats were in office, they inherited from the Lyon government a 21 percent spending on education out of total spending, and the New Democrats in those days took that 21 percent and hacked and slashed to the point where our schools were left with 17.7 percent of funding when they left office. In contrast, the Filmon administration moved that up to 19.3 percent of total spending, so I am not about to take too much advice from the honourable member with respect to the funding for public education.

* (1345)

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): We have raised some serious questions about political influence in the granting of liquor licences. Yesterday we raised the question of Mr. Cubby Barrett and the licence in Cross Lake, and we raised the issue with the first batch of wine licences with one Mr. Denardi, who was the Crescentwood Conservative candidate in 1990, sat on the Liquor Commission Board, left the board and conveniently got a liquor licence a number of months afterwards.

I would like to ask the Minister responsible for the Liquor Commission how she can explain the fairness with a recent round of applications for private wine stores of having one Gordon McFarlane, the comptroller for the Conservative Party, the minister's official agent in the election, cited by Mr. Monnin in his report, acting as the third-party consultant dealing with the applications for those wine store licences.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): Madam Speaker, we know the members across the way have opposed private wine stores from the very beginning, have opposed them, spoken in opposition. This is a continuation of their constant opposition and absolutely no solutions. Mr. McFarlane was representing his firm, the management consulting firm of Grant Thornton. He was then chosen by his firm to act as part of the selection committee. I would remind the members across the way that the advertisements for the expansion of the private wine stores did go out in July 1998, well before anything was received in relation to the Monnin report.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, as a follow-up, I would like to ask the minister: how can she explain to applicants such as the Forsyths, for example, the fairness of a system that led to Mr. Joe Jerema [phonetic] with Pembina Fine Wines, contributor to the Conservative Party, receiving a licence, by the way, a licence which has the same name and location that the Forsyths had been seeking, spent $11,000 out of their pocket to put in? How can she explain the fairness of Mr. McFarlane with his connections directly to this minister, sitting there as a supposedly objective party analyzing their application?

Mrs. Vodrey: I can tell the member that the process was one which began in July of 1998, in which approximately 180 interested partners were given information and in which decisions were made on objective criteria such as location and premises, the operating plan, the marketing and merchandizing plan, the financial resources available, and also based on the management team plan.

Mr. Ashton: Well, I am wondering then, Madam Speaker, if the minister can explain the fairness of this process again, which resulted in De Luca's, a contributor to the Conservative Party, receiving a licence, Tom Frain [phonetic] being one of the principals, and one David Filmon being one of the principals. How can she explain the fairness of this process when her official agent in the last election sat there as a supposedly objective party, but just coincidentally resulted in these individuals getting the licence?

Mrs. Vodrey: Again I can say that the application process was a wide-open application process, that through the process there was an opportunity, then a second stage in which there were interviews. There was every effort to make sure that everyone who was interested in having this opportunity could fully explore this opportunity with the team of people who was set up to apply the objective criterion. Based on the objective criterion and interview process, there were five new stores which will in fact add to Manitoba. I would remind the members again that this process started in July of 1998.

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): My questions are directed to the Minister of Northern Affairs.

Madam Speaker, 15 years ago, the Cross Lake First Nation made a claim for the first time to the arbitrator regarding Claim 109, the Pipestone bridge. In December of '93, the arbitrator ruled in favour of Cross Lake. Since then, two more times there have been favourable rulings by the legal system for Cross Lake.

In February '99, the Manitoba Court of Appeal again ruled in favour of Cross Lake, and in March the government was ordered by the Court of Appeal of Manitoba to pay the damages, the interim damages to the Cross Lake First Nation.

I would like to ask the minister: what will it take for him and his government to comply with all these court orders that have been coming from the arbitrator and now finally the Court of Appeal of Manitoba?

Hon. David Newman (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Madam Speaker, questions have been raised on this issue previously by the honourable member for The Pas, and the responses that I gave indicated that the matter was going to the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal would then give guidance to all parties as to what the responsibilities were. The Court of Appeal has spoken, and the Court of Appeal will be listened to. The direction and guidance given by the Court of Appeal will be respected in the policies which will be put into play and the implementation of those policies that will be put into play to address this particular long-outstanding matter under NFA 1977.

* (1350)

Mr. Lathlin: Madam Speaker, I would like to respectfully table the latest decision by the Manitoba Court of Appeal for the government and the Minister of Northern Affairs, and also ask him: what part of the judgment that has been rendered three times by his legal system does he not understand?

Mr. Newman: The Northern Flood Agreement was of course signed in 1977, and the New Democratic Party was in government for a period of time, certainly from 1981 at least until 1988. Not only did they do nothing in relation to this particular issue, Madam Speaker, but the advice that was given at that time was exactly the advice that was followed by the government lawyers and the civil servants up until recently. Recently we have been taking a look at the spirit and intent of NFA 1977 and developing a totally different relationship. One of them led to the comprehensive settlements in four of the five communities. That was done by this government, and the last one concerning Cross Lake was almost achieved, including the resolution of this particular issue, but the new chief and council chose to go a different path. The solution to the issue raised in the Court of Appeal will be addressed in this new relationship that we have with Cross Lake in ways that are fair, reasonable, in the public interest, the interests of the people of Cross Lake.

Mr. Lathlin: Madam Speaker, my last question to the same minister is: given his habit of lecturing aboriginal people–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

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

* (1355)

Mr. Lathlin: My question to the minister is if he expects aboriginal people to follow the laws even when they come here to the Legislature, his lecturing of civility, obeying the law, I would like to ask the minister: when is he going to follow the law and implement the decision that has been given three times by the legal system of Manitoba?

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, what we are talking about is the implementation of an agreement. There was some difference of opinion by all parties, including the federal government, as to the interpretation of the agreement. The final position by the Court of Appeal will be respected by the province of Manitoba and its government, and the implementation will take place in accordance with all of the due processes but with dispatch because this is an important issue which may contribute to the socioeconomic development of the people of Cross Lake, which we support strongly.

I can assure you whatever time it takes, it will be a lot faster than the seven years it took for the New Democratic government to do nothing in relation to this particular issue, and since. We have at least accomplished 80 percent of the objective, and we are going to accomplish a hundred percent before we are through.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question again is for the Minister of Health. The costs related to diabetes for the health care budget are quite enormous. In fact, reports and experts will tell you that it is one of the costs that is going to be increasing over the next number of years. The question to the Minister of Health is: does the government have any idea of the percentage of cost to diabetes on the health care budget, and what specifically is it doing in terms of addressing this important issue both in Winnipeg and rural Manitoba in the upcoming budget?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member is correct that certainly costs related to diabetes have been continuing to increase in the province of Manitoba. That is why the previous Minister of Health undertook a study, a review, and a strategy was released back in just November of this year, November '98, to deal with the whole issue of diabetes in the province of Manitoba, a comprehensive strategy with a number of recommendations that are being acted on. Some we discussed yesterday. This is the treatment side in terms of more dialysis stations, but the more important issue is doing everything we can to prevent diabetes in the first place. That strategy outlines a number of initiatives to deal with that very important issue, and if the member for Inkster has not had an opportunity to see that strategy, I am certainly prepared to forward him a copy.

* (1400)

Mr. Lamoureux: I look to the former Minister of Finance, today's Minister of Health, and he will recall great claims of tax reduction. What I am asking the Minister of Health now to look at is a part of those initiatives meant increasing the deductibles, so things like testing strips, things like syringes are a real cost for individuals who have diabetes. Is the Minister of Health prepared to revisit that issue so that we ensure that there is better control at that level so we are preventing some of those long-term costs on health care?

Mr. Stefanson: Well, again, Madam Speaker, the study that was released just in November of last year, just some four or five months ago, outlines a number of recommendations to deal with a diabetes strategy to prevent the number of incidents of diabetes. As I have indicated, we certainly are acting on a good number of those recommendations. That report is an excellent source document for us, all of us as Manitobans, to deal with this very important issue to do everything we can to make sure that diabetes does not occur in Manitobans in the first place.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, what we are asking the Minister of Health is to recognize that there are individuals that are not testing their blood every day as they should be, and that is why I ask the Minister of Health: what is this government going to be doing in the upcoming budget to deal with this very critical issue which in the long term is going to save a great deal of dollars on health care expenditure in the future? What is the government doing in this particular budget?

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, we have already taken steps dedicating additional resources to deal with diabetes strategy. The member may have noticed when we provided some additional support just recently to all of the regional health authorities across Manitoba. A major part of that was to provide support for diabetes co-ordinators to deal with this very important issue right throughout all of Manitoba. The report I referred to earlier also has a number of recommendations to help us as a province deal with preventative measures to do everything we can to ensure that Manitobans do not end up having diabetes. So again we are taking a number of steps. We have dedicated additional resources to deal with this very important issue, and I encourage him to wait for our upcoming 1999 budget.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture. When this government announced their plan to move away from single-desk selling despite the opposition of the majority of producers, one of the biggest fears of the producers was their ability to get price information which is critical to a fair and open market. This fear has come to pass. Manitoba Pork is no longer reporting prices because one packer is not providing the information.

Given that under Manitoba law this is a requirement, I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture what steps he is taking to resolve the problem which is causing chaos in the hog industry in Manitoba.

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, I want to assure the honourable member for Swan River that there is no chaos in the pork industry in the province of Manitoba. The pork industry is recovering from a very serious price decline that has afflicted other producers, wheat producers and produce producers generally speaking, but the outlook for pork at the moment is far from chaotic.

The issue that she raises with respect to price transparency, let me correct her that, with the flexibility of the marketing system introduced by this government, which has bred so much confidence in the industry in the province, there has been a difficulty in establishing a price. The reporting of that pricing arrangement is undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, which up until a very short little while was providing a reasonably satisfactory service in that regard.

One major packer, namely the Neepawa people, have stopped reporting, and we are addressing that issue while I speak.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the same minister, since he said he would ensure levies would be collected under the new open-market system–and in fact when he was asked how he was going to do it, he said watch me. Since all people are not contributing their levies, I would like to ask the minister how he is addressing this to ensure that there is equality in the industry. We are watching you.

Mr. Enns: The honourable member will well recall that the question of collection of levies has always met with some difficulty. When it was the sole responsibility of Manitoba Pork, there were some significant defaults taking place, as the member is well aware of, and I intend to address those situations.

I am meeting with the Manitoba Pork council next Thursday. It will be my first meeting with them in their newly structured organization. This is the group that now has the total responsibility of the levy and how it is spent, and we will be having discussions about the very issue that she raises.

An area that I am still not satisfied with is to impose the levies on the number of weanlings that get shipped out of the province. I need co-operation from the federal authorities, customs authorities, to impose those levies on the weanlings that are being exported, as well.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, given that when anybody in the farming operation makes a change, they do a review of the change to see what the impacts of it are, I would like to ask the minister if he will do a review on the changes, or whether he has done a review on the changes to the open-market system that he has moved to, to see what the impacts are on small operations, on family operations, who are the ones that are suffering right now because of the lack of price transparency.

Mr. Enns: Madam Speaker, it was precisely that responsible industry in-depth review that was undertaken by Professor Clay Gilson, one of our most respected agricultural economists, now retired from the University of Manitoba, that led me to make the changes that, by and large, are widely supported in the industry, that have brought hundreds of millions of dollars of investment to this province, that have in a very short while increased our pork production by some 55 percent and will continue to do so. Now there are some problems to be ironed out, and I am prepared to work with the pork industry to see that they are carried out.

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, over 23,000 Manitobans suffer from epilepsy, 40 percent of them intractable cases. Over a year ago, I raised this issue in the Manitoba Legislature that we were losing our only remaining epileptologist to the province of Alberta. At that time I asked the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to get involved to try and make sure that this person would stay in the province to provide that medical service for people suffering from epilepsy. At that time the Premier refused and the Minister of Health, in answer to the question, said that he was on a recruiting program, the recruiting program was underway and that they were going to have an epileptologist for the province of Manitoba.

I want to ask the new Minister of Health to advise this House: has his government found an epileptologist for the province of Manitoba, when we should be having at least a minimum of three in this province, Madam Speaker?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Certainly, on a number of fronts, we continue to make significant improvements in terms of recruiting people to Manitoba to remain in Manitoba in a number of medical areas, Madam Speaker, whether it is anesthetists, oncologists, and so on. In terms of the very specific question asked by the member for Transcona, I will take that as notice, and I will report back to him as soon as possible.

Mr. Reid: That is what the previous Minister of Health said to me in answer to my questions.

* (1410)

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): I want to ask the Minister of Health: since Dr. Pillay, the epileptologist who has left Manitoba for Alberta, pioneered the vagus nerve implants to control the 40 percent of intractable epilepsy cases in this province, who has taken over the monitoring of those cases, to monitor to make sure that those patients are receiving the care that they need, to follow up on Dr. Pillay's research so the patients are not put at risk?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, again, Madam Speaker, I certainly thank the member for Transcona, both for his question and obviously his interest in this very important area. Similarly to the first part of his question, I will take that part as notice as well and report back to this House.

Mr. Reid: Madam Speaker, can the Minister of Health explain then why his department has not made the decision with respect to the funding of all of the vagus nerve implants that Dr. Pillay had to pay for out of his pocket, at least in part, and has left the province of Manitoba, leaving those patients without any medical care in the field of epilepsy? Why has this government not paid for those particular implants?

Mr. Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, without necessarily accepting the preamble, I am certainly prepared to look into the issue that the member for Transcona has raised, the issue that he has raised here in all three parts to his question, and to report back to this House at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, last week the minister conceded, as did the two hospitals in question, that HSC and St. Boniface were paying more than $50,000 a month for food they were not receiving. He defended that. Will he today confirm that as of about two weeks ago they are each paying over a hundred thousand dollars a month now because they are now picking up their share pro rata of the fixed costs for the little peas they are not receiving either?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, I certainly did indicate to this House that the Urban Shared Services Corporation–which is a corporation formed by the nine hospitals here in the city of Winnipeg, so obviously they are on both sides of this issue. They are running the hospitals. They are also purchasing their food from the Urban Shared Services Corporation. Their objective throughout this entire process is to be sure that we have high-quality food with proper nutrition and to do it as efficiently and effectively as possible so that any savings can be redirected into other health care needs here in the province of Manitoba. So it is the management, the CEOs of these nine hospitals, that are a part of that organization.

It is taking a little bit longer for both the HSC and St. Boniface to come on stream with the new organization. I think that is being done for a couple of reasons. One is there are some capital requirements required at both facilities to a certain extent; and secondly, I think it is prudent and proper to be absolutely certain, as these steps and changes are implemented, that they are done ensuring that at the end of the day proper quality food and high-nutritional food is provided.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, surely the minister would agree that it would have been prudent, proper, good business, good management, to have assured himself and the department that all of this planning was in place, all of the estimates were in before they committed $20 million to this plan. Would that not have been prudent and proper management?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, certainly at the outset of this whole initiative an extensive amount of work was done in terms of the capital requirements, the operating savings, and as I have already indicated, the process is taking slightly longer to implement, but at the end of the day we are going to end up with a system that does provide high quality food, proper nutrition, and does save dollars that can be used elsewhere in the health care system.

Certainly when you look at the patient surveys, they continue to show higher and higher approval ratings at all the facilities, higher than they were under the previous system, under the old system, and certainly even NDP members can understand and appreciate that one centralized service can provide the services more efficiently and effectively, thereby leaving more dollars to dedicate to other health care needs in the province of Manitoba.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired.