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 thirty-seven Grade 9 students from Calvin Christian School under the direction of Mrs. Angela Schaefer. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson).

Also, nine Grade 7 students from Prairieview School under the direction of Ms. Carol Dyck. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura).

We also have twenty-three Grade 5 students from Christ the King School under the direction of Mrs. Shirley Gendron. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Render).

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

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, since this government has been in power, we have clearly seen that the delivery of patient services in our health care system is in great difficulty. We are also seeing that many of the other tenets of the system put in place by this government are in equal difficulty, particularly the large planning sections and bureaucracies that were established in the movement to regional health. I would like to ask the Minister of Health how he can explain the fact that when the health authorities were established, one of the reasons that was given was because of more unified planning, operating and funding structure to integrate health care services, when we now see that the government is putting out a tender effective June 15 for a consultant to provide a comprehensive model for the funding of personal care homes for the province of Manitoba. Why are they privatizing this particular situation when we clearly have seen the fact that there are many bureaucrats in the system that have been added under this government?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, the member for Thompson clearly misunderstands what is being done here. I go back to earlier questions from his colleague the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), who asked about the whole issue of personal care homes, that we indicated very clearly we are looking at the issue of standards in our personal care homes. In fact, we will be out very shortly doing consultations. I offered the member for Kildonan a full briefing on the whole issue of standards. We also indicated at the time we would look at the whole issue of funding for our personal care homes, both our proprietary, which are the private ones, and our nonproprietary, which are the public ones, which, by the way, are about five to one, public to private personal care homes, and what we are doing now is within the department reviewing the entire issue of appropriate funding levels for our personal care homes. The RFP that the member refers to in the newspaper is a request to get additional support to bring in more expertise to do that review. Again, the members on the one hand call for it to be done. We agree that it should be done, and we are drawing on the best expertise, both within our department and externally, to come up with appropriate options for a funding model.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I would like to table a copy of the plan of the Winnipeg Community and Long Term Care Authority which outlines, I believe, there are five vice-presidents and three different research directors, and that is in the Winnipeg Community and Long Term Care Authority alone. I would like to ask the Minister of Health why now, several years after we needed this, why is he now privatizing this particular aspect? Why, with this huge bureaucracy he has built in Health, is he not getting that kind of study done by the bureaucrats in the regional health authorities and in the Department of Health?

Mr. Stefanson: This member is clearly confused, Madam Speaker. We are not privatizing anything. When you look at our personal care homes today in Manitoba, there are about 100 that are nonproprietary or public personal care homes. There are about 20 that are proprietary. It is a 5 to 1 ratio. What we are doing is we are looking at the future funding for our personal care homes in Manitoba, both our proprietary and our nonproprietary. We indicated in this House several weeks ago, we are doing that review. It has been called on by the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) that we should be doing the review. We agree that the review should be done, and not only are we utilizing our internal expertise, we are drawing on outside expertise to do this. This is something that has not been done in Manitoba for 25 or 30 years, and we want to draw on the best expertise available internally and externally to be sure it is done right when the policy is changed.

Mr. Ashton: It is the people of Manitoba who are confused about how this government can build up a huge bureaucracy and then state there is not enough expertise to–

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Would the honourable member please pose his supplementary question.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Health minister if he can explain the comments by Sue Hicks that there was not enough expertise in the government to do the job when this government under its regional health strategy has added huge new layers of bureaucracy. Why can they not do the job in Health? Why are they now bringing in outside consultants to do something they should have done in Health in 1995 when it was first requested?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, we are doing both. We are utilizing internal expertise and external expertise. This is not something that is done every month or every year. In fact, as I have already indicated, it has not been done, I believe, in over 20 or 25 years in terms of a comprehensive review of the appropriate funding models for personal care homes in Manitoba. That is not to say there have not been annual increases in funding because there have. But we have been called upon by all kinds of parties to look at the funding model, and that is what we are doing. We are utilizing our internal people, and we are also putting out a request for proposals to draw on outside expertise to do this thorough analysis which requires an analysis of the costs of all of the issues related to what is an appropriate funding model for personal care homes in Manitoba to meet the needs today and in the years ahead.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, in 1992, an inquest requested increased funding to personal care homes. In 1995, as a result of an exposé on television, the former, former minister conducted a study which concluded in 1995 as one of the 32 recommendations that the government increase funding levels to personal care homes. Now, in 1999, seven years after it was first requested, we see the government going out quickly on a tender to do a funding proposal to private consulting firms for new personal care homes.

In light of what the government tried to do by privatizing home care, how can we have any faith that this government is not attempting to privatize that function and go to a private model of personal care homes since most of their friends, I suspect, will be involved in this tender process?

* (1340)

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, we have increased funding for personal care homes in most of the budgets we have brought down. We increased it in this budget by $15 million. I am assuming, once again, that is one of the reasons that the members opposite of the NDP voted for our 1999 budget because it includes $15 million more for personal care homes. We have done that time and time again, continuing to provide more resources in keeping with the whole shift to community-based care whether it be our Home Care program which is up by some $20 million, our personal care home program which is up by $15 million. I am sure that is why they voted for this budget. They have not explained clearly why they have, but I am assuming that that is one of the reasons that they were wise enough to support this budget.

What we are doing here is reviewing how we fund personal care homes in the years ahead. We are using internal expertise, and we are drawing on external expertise to assist with the development of options for a funding model. In terms of what that funding model ultimately is, that will be a decision of our government, and it will be done on the basis of meeting the future needs of personal care homes in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the Minister of Health explain why since 1992 the government has increased the fees paid by residents in personal care homes by 150 percent, and now seven years later, the government now says we need a study–going into an election–to determine a funding model? Can the minister explain that to me, please?

Mr. Stefanson: Well, what I will explain to the member, Madam Speaker, and I will show him very clearly as we are in Estimates the continued increases in funding for our personal care homes in Manitoba. Again, I believe we still have one of the most comprehensive personal care home programs in all of Canada, where a significant percentage, 70 percent to 75 percent, is provided by the government of Manitoba for our personal care homes.

Again, he likes to talk on both sides of every issue. He calls on us to review the funding models. We review the funding models, and now he criticizes us. He questions whether or not we are putting in more money for personal care homes. He turns around and he votes for our budget. Well, again, we would like to see just a little bit of consistency from members opposite.

We put $15 million more into personal care homes, $300 million in this budget. We support this budget. I am glad to see they had the wisdom to do just that as well.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister explain why we set up 13 regional health authorities and two authorities in the city of Winnipeg at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to, quote, better co-ordinate and plan our health care system, why we have hired dozens of vice-presidents across the province, very high-priced consultants, and now the minister is telling us we have to spend more taxpayers' money for them to go to an outside consulting firm to tell us how to fund our personal care homes? Can the minister explain that?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, again, we support regionalization. I am not sure what members opposite do. We support regionalization for the very important reasons that regionalization can allow us to make the best use of our buildings in our health care system, can make the best use of our equipment in our health care system, and we can make the best use of our people in our health care system by putting programs where they meet the greatest need in all of our communities. So again, we are very supportive of regionalization, another issue where we are not sure where members opposite stand on that issue. But the simple message on this issue is we are reviewing the funding models. We are looking at options for future funding models to meet the needs of Manitobans in our personal care homes. We believe in doing it thoroughly, we believe in drawing on the best advice and the best expertise that we can possibly get when we do a review after 20 or 30 years, and therefore we are going to use internal expertise and external expertise to give us the best options on a go-forward basis.

* (1345)

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, a new question to the Minister of Health. The CEO of the Urban Shared Services has quit. The corporation is losing $2.5 million, something we warned them about last year. The Auditor is investigating the corporation. It is in chaos because of the food delivery. The minister said yesterday, quote, the operation is already running smoothly.

Madam Speaker, if that corporation is running smoothly, how can we trust the government to run anything in health care? Can the minister not use this opportunity to stop this corporation, to bring it back to the House, to bring the financial statements to the House and ask for an investigation of this corporation and a freezing of the frozen food?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, again I remind the member opposite that the Urban Shared Services Corporation is an entity that was created by the nine hospitals in the city of Winnipeg, the CEOs of those nine hospitals that are concerned with the operations of the hospitals and the quality of care for the individuals in those facilities. They serve on the board along with, I believe, four other citizen representatives from Manitoba that serve on the board. Their objective throughout the entire process is to provide quality, nutritional food in the most cost-effective and efficient way possible. They have pointed out that by having one centralized system, it can reduce the requirements for future capital in all of our health care facilities in the city of Winnipeg, and it can also improve the efficiencies of providing that food. They readily acknowledge that in the first year of operation they have had some implementation costs, they have had some transition costs. It is taking longer for a couple of facilities to come on stream, but you are not putting a system in place just for one month or one week or one year. You are putting a system in place to meet the needs of the Winnipeg hospitals for the next 20 or 30 years, and this system will provide quality, nutritional food in an effective and efficient manner.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the Minister of Health explain why on April 15 of last year, when I asked the former minister and Joe Sheil, CEO, to revise the business plan because they were going to lose $2.5 million, they refused to revise the business plan? They refused to table the financial plan; they refused to table the contractual plan. Why does the minister expect us to believe today his claims that they are going to make it all better when they could not do it last year, when they denied it last year and when the Auditor has already investigated it?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I expect him to believe that because they have seen the wisdom of their ways by voting for our 1999 budget. So if that is indicative of some of the thinking that is finally taking place over there, I hope they start to think that way when it comes to regionalization and other services in Manitoba.

I have explained very clearly for the member the whole objective, the whole benefit, the system that is in place for the Urban Shared Services Corporation. We certainly believe that over time it can definitely do what it is meant to do and provide quality, nutritional food in a cost-effective manner.

In terms of all of the surveys that have been done at the hospitals of late, they show continued improvement in terms of the ratings of the food by the patients. In fact, the surveys show that the ratings today show that the patients of the facilities give a higher rating to the food today than they did to the food prior to the changes.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, can the minister not understand that the same comments he made today were made by the previous minister and the previous minister in the same claims? How can he justify a loss of $2.5 million in the corporation, and will he not use this opportunity of the resignation of the CEO, the chaos in the corporation, the investigation by the Auditor to put the frozen food plan on frozen and come back with a legitimate process as to how we can provide proper food to Manitobans so that they do not have to go through this fiasco? This is a fiasco.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, there is no fiasco other than in the mind of the member for Kildonan. Again, I just remind him of the system that is in place and the status of operations. We are in Estimates, and I look forward to discussing this at further length with the member for Kildonan.

Again, the objective of this system is to avoid future capital cost requirement, to do it effectively and efficiently to minimize the actual operating cost, to provide quality and nutritional food. This system can definitely do that, and I am sure that with the board that is in place, the nine CEOs from our hospitals, the four citizen members, they will take the appropriate steps to continue to make sure the corporation works efficiently going forward.

I have indicated I am prepared to return to the member with the issue of the contracts, and there will be a revised business plan from the Urban Shared Services Corporation very shortly, which I look forward to sharing with the member for Kildonan. I am sure he will take some interest in that.

* (1350)

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, yesterday in Question Period the Minister of Health said that because the operation is running smoothly, he does not foresee any operational problems in the near future. Well, the big rethermalization carts were designed to be taken to each ward of each hospital and plugged in there so that the food would be ready when needed, but it turns out the Health Sciences Centre wards do not have the power supply to allow the plug-ins and that the Health Sciences Centre officials have now acknowledged that the huge costs to rewire each ward are simply prohibitive. So will the Minister of Health then confirm that the carts cannot be plugged in to the wards of Health Sciences Centre, therefore cannot be used the way they were intended, and that is a pretty major operational problem in anyone's books?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Both the HSC, Health Sciences Centre, and St. Boniface Hospital have indicated that they have some improvements to put in place to allow for the introduction of the Urban Shared Services Corporation. But again, the review and analysis that has been done to compare the Urban Shared Services Corporation to improvements that would be required at all of our health care facilities in Winnipeg shows a difference of about $15 million less by doing it on a centralized basis as continuing to do it at each individual facility.

I will certainly look into some of the details, but based on the member for Crescentwood's past performance of being right maybe 10 percent of the time, I even question the accuracy of what he brings today.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister confirm that the current plans are to rewire a major piece of the basement area of HSC for the carts, widen structural doors at huge costs, then hold the carts in the basement and rush them to the floors at meal times, exactly like the previous system? No improvement.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I think that we should wait till the whole new system is introduced at the Health Sciences Centre, which is expected to take place either later this year or early next year. But again, in terms of the overall plan for the Urban Shared Services Corporation, it was brought forward on the basis of one of the benefits being that we could forgo about $15 million in capital costs by doing it in one central location. So again, the Urban Shared Services Corporation has acknowledged that the HSC and St. Boniface do require some adjustments, but that pales by comparison to major capital improvements that would have been required in terms of kitchen facilities and food preparation facilities in those hospitals. So, on the capital cost side, the investment, again the information provided by Urban Shared Services Corporation shows a savings of about $15 million.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister tell the House: now that we know that we are already $5 million over the budget, given the food that is being paid for but not received by HSC and St. Boniface and given the $2.5-million overrun, we have already spent at least five that we know of, of the 15 that you were saving, will he tell us what the expected costs of the renovations at Health Sciences Centre will be, the real total costs, and whether there has been any testing of the proposed revision to the plan, that is, shipping the carts up to the floor not able to be plugged in, or whether this is just another fly by the seat of the pants planning exercise by this government?

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

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, the member is wrong with his preamble. He is comparing capital costs and operating costs. I know he has difficulty getting both of those issues straight in his mind. Again, in terms of a lot of the preamble he brings, we have seen his track record when it came to Deer Lodge hospital, having a pathetic amount of accuracy in terms of the quality of information he brought. I think we should wait and see the issues being addressed by Health Sciences Centre. They are in the process of doing that. They are in the process of finalizing their plans for the introduction of the service.

But again, the overall objective of the USSC, which is owned by the nine hospitals–what they seem to forget across the way is that these nine CEOs who manage these health care facilities that provide all of the services in the hospital from the patient care to the food to all of the services, they are extremely interested in doing that as efficiently and effectively as possible and to ensure that the food is of a quality and a nutritional value that is acceptable to all of the patients. They have a very strong interest in doing that, as do we, and they continue to improve in that area.

* (1355)

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier. In the Deloraine area there has been considerable discussion around the fact that a number of individuals who are not resident in the municipality were able to vote in the municipal election as a result of owning undivided interests in tiny parcels of land within the municipality. My question to the Premier is: what changes to The Municipal Act will the Premier be proposing to end this particular practice?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I know that that matter is currently being reviewed by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), and so I will take that matter as notice on his behalf and have the answer brought back to the Legislature.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, can the Premier indicate, given the municipal legislation that we have before us, why is it not being dealt with with current legislation that is being proposed?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will take that question as notice and have the Minister of Rural Development bring a response.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, then will the Premier in fact be introducing amendments to The Municipal Act sometime in this session to address that issue?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I said that the matter was being reviewed. That does not imply that a decision has been made with respect to amendments. So, again, I will have the matter responded to by the Minister of Rural Development.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, farmers in the southwest corner of Manitoba continue to wait for some direction from this government as to what kind of support they are going to be offering farmers who are suffering perhaps the most serious flooding they have ever had in this region. I would like to ask the Premier when his government is going to be telling farmers of southwestern Manitoba whether they are going to be extending crop insurance, whether they are going to waive the penalty for late seeding. When are they going to give some answers to the people of southwestern Manitoba who are suffering very serious flooding?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, there has been a good deal of work and discussion on these issues done by various departments and ministers. We met just less than an hour ago with representatives of municipalities and KAP regional people in that area. We had an extensive discussion, including the chair of the Crop Insurance Corporation and representatives from the Departments of Natural Resources, Agriculture and MEMO. A variety of different initiatives are being explored.

The member may well know that in virtually every case there is a federal participation, from the DFA with respect to disaster financial assistance, with respect to the potential use of AIDA, with respect to crop insurance and with respect to all of these other matters including various different opportunities that were pursued either in other disasters in Canada or in the 1997 flood in the Red River.

The position that we have taken is that we will pursue the most generous applications of solutions that have been made in the past as our model so that if they were used either in this province or other places to the benefit of farmers and residents in an area facing similar disasters, that is what we would want to do. I would hope that we would have these matters all clarified to the extent that we can put out public notices with information on this within the next 24 to 48 hours.

Ms. Wowchuk: I thank the Premier for the answer. I want to ask him whether he agrees with the federal Minister of Agriculture who says you cannot announce programs for farmers because they might be irresponsible and be discouraged from seeding. Surely you must agree that farmers do not farm to farm crop insurance and are looking for support just in case they cannot seed, and need some answers now.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I do not agree with the comments of the federal minister, and we will be in contact again. I know that our Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) has been in contact with Mr. Vanclief on a number of occasions in recent times, and we will continue to pursue the matter with him. We do not agree with his position on the matter.

* (1400)

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): The Minister of Justice here in the robbery and the street gang capital of Canada, we understand the minister has been circulating for a few months this fancy, glossy brochure called Maintaining Safe Communities, full of the minister's puffery. I commend the minister for the nice, glossy photos and the layout. What is this for, Madam Speaker? It is clearly not a guide or a manual for help or to improve safety. What is the cost to taxpayers?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): This was a brochure entitled Maintaining Safe Communities that was put out by my department, and I think my department speaks with pride, our civil servants, our public servants speak with pride about the efforts that they have made in terms of making this a safer place to live.

I want to commend them for the work that they have done. For example, in the area called Victims, it talks about the victims' programs that we offer, in fact indicates that there is a 1-800 number where people can phone to get some more information in respect of support and assistance to victims. So I am quite proud of what my department has done in respect of not only putting this pamphlet together but also the programs that they have been instrumental in developing.

Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister who will not tell taxpayers–

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Would the honourable member please pose his question.

Mr. Mackintosh: The minister justified this puff piece at any cost, but it describes recent improvements to deal with domestic violence such as new civil remedies for victims to deal with stalking, protection orders available province-wide at any time, prevention orders with compensation, suspension and seizure of driver's licence, all of which are untrue.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, this particular member has brought forward information, allegations that have subsequently been proven to be untrue, that there was very basic information that he could have checked. For example, he brought information here indicating that Manitoba's Maintenance Enforcement Program was somehow substandard. In fact, it has the highest rate of collections of any province on a percentage basis. So the types of comments that he has made about the programs I think are simply incorrect.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): A point of order, Madam Speaker. Beauchesne's Citation 417 is very clear, that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. Once again this minister is not only not answering the question but is engaging in the kind of personalization, the kinds of efforts we see all too often of diverting from the question. A very serious question was asked about this puff piece and the information that is in it. I would appreciate if you would ask the minister to answer that question under our rules.

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

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, as I understand Beauchesne, the question has to be succinctly put. It has to be one question, and there should be no preamble. The member has clearly erred in putting that question. So the question that was put to me, or should I say the plural of the questions that were put to me, demanded an answer as concisely as I could give, and when you give multiple questions with a multiple preamble, I was answering it as succinctly as possible.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I indeed will take the matter under advisement to check with Hansard.

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

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Will the minister perhaps admit that he has just been too busy to–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Would the honourable member for St. Johns please pose a supplementary question without any preamble.

Mr. Mackintosh: Has the minister, Madam Speaker, been–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am having difficulty hearing the honourable member for St. Johns who was recognized to pose a question.

Mr. Mackintosh: Madam Speaker, has the minister been too busy to put into force The Domestic Violence and Stalking Act which would actually give Manitobans those rights and protections that I listed, because he has been too busy prioritizing his time getting out documents, puff pieces like this? The legislation was passed one year ago this month.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I am quite proud of the piece of legislation that my department drafted and which this House passed. As the members are well aware, there are very complex regulations that have to be put in place as a result of that legislation. The legislation is the first in Canada.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Justice, to complete his response.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, as I indicated, the regulations under that particular legislation are very complex. I have had meetings on a regular basis with my department to ensure that those regulations are being moved along on a very timely basis. But I feel that I have an obligation–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. A very serious question was asked, and the minister has been interrupted twice in completing his response. I would ask for the co-operation of all members in permitting the minister to complete his response.

Mr. Toews: I believe that I have an obligation to the people of Manitoba, to the victims of stalking to ensure that the legislation is workable and that it does in fact do the things that it is supposed to do. Our government has not taken a back seat in respect of this issue. It was my colleague the member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Vodrey) who brought forward very important proposals to the federal government which they adopted for the benefit of Manitobans.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, two school divisions in Manitoba are reported as entering into contracts with the Youth News Network for the showing of commercial news in Manitoba schools. The minister has already stated in this House that his department does not intend to review the content of these programs, but I would like to ask the minister today whether he intends to open a discussion with the respective school divisions about the nature of the contracts that they have entered into.

* (1410)

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, as we have discussed previously, school divisions will weigh the pros and cons of the proposals brought forward by the company involved and make decisions at the school division level, and I have said that I believe that is an appropriate way to handle this particular issue because each community, each school division will have certain items of priority for themselves that they want to address, and that is an appropriate thing.

I have a copy of a sample of the presentation which, because of activities this morning related to developing further technological advancements in our school system related to an agreement reached between the MERLIN and the Corel Corporation for technology for our students, I did not have a chance this morning to review that YNN sample production. I will do that, and if any questions arise that I think are appropriate for me to address with any school divisions, I will do so. But the fact that school divisions are in some areas finding in favour of moving on this proposal, in other areas are moving in favour of not moving with this proposal, tells me the system is working, Madam Speaker.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister confirm whether or not such contracts in Manitoba contain the requirement for schools to report their daily attendance figures to the commercial company, and does the minister believe that such provisions are consistent with The Education Administration Act or The Public Schools Act?

Mr. McCrae: I think I could examine that issue and give the honourable member a response to that specific question, but no doubt she would realize that anyone entering into a contract–a contract is a situation where both parties agree to do certain things or decline to do certain things by mutual consent, and that is what I would see here. If the honourable member thinks that I can substitute my judgment for that of school superintendents, school trustees, parents and teachers in all the areas where these matters are being looked at, I quite frankly disagree with the approach that says every decision has to be made in this building, everything has to be done by the government, that Big Brother knows better than ordinary Manitobans, that Big Brother knows better than elected school trustees, that Big Brother knows better than everybody else how everyone should live their lives. Madam Speaker, I feel fairly strongly about that, as you might have noticed.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell the House whether or not such daily attendance figures may be passed from the news network to individual advertisers under provisions of any of the contracts signed in Manitoba? I understand he has not looked at them yet. I ask him to investigate that as well.

Mr. McCrae: I think that is something that would be appropriate for me to inform myself about as to the question being raised by the honourable member. She is raising it as a legitimate concern, and I think that it ought to be handled legitimately.

The honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) suggests that maybe we should apply certain of the same principles respecting testing in Manitoba, and I just respond to him that I would not proceed like honourable members opposite who are quite content to relegate future generations of Manitobans to a life of dependence and mediocrity and despondency. No, I support measures that would promote for our children a life of independence, a life of excellence and a life of happiness.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): The government's record on health care is marred by a number of fiascos, to use the word used by our Health critic. Who can forget Connie Curran, that outside consultant?

I would like to ask in regard to the tender for the contract if the minister can explain why the proposal is supposed to be in June 15 and the work is supposed to commence July 1, and I am just wondering if there is another Connie Curran waiting around in the wings to pick up this consulting contract and then engage in another fiasco for health care in this province.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Again, the member for Thompson now uses the word "fiasco," but yet this budget includes $2.1 billion for health care, a $194-million increase, a 10 percent increase which, oh, by the way, Madam Speaker, they voted for and they supported, 35.5 percent of our budget, the second-highest expenditure of any province in all of Canada, consistently the third or fourth highest per capita spending in all of Canada when it comes to health care, one of the most comprehensive Home Care programs in all of Canada, one of the most comprehensive personal care home programs in all of Canada. I am assuming those are some of the reasons that they supported our budget and voted for our budget.

Here again, we are going out and drawing on the best expertise available to analyze our funding for personal care homes to meet the needs of our system not only today but in the weeks, months, years ahead.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): A supplementary. I am wondering if the minister will confirm that one of the reasons that nobody trusts this government in this province on health care–that is probably the main reason they have delayed the election–is because of the fiasco with frozen food. I am wondering if he will assure the House that Mr. Sheil will be called before the Auditor to account for the mess, the complete fiasco we have seen with frozen food, a system that this minister said only yesterday is running smoothly. Only the Minister of Health believes that.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Members opposite obviously trust this government because they voted for our budget just a couple of weeks ago, did it twice, and voted unanimously for our budget. So again, I take that as a vote of trust from people right in this Chamber, including all of those members opposite, and I have just outlined the many reasons why I am assuming that they had the wisdom to vote for our 1999 budget, the reason that I have outlined in terms of the $2.1-billion health care funding that is being provided.

The member knows that the Provincial Auditor is starting a review of the Urban Shared Services Corporation. He indicated very clearly that when there are new initiatives, it is not uncommon for him to do a review. This is a new initiative, and he said he was going to undertake a review. I am told that he is starting that review process in June.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Omand's Creek is a small creek that winds its way from north of the airport to the Assiniboine River. A significant initiative has been underway to develop a linear green corridor. We have an opportunity to enhance that corridor by having the government turn over a parking lot that was used by Manitoba Health.

My question to the Minister of Government Services: is the minister willing to transfer this property to the City of Winnipeg, in trust, to enhance and expand the urban green space known as the Omand's Creek corridor?

Hon. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): I thank my honourable friend for that question because we have looked into the property that is presently listed at 599 Empress Street, I believe is the address and, as such, we have taken a look at that small parking lot that is stranded by the highway going through it. We have decided that if the City of Winnipeg is willing to accept the responsibility for that piece of property we will do everything we can to transfer that property to the City of Winnipeg for use in that linear green space.

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