LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Tuesday, October 24, 2017

TIME – 6 p.m.

LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba

CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye)

VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East)

ATTENDANCE – 11    QUORUM – 6

Members of the Committee present:

Hon. Mrs. Cox, Hon. Messrs. Fielding, Pedersen, Wharton

Messrs. Curry, Isleifson, Ms. Lamoureux, Messrs. Maloway, Marcelino, Selinger, Smook

APPEARING:

Mr. Mohinder Saran, MLA for The Maples

Hon. Steven Fletcher, MLA for Assiniboia

Hon. Ralph Eichler, MLA for Lakeside

Mr. Kuljit Gill, Unicity Taxi (by leave); and Mr. Harjinder Dhillon, Duffy's Taxi (by leave)

PUBLIC PRESENTERS:

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon, private citizen

Mr. Kulwinder Toor, private citizen

Mr. Manmohan Uppal, private citizen

Mr. Chamkaur Brar, private citizen

Mr. Vikram Sandhu, private citizen

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu, private citizen

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu, private citizen

Mr. Edward Los, private citizen

Mr. Jagtar Virk, private citizen

Mr. Lathuinder Dullat, private citizen

Mr. Harpreet Sangha, private citizen

Mr. Jaswant Deol, private citizen

Mr. Arshdeep Kensray, private citizen

Mr. Ranjodh Chhokar, private citizen

Mr. Karam Brar, private citizen

Mr. Inderjit Bedi, private citizen

Mr. Sam Sidhu, private citizen

Ms. Asmeen Gill, private citizen

Mr. Sukhwinder Sharma, private citizen

Mr. Baljit Chana, private citizen

Mr. Kuljit Gill, private citizen

Mr. Alem Hailemariam, private citizen

Mr. Gaim Yohannes, private citizen

Mr. Asmeron Woldeselassie, private citizen

Mr. Rajwant Brar, private citizen

Mr. Jasunder Jaswal, private citizen

Mr. Khushwant Brar, private citizen

Mr. Manjinder Grewal, private citizen

Mr. Gurcharn Singh, private citizen

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:

Gurdial Singh, private citizen

MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:

Bill 30–The Local Vehicles for Hire Act

* * *

Mr. Chairperson: Good evening.

      Will the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development please come to order. This meeting has been called to continue consideration of Bill 30, The Local Vehicles for Hire Act.

      I would like to inform all in attendance of the provisions in our rules regarding the hour of adjournment. A standing committee meeting to consider a bill must not sit past midnight to hear public presentations or consider clause-by-clause of a bill except by unanimous consent of the committee.

      In addition the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development will meet again to consider Bill 30, if necessary, Thursday, October 26th, at 6 p.m., and Friday, October 27th, at 10 a.m.

      We will continue public presentations on this bill in accordance with the list of presenters before you.

      A written submission on Bill 30 from Gurdial Singh has been received and distributed to committee members. Does the committee agree to receive this document and have it appear in the Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed]

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I move that the–for this committee, any presenter be permitted to have a person of their choice to translate their presentation into English.

Mr. Chairperson: It is moved by Mr. Maloway that I move–that the committee–that for this committee, any presenter be permitted to have a person of their choice translate their presentation into English.

      The motion is in order.

      The floor is open for questions.

      Shall the motion pass?

Some Honourable Members: Pass.

Mr. Chairperson: The motion is accordingly passed.

Before we proceed with presentations, we do have a number of other items and points of information to consider. First of all, if there is anyone else in attendance who would like to make a presentation this evening, please register with the staff at the entrance of the room.

      Also, for the information of all presenters, while written versions of presentations are not required, if you are going to accompany your presentation with written material, we ask you that–you to provide 20 copies. If you need help with photocopying, please speak with our staff.

      As well, in accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for presentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from committee members.

      If a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list. If the presenter is not in attendance when their name is called a second time, they will be removed from the presenters' list.

      Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee. The proceedings of our meetings are 'recordered' in order to provide a verbatim transcript. Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name. This is the signal for Hansard recorders to turn the mics on and off.

      Thank you for your patience. We will now proceed with public presentations.

Bill 30–The Local Vehicles for Hire Act

Mr. Chairperson: I will now call on presenter No. 1 on your list, Sukhvir Kalaat, private citizen. Is Sukhvir Kalaat in the room? Sukhvir Kalaat does not appear to be here. He will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 2, Baljeet Sandu. Baljeet Sandu? Is Baljeet Sandu in the room? Seeing as he's not here, be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Shimranjeer Sandhu. Shimranjeer Sandhu? Is Mr. Sandhu present? [interjection] Simranjeer? Simranjeer? Mr. Sandhu will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Balreep, No. 4, Balreep Mann. Balreep Mann? It doesn't appear that this presenter is in the room. Be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 5, Kulwinder Toor. Kulwinder Toor. Is Kulwinder Toor in the room? Not being present, be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 6, Gurshvider Singh Dhillon. [interjection] Gurshvinder?

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon (Private Citizen): Yes, sir, Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon.

Mr. Chairperson: Do you have any written material for distribution? You do?

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon: Yes, I do.

Mr. Chairperson: Okay, once, when you're ready to proceed, you may proceed with your presentation. Thank you.

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon: Good evening, everyone. My name is Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon and I living in Canada since 1992. I give you brief information about my family.

      When I moved in Canada with my parents in 1992, my sister, she sponsored me, and my parents, they depended on me. And I worked–work started at the gas station, $5 minimum. Many people, they know the Bunty car wash on Isabel there, I worked there continue one year, went back India, get married, came back and I started cab as a driver, 1994.

      My wife, she come in Canada–came in Canada 1995. We started our life. My parents went back. They don't want to stay here because my father, he retired from the police department. He involved many cases in India, so as a witness, he had to go there. So they don't able to come in Canada anymore, but they came in just for a visit. When my wife, she moved here, she started to go to school, daytime. Evening shift, she working at the Palliser Furniture because we used to live in East Kildonan. I started taxi in the nighttime, full-time with a Christmas car, and then I started full-time, regular car.

* (18:10)

      After that, what happened in '97, I got a dispatch call from Transcona, early morning. They want to go to Belmont off Main Street. And it was a male and a female, around 4:30. When they jumped in the cab, I smelled that they were drunk. When they told me, they wanted to go to their destination and–Belmont, so then I said, okay then, fine. And also, he said, oh, somebody paying there.

      I said, sir, no, I can't do that because I can't take a chance because I'm working. It's not my cab; I working for somebody. Then he started yelling–then he started yelling, and I moved my car–they're still in my car–and moved to Plessis Road there. And the guy, he catch my neck from the back seat. That time, we don't have a shield. I lose my lower teeth. You can see I have fake teeth. I lose my teeth.

      And he tied up–more tied up, suddenly. I took the microphone and called my supervisor, because we don't have a phone that time. And I called my supervisor, please help me because this guy going to kill me. And when the customer he listened to my supervisor, he left me, but I lost my teeth.

      I am lucky the police came over there in five minutes. They caught him. Sir, I request you, it's not one incident. How many times we suffering people, they don't pay? They get out the cab and they make bad language, get out the cab. We can't do nothing because we providing a public service.     

      Since '94 until today, I am still a taxi driver. Many people, they're thinking, why the taxi price went high? What's going on in there? I think, mostly, immigrants, they know that. When we want to sponsor even my wife or my parents or my in-laws, we had a certain income we have to show to the Immigration Department; then they accept my application. Otherwise, they deny.

      For example, I have I have four children, and all together, six people. I wanted to sponsor my parents–sorry–my father's gone; my mother's here now. They wanted $55,000, net. You tell me, sir, do we have still any jobs in Winnipeg? We are able to sponsor our family? No. Tell me something about that. How we can sponsor our family, sir?

      Immigration department, they have a good idea to make money from the immigrant people. Now my mother's here. My father's passed away in 2014. And my mother, she is 86. I apply for it, in 2014, the super visa. She got a 10-year super visa. But this I have to pay again. Medical insurance, $4,000 a year. I have four children plus my mom. What's going on, sir? Why is everything going to immigration peoples–immigrant people–sorry.

      This is my family life, sir. It's not me. There's many other people sitting behind me. They have the same situation, sir. Maybe they are not speak up like me. I'd request you think about that a hundred times when you passing the Bill 30. Bill 30 is going to be total destroyed our families and our business. Please think a hundred times.

      Now I'm going to read my position. Thank you.

      I'm here tonight to talk to you about our family, Sir. You know already, but still, what you are talking about today is really important to us as a family. I want to–you know that already it is creating a lot of stress for us. Taxi drivers already have enough stress, and we getting more stress now because of the government's policy.

      Every day we have to worry about what is going on, what's going to happen. And it is not just about some of things that I'm sure will be discussed here at this committee. For us, the taxi system in Winnipeg is what gives our family the ability to make a living. It is not an easy job. There are lots of hours. You need to make sure that there is someone to drive a taxi 24 hours a day.

      There are worries too. When the weather is bad, worrying about accidents, worrying about robberies and assault, worrying about safety. Now, think about that. You going to Happy New Year's. You celebrate, we celebrate. You going to Christmas party; we have a different kind. But we are still working. Doesn't matter it's -35, doesn't matter it's plus 35, we still provide the service to my customers because we know that we have many customers, they depend on a taxi ride. Doesn't matter, we still providing good service.

      Then–but there's a new worry right now, and that's what is going to happen to our families. Wow. Our parents be able to support our education. In our community, education is very important. We as young people are encouraged to work hard to get ahead and to achieve our goals. I worry about that. What has happened here will make it difficult for me and other young people to get the education they want and need. I don't know all the details about the bill, but I don't–I do know it has already having an impact. No one wants to buy a taxi licence, so any of us who have families in the taxi business are in a very difficult situation.

      I do know that a lot of this is about bringing Uber to Winnipeg. There's my question, Sir. Why we want to bring Uber? Do you have anybody answer? Do we promote to the taxi industry or do we promote to the people you don't know what's going on.

      Our responsibility to provide a 24-hour service because this is mandatory from the Taxicab Board. Nobody can force to the Uber drivers. She said, no, I don't want to work. What you going to do?

      You need a cab at -35. They said, no, we don't want to go; there's outside slippery. I don't want my vehicle slide off. There you go.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Dhillon, your 10 minutes for your presentation has expired.

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon: Okay, Sir.

Mr. Chairperson: So we will now move into question period.

Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): Mr. Dhillon, how many hours a day do you drive a cab, and how many days a week?

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon: I driving–now I am 53. I'm driving six days a week. I have four kids. My older son, he is grade 12; my younger one is four and a half, and right now the situation that–look at my expensive, even though I can't afford that, because look at the business. Wintertime, five months we have a good business. But look at our roads. Look at our weather. Then we have–add 125 more cabs, you know. So then we not making enough money. Summertime, we sitting in the parking lot; the drivers, they are sleeping because there's no business.

      Still I'm working six days a week, 12-hour shifts, sir.

* (18:20)

Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East): Mr. Dhillon, thank you very much for your presentation.

      I'm just looking–because obviously I'm not driving a taxi, so I just want to–if you could just take a couple of minutes just to explain the process of how, if I want to become an owner-operator, how would I apply and where would I apply for a licence to do so?

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon: First of all, the City needs to survey, sir–first of all, because we are owner-operators because the government's the law, they issue the shares. We bought a share, sir; we did not get any gifts. We bought the shares. What are the values of shares, that time?

      For example, I bought a taxi for 13, but now value is zero. The City or government–it was under government. The government has a responsibility. They have to survey first: Do we need more cabs?

      And many people didn't know that [inaudible] report, and he brought up his suggestion. They said, no, we do not need to permanently cabs; we need it just for the wintertime, extra cabs. And that's–it did. And we're following the rules and 125–taxi board said, yes, 125 is enough, which is fine. Then, Duffy's and Unicity and some independence cars, they're doing this business.

      And my–I still have a doubt, I don't think so that people have a problem, they taking taxis. They're so happy, and I give you one example. I took one customer from the airport to downtown, and he's from Saskatchewan and he's very happy. He said, no, this, you know, that there's a taxi industry in Winnipeg, there's way cheaper when we compare to other cities. He said, I go to all over the place. You–there's taxi industry still cheaper from airport to downtown, and last eight years we not get nothing, sir. We paying our own, even though we have to replace the new cameras and we still paying own. What we get, sir?

      I think the government they're not thinking we're Canadian citizens. They're not thinking we're part of Canada, sir. Where are our rights, sir–human rights? Where's that?

      They want to try to pass a Bill 30? For what? They cut our hands, because we're not able to go to the courts. I challenge that. This is my right, sir. Still, if it's going to happen, I will go there myself. Doesn't matter; I don't care, because this is my Charter rights–because I'm living in Canada. Thank you.

Mr. Marcelino: Do you feel that you're being betrayed by this government by proposing to take your livelihood out?

Floor Comment: Say again, please?

Mr. Marcelino: Do you feel a sense of betrayal by this government by proposing to take your livelihood out of your reach?

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon: We are really upset, sir. Whatever they're trying to doing, we're really upset. Please, they have to think a hundred times: We have a family. We worry about that. Look, there's–I started taxi '94 until today. Where's my input?

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Dhillon, your time on questions has expired. We want to thank you very much for your presentation.

      We were at presenter No. 6. Now, is it the will of the committee–presenter No. 5, Mr. Toor, has just arrived. He was couple minutes late. Is it the will of the committee to accept Mr. Toor's presentation at this time? [Agreed]

      Number 5, Kulwinder Toor.

      Mr. Toor, do you have a written presentation, or is it's just–

Mr. Kulwinder Toor (Private Citizen): No, no, Sir.

Mr. Chairperson: Well, you may proceed with your presentation as soon as you are ready. Thank you.

Mr. Toor: Good evening, everybody, to the committee. My name is Kulwinder Toor. I have a–I came to Canada in 1984, started working as a mechanic helper in an auto shop; then slowly, slowly I went to Red River doing my apprentice. Then I started working as a mechanic as a–at Redwood Motors. I work there's–I–since last year.

      Then I bought the place, shared with somebody else–some other–three partners. So I got to–I had to sell the business last month because of health issues. So, in the meantime, I was thinking in the nineteen–in 2015, I thought I bought a cab just for my retirement. I paid almost $430,000 at that time. So I guess today that retirement looks like is not working very good because that share went to almost zero because of Bill 30 coming in.

      So I’m here today on behalf of Duffy's Taxi to present a 'repetion' on Bill 30. Since 1950, Duffy's Taxi has been proud to serve Winnipeg. We have proud history and we are proud that our owners and our partner of the community. Our owner and small-business people who work very hard under the different circumstances. At Duffy, we've always been committed to organize our operation. That included leading to–we are bringing the hybrid cars and dispatch–improving the dispatch system.

      We know Winnipeggers are looking at taxi company and taxi industry day to day, no matter what time of the year and what kind of weather it is. Our message today is that the way–prevents and the City is moving from a currently changing system in the Winnipeg is totally unfair.

      We're pushing Bill 30 through the Legislature without consulting with the industry. Bill 30 does more than just transfer jurisdiction to the City; it takes away our right–legal rights. What are our concerns? It starts with the safety. I cannot stress enough the hazards of the industry faces on daily basis. Racism, accidents, robberies, assaults, but there is one thing very unique about industry in Winnipeg. An industry where taxi drivers is one of the most unsafe occupations in the North America, here is Winnipeg; we have the distinction to having one of the safest taxi industry.

      You probably heard–you guys already heard that nineteen–2001 there was a murder happened. Mr. Pritam Deol got murdered and it was hardworking–he was a hardworking taxi driver. He has been driving only three months. After that, the Province brought in new legislation and a new safety procedure–safety shields and cameras and training that immediately reduced the assaults by 79 per cent.

      Most important, there has been not one single murder ever since. We believe it is important to maintain the high level of safety, protection with shields, camera and training. We also committed to passenger safety. It would fall support–it will not our full–I would note our full support to the current intensive security placed in the drivers. That included English language, passing the criminal record checks, Child Abuse Registry checks. In jurisdictions around the world, there are huge problems with Uber refusing to follow the same rigid standards in terms of screening and training.

      I want to talk about fairness as well. This will strip our legal and property rights. Members of this community, you are elected to represent all Manitobans, not a big corporation like Uber. So we are our constituents–we serve this community. You have not even taken the time to consult with us. That is why I'm speaking today to say we want to be part of any and all circumstances about the future of the taxi industry.

* (18:30)

      Why don't we have–why don't we take the time to get it right? Why don't you listen to the industry?

      I can make one thing clear today: Our industry is going to right to protect not only our own interests but the interests of the Winnipeg's. You are the ramping–what are the ramping through, that Bill 30–bills–reduce safety, less service for people and areas and our cities and outflow the profit from our community.

      We will also wipe out–you will also wipe out the investment and livelihood of hundreds of Winnipeg families, people who invest $450,000 in licence are left with a licence that is worth nothing. This is bad enough, what this will take away our rights or take legal action to have this threaten to same way as exploration. Why would you have this section in the bill if you did not believe that we might be able to–successful in court? What you are doing is wiping out our investment with a stroke of a pen, then taking away our legal and property rights.

      Does–the vast majority of people in our industry are proud, new Canadians. Many of us came to this industry with a dream to building a better future and family. We work hard and, in many cases, investment of life-saving into this industry; many of us have mortgages to our homes to make the livelihood–to our families. You are putting all of that at risk. As a result, what we are ramping through, people will go to bankruptcies, families will unable to support our children and education. We deserve better.

      We are a proud of the service we provide, and we always committed to improve the service and more [inaudible] industry. We want to be part of the solution. Right now, we are not even part of the process.

      So our message to you is clear; this is a bad bill. We urge you to delay it. If you do proceed amendment, take out the section take away our legal rights, transfer the existing licence system to the City, giving them the time to get it right with any changes.

      And, in the section ensuring maximum safety protection and driving and drivers and passengers. Safety, fairness, community–this is what we are all about. We ask you to work with us to build our taxi industry, not destroy it. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Toor.

      Mr. Maloway, you had the first question.

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Well, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I guess you're probably aware that in almost all of the states in Australia, compensation is provided. And, in fact, the state of Victoria has the best compensation regime in Australia for, I think, $100,000 for the first cab and $50,000 for a second cab.

      And there's other examples I can give you of compensation: the Manitoba government of Schreyer in 1971, when they set up Autopac, they put out a 2 and a half million dollar, which today would be $15‑million compensation package, to the existing insurance agents who did not want an Autopac contract. And some took that. Today, we have the Canada European free trade agreement, CETA, where the Quebec dairy farmers are being compensated over a 10-year period. So we have lots of examples where compensation can be provided.

      And what this government did was, in this bill, they deliberately put a section 10 in here to say that no compensation can be paid. In fact, you can't sue for compensation.

      And, you know, I always thought, well, these are Conservatives across the bench from us here and they were elected, you know, a year and a half ago, and I believe that they believe, anyway, that expropriation is, you know, is valid if it's based on appraised value. And, you know, they sit in the Conservative caucus, all the members over here every day. There's 40 members. They have a 40‑member government, and there's six of them right here. A couple of them are ministers. They talk to the Premier (Mr. Pallister) every day. They can go to the Premier tomorrow, and say, you know, we've had some second thoughts about this bill and how badly these people are being treated, and we think we should withdraw the bill. And the Premier can withdraw it tomorrow.

      This session ends in three weeks. This bill will pass in three weeks. But, in another month, the 23rd of November, the government's going to call a brand new session. They could withdraw it now; they could do some consulting with you; and they could reintroduce the bill with some improvements in only a month's time. So I just want to give you those examples of what can be done here.

      And, you know, there was a poll out last week and they're running third in the city right now after only a year and a half. So I think they're paying a lot of attention. They will–they should be paying a lot of attention to not only your issue and other issues that they may be getting wrong right now, and it's to everybody's benefit that we get a solution to this problem.

Mr. Toor: Yes, sir. That's what we are asking for. The–we–as I said before, I spent $430,000 2016, to–just for–to save enough money for retirement, but my–all retirement is gone. It's zero today, so that's why I'm saying this bill is–going to decide not me–a loss of hundreds and hundreds of families, who are–depend on this industry.

      So that's–I'm saying: Please look at again–make it right. And, if it's–like, we deserve the compensation if it's–the bill go through it. Don't take our rights away.

Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): Thank you for your presentation. You know, I just want to really be able to show the government the seriousness of this. I was hoping that you could share with us–you mentioned earlier that you bought–the last taxi cab that you bought was $430,000. How much will it depreciate if Bill 30 passes through the House?

Mr. Toor: I think it depreciates today is–the value of–is zero. Nobody–because everybody's scared from that bill. Nobody–there's a–if you go to a taxi industry, Duffy's, Unicity, look at the charts there. There's a hundred taxis for sale, but nobody–nobody–wants to do anything, because everybody's scared from that Bill 30.

Mr. Greg Selinger (St. Boniface): Thank you, Kulwinder Toor, for being here tonight, and I was struck by just how difficult this is for you. If you've spent $430,000 to buy a taxicab licence in 2016, and that, as a result of this Bill 30, means your retirement goes to zero, that just seems to me to be very, very unfair to anybody, when the rules change like that to your disadvantage.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Selinger?

Mr. Selinger: Yes.

Mr. Chairperson: Our time for questions has expired, but I will allow Mr. Toor to make a brief statement to it.

Mr. Toor: Yes, sir. As–like I said, I saved all those–so I worked hard to save some money so many years. So I thought that this would be good retirement for me. I can provide my retirement. Plus, my daughter's going to university, I can provide a little bit help for her. As like–this government doing, they're going to ruin my livelihood or my retirement plan.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Toor. Thank you for your presentation. We greatly appreciate you coming out here tonight.

      We will now move on to–well, before we move on to presenter No. 7. I'd just like the–ask the indulgence of the committee, like, we only have five minutes for questions, and when somebody goes for two and a half or more than that three minutes to ask a question, I would ask–to try to keep your questions a little shorter, because we do have a lot of people here that are wanting to ask questions. So, please, like, yesterday we talked about 45 seconds. So come to the point, ask your question, so we can all have a shot at doing that. Thank you very much.

      Number 7, Gurdeep Sidhu. Would Gurdeep Sidhu be here. Presenter No. 7.

      We will–Mr. Sidhu does not seem to be present. We will move on to presenter No. 8, Rajinder Viria. Presenter No. 8, Rajinder Viria. Rajinder Viria? Presenter No. 8 does not seem to be present.

* (18:40)

      We will move on to presenter No. 9, Parkash Brah. Parkash Brah. Mr. Presenter No. 9 does not seem to be here. We will move presenter 9 to the bottom of the list and move on to presenter No. 10.

      Inderprett Aora, Inderprett Aora, presenter No. 10. [interjection] Arora, A-r-o-r-a. Presenter No. 10 does not seem to be present. We will move presenter No. 10 to the bottom of the list.

      We will now move on to presenter No. 11. Manjot Dhaliwal, Manjot Dhaliwal. [interjection] Manjeet? Manjot Dhaliwal? [interjection] Dhaliwai? Manjot Dhaliwai? Presenter No. 11 does not seem to be here. We will move presenter 11 to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 12, Major Dhaliwal? Major Dhaliwal. [interjection] Presenter No. 12 does not seem to be here; we will move presenter No. 12 to the bottom of the list.

      Number 13, Manmohan Uppal. Manmohan Uppal. Presenter No. 13. Mr. Uppal, you don't have any written material to distribute to the–

Mr. Manmohan Uppal (Private Citizen): Yes, I do.

Mr. Chairperson: You just want a–you just have a verbal presentation?

Mr. Uppal: Yes.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Uppal: Hello, good evening, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Manmohan Uppal. I am the son of–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Uppal, could you move maybe the mic a little bit lower and speak–or lift it up, you know. Keep it–or pick your voice up, because it–we can't hear you.

Mr. Uppal: I'm the son of the Unicity taxi driver, Abaldav Singh Uppal  [phonetic]. We have bought a taxi two years ago. We bought it for about $400,000, which is a lot of money. You can buy a house for same amount. For us, this was a huge risk and investment. Our only source of income is our taxi, and my mother isn't able to work, due to her language barrier. I can't work because of my grade 12 education.

      We are regular citizens of Canada. We have our own house and the taxi on loan. We had to sell everything back home in India, to buy our taxi. We still have to pay off our $300,000 in loans for our house and our taxi in terms of taxi and houses. If Uber was to come in Winnipeg, not only us, many families will lose their main source of income, right.

      Uber can be driven by anyone and–whereas taxis are only driven by trained professionals and knowledge people, right. So they have to pass the knowledge safety test. Also, going on forward for our university, which will be needing funds to for your education. If Uber was to come, we would, as I said before, lose a major source of income. Losing this source may mean bankruptcy, homeless and unemployment.

      That's all I got.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Uppal. We'll now–questions?

Mr. Selinger: Yes, I want to thank you for coming out. I understand you're representing your family today, your father who bought the taxicab licence? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Uppal, could you wait 'til I recognize you before you speak so that it can get recorded?

      Mr. Uppal.

Mr. Uppal: Yes. We paid $400,000 for the taxi.

Mr. Selinger: Is it the only source of income for your family? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Uppal. Go ahead, Mr. Uppal. You can answer the question now.

Mr. Uppal: Yes, yes. Only the taxi.

Mr. Selinger: Do you think it's fair that this legislation makes it impossible for your family to be compensated for the loss of your licence?

Mr. Uppal: What do you mean by that? Like–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Selinger.

Mr. Selinger: You think it's unfair that this legislation will take away your licence without compensation, any money paid back to your family, for the loss of this licence?

Mr. Uppal: Yes, it's unfair because we paid $400,000, right, so we're getting it no money back, right, by the government.

Mr. Isleifson: I think there's some confusion, because I believe if the–if Bill 30 was looked at, and we just heard a question from the other side of the table that said, what would you do when this bill comes into effect and you lose your licence, which, if you read this thing here, it says, section 10: A person who held a valid licence issued by the taxi board under The Taxicab Act on the day before this act comes in force is deemed to hold a licence issued under the City of Winnipeg's vehicle-for-hire bylaw. So I just want to make it clear that Bill 30 does not take away your licence. Bill 30 is about transferring and creating fair play in the province of Manitoba from the taxi board–or, from the taxi act into municipalities.

      So does that help a little bit better in assuring you that that's not what the intent of the bill is?

Mr. Uppal: Yes, as I said, I was a–taxi laws, right, like, we buy it for $400,000, right. I am not talking about the licence, right.

Mr. Selinger: I would like to thank the member for Brandon East (Mr. Isleifson) for his clarification of the legislation.

      Is it your understanding that if this legislation passes, and Uber is allowed to enter the Winnipeg market, the value of your licence, which you paid $400,000 for, will drop to as low as zero?

Mr. Uppal: Yes, that's right.

Mr. Selinger: Thank you.

Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): Okay, Mr. Uppal. What do you–if you are given a chance to find the solution, and we understand, Uber want free ride, and similarly, some other groups want free ride, and you guys have spent about $400,000, $500,000. If government allows you to have input, what kind of solution you will provide?

Mr. Uppal: What I would do is that I won't let the Uber come, because as I'm saying, right, like, if Uber comes, our business going to be zero, right. So I want to go university, right. We only have one income source by my dad, right. So I'm–we're not going to have save some money because how are we going to pay off the, like, the loans? Like, for a house. And we still have the loan on our taxi, right.

Hon. Jeff Wharton (Minister of Municipal Relations): Thank you so much, Mr. Uppal, for your presentation this evening. It's quite apparent that you are–as many of the folks here tonight and last night are very passionate about this industry, and of course, so are we as a government. I would like to put on the record, though, that it's not fair that you have to succumb to some of the–member from St. Boniface–fear-mongering this whole procedure, quite frankly, if he would read the bill, he would get the facts straight and present them as they are presented in the bill.

      So, Mr. Uppal, I can tell you that everything that you said tonight, we are definitely making note of, and thank you so much for your presentation this evening. We are here to listen, we are here to learn as well, and we appreciate the time you've taken to present your case. Thank you.

Mr. Uppal: Yes. I thank you a lot for listening.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much. We thank you for your presentation.

      Mr. Saran, still had one more question? It's–time is over, so if you could, quickly.

* (18:50)

Mr. Saran: No, I think if–it will be fair if Uber or any other group have to buy taxi licence on going price. Or Province can set up also parallel method, so either they can buy from the Province or they can buy from the market price. You think that will be a fair solution?

Mr. Uppal: As I said, like, if I would take a Uber, right, it's not safe, right. They don't have a valid safety test. Like, they don't even take any tests for Uber; you can just go drive Uber. Like, anyone can drive Uber, right. So, if I were–even though I wouldn't take Uber because it's–there's no safety in it, right. In the taxi, you guys have cameras and everything, right, even though drivers are trained.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Uppal. We're well over our exceeded–or expected time limit. We thank you very much for your presentation.

      I will now call on Ranjit Sidhu, presenter No. 14. Ranjit Sidhu? Ranjit Sidhu are–

      Seeing's that he is not here, we will move on to presenter no. 15, Chamkaur Brar. Chamkaur Brar.

      Mr. Brar, do you have any written material for the committee?

Mr. Chamkaur Brar (Private Citizen): No, I don't.

Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Chamkaur Brar: Good evening for everybody. First, I tell you about me. My name is Chamkaur Brar.

      I came to Winnipeg, in 1997, from India. I came here for a better future for myself and my family. After a couple of years, I started driving taxis. I drove someone else's taxi about six to seven years, then bought my own cab. To do this, I saved over the year and sold my property back in India and bought a taxi and a share. I bought my taxi, 2008; I paid $390,000 that time. Right now, that value has dropped almost about $30,000, just on the car price. Like, if you buy a Prius car, it's about 30, 35 thousand dollars only–car price, even equipment and they're about $10,000 is–no value about that, too, right.

      Along with the other taxi owners, many of us–a lot of–lots own our investments already. We, as a taxi driver, I feel Bill 30 is unfair and the government is not consulting with us. The bill needs to be amended to take it fair.

      First of all, all safety is the big issue. The safety is a very big issue in Winnipeg, because, you know, I'm not only the owner, I'm the–one of the drivers too. I'm driving still seven days–either I drive daytime, I have lots of problems, and, like–you know, about threatening, violence and racism and that kind, like, you know, especially in nighttime it's more dangerous here. I'm driving nighttime, too, like, a long time ago but not now.

      Both of–both for the drivers and the passengers, taxi driving is a very dangerous job. Every day, drivers facing threatening, violence, racism. Right now, we have the cameras–we have a camera, shield, making it safer for the driver and passengers. There needs to be amended–to ensure all we can do for her–have a good safety here.

      Passengers currently have very good safety here because the–all of the taxi drivers have a criminal record check, they have a child abuse check, and that–all the drivers have to make sure of this. But Uber drivers don't go–Uber don't do–don't go through the same background checks, which puts the passenger safety at risk.

      We need to–fair rules and regulations. The Province needs to ensure the licence requirements are the same for Uber and the taxis.

      If it is not, this is very unfair. We, as an industry, need to be recognized–of the money we have invested, and life savings into this. We have followed the rules of Bill 30 to be our investment and legal and property rights.

      The government should be–remove the section 10 of Bill 30, that don't allow the industry to seek compensation and to take legal action. We want to feel the similar regulation for the taxi industry and Uber. The grant licence system by–balance supply and the demand for the taxi and the people in the city. If Uber doesn't have same regulation, it will be unfair the taxi industry and the public.

      There will be higher price for customer and not all will be served in all areas of the city, and there will be limited service to those who want–this population.

      If there is a change to the industry, compensation should be similar to what is in Australia. We take–sorry–we are asking for the bill to be delayed to consulted fully. If the bill goes through–that it is amended, we as an industry, have a lot at risk here for just want to make sure Uber follow the same rules as us.

      So we trust the committee. That's our MLA, he at right hand. That's my request for all MLAs here, and I ask for your support for the taxi industry, for the passenger, for the city of Winnipeg.

      All that's–thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Brar.

      We will now take questions from the committee.

Mr. Saran: Yes, I clear–thanks for coming.

      And I have the same question I previously asked. I understand Uber want free ride; they don't want to buy the–those permit on ongoing price. There could be some other groups waiting for mayor to help them out, they can get free ride. What will be the solution if you–taxi industry–to decide and provide the solution?

      What will be the fair solution so that this committee can think about it?

Mr. Chamkaur Brar: Yes, sir.

      Actually we want to, like–you know, the Uber of course, yes. So they need everything free, right? So we spend a lot of money in our business, right? Like–and we want to–you know, Uber follow the same rules, whatever we follow, and also I'm not angry with–that Uber's got, like, everything free here, right? Like, you know, they put in the car and just have a free ride for the public, no. I like to–we–if we spend a lot of money, so it's totally unfair with us. So we need to–they can pay something for the city.

Mr. Saran: Again, suppose Uber also follow the same rules, other group comes in and follow the same rules, but you have bought taxi for $500,000 and Uber get that licence for free, although they follow all the rules.

      You think that will be fair to the taxi industry?

Mr. Chamkaur Brar: That's totally unfair, sir. It is not fair because we invest a lot of money, so–and that totally unfair.

* (19:00)

Mr. Saran: Yes, okay. I don't know whether taxi industry consulted any lawyers. Even this bill passes, that clause is put in. Don't you think that will be a violation of a Charter of right? Government taking away your right to go to the court, and don't you think it will be illegal?

Mr. Chamkaur Brar: Yes. I–thinking about–that's unlegal. Yes, sir.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Saran? No?

      Well, we thank you very much for your presenation, Mr. Brar.

      Seeing's there are no more questions, we appreciate your presentation.

      And we will move on to the next presenter, No. 16, Vhegwamp Dhaliwal. Vhegwamp Dhaliwal.

      Seeing Mr. Dhaliwal is not present, we will move on to presenter No. 17, Josh Brandon. Presenter No. 17.

      Mr. Brandon is not here. Mr. Brandon's name will be moved to the bottom of the list along with Mr. Dhaliwal's.

      Number 18, Vikram Sandhu. Number 18, Vikram Sandhu.

      Mr. Sandhu, do you have any–a presentation for the committee, or it's just verbal?

Mr. Vikram Sandhu (Private Citizen): Yes, I do.

Mr. Chairperson: Yes. If it's a verbal presentation, you may proceed when you are ready, Mr. Sandhu.

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: All right. Thank you. Can you hear me fine? This is good? All right. Perfect.

      All right. My name is Vikram Sandhu. I'm a first-year university student, and my father works as a taxi owner and operator. My father arrived here in Winnipeg in 1996. He's been working for the taxi industry for almost 20 years, and for those 20 years, he's been working day and night to accomplish just one dream, which is to give his kids, me and my brother, the opportunity to become something that he couldn't.

      And this bill, Bill 30, will most certainly destroy my father's life savings and also destroy one of his dreams. And his life–with his life savings being dissolved, my dream of becoming something in the medical field, like an anesthesiologist, is also being dissolved because all the money required to go through schooling comes through my parents and my father. And, if that's cut almost entirely by half, it becomes a large struggle for my family–what is it?–financially to be able to provide money for me and my brother to get through school.

      The–my question is: With the bill dissolving the taxi licence, will my father be compensated financially for the amount of loss that he has? Will he be given a fair valuation in the–compensation?

      The next issue that I have is with safety. Bill 30–or, well, taxi drivers are required criminal record checks, child abuse record checks, taking wheelchair accessibility courses, and having a class 4 licence to ensure the passenger is in safe and qualified hands of professional drivers. And my question is: If taxi drivers are required all of these licences, which cost, again, a lot of money, would other companies coming in in the ride–in the vehicle-for-hire act also be required these regulations? If not, why?

      Other things that also add on to the other licences would be a six-month–is the car inspections of the taxi every six months. Taxis–all taxis have to have cameras and driver safety shields, which also cost a lot of money, and would other companies like Lyft and Uber be required to put these safeguards to further provide a safe ride for both the driver and the passenger?

      Taxi owners and drivers are left at a disadvantage when companies like Lyft and Uber are left unregulated. They have an unfair advantage over the taxi industry, and everyone should have a level playing field to be able to compete properly and be able to keep each other in check. If one company–or one section of the vehicle-for-hire group is left unregulated, they can do basically whatever they want.

      And my question is: Would they–if you introduce this bill, would they also be regulated on a basis in which taxis and these big companies would be at the same playing field and be able to compete with each other?

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sandhu.

Mr. Wharton: Well, thank you so much, Mr. Sandhu, for your presentation, presenting some very valid concerns, obviously, with your family and the business and your dad starting the industry back 20 years ago.

      I just wanted to ask a couple of questions, if I may. First of all, are you aware that the former government–the NDP government commissioned a report back in 2015 with Meyers Norris Penny to actually look into the taxicab industry?

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: No, I'm not aware of this. I was not aware of this.

Mr. Wharton: The NDP commissioned a report back in 2015, essentially to examine the Winnipeg taxicab industry and review the process, including stakeholders that it took–put input into the public consultation process. This was done and started by the former government and, as a matter of fact, my colleague Minister Clarke also met with industry stakeholders as well, along with the presidents of the board, representatives of Duffy and Unicity, Mr. Sandhu, and I can tell you that there has been a lot of consultation. There's been over 10,000 responses, including 500 telephone interviews that took place.

      Number 1, this government is concerned about consultation. The former NDP government did not consult, Mr. Sandhu. We are so pleased to have you here tonight to share your concerns. We are noting them, and thank you so much for your presentation.

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: And all these consultations have been occurring since 2014?

An Honourable Member: Fifteen.

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: Fifteen? And when was the latest consultation from the group? Sorry.

Mr. Wharton: Minister Clarke had met with the stakeholders and the city workers just recently, just last–what's today?–fall, last spring.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sandhu, do you have a comment?

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: No, I have no comment upon that.

Mr. Selinger: Yes, thank you for coming and presenting tonight on behalf of your family; it was a very articulate presentation. And I want to thank the members for the point that they made that if a licence is–when the licence is cancelled under the provincial legislation, that licence will automatically stay enforced when it goes to the City.

      However, section 10(3) says no cause or action or remedy arises as a direct result or indirect result of the cancellation of a licence. Under section 1: and no compensation or damages, including but not limit to–limited to, to any loss of good will or profits are owing or payable to any person in connection with a–or as a result of such a cancellation. Are you concerned that with this new system which allows Uber into Winnipeg and Manitoba, that your family's investment will dramatically decline and put you in a very difficult situation as a family?

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: I would say yes, but it also affects the City in general. Uber being a big company takes a percentage of the profits being made which they take. But, with the taxi industry being based in Winnipeg, the money is drawn out of Winnipeg and it's also put back into the community, because the taxi drivers are using that money to buy other things. So, in a way, it also does hinder in many ways the economic standpoint of Winnipeg. It does–it's bad overall, in general, economically for the city of Winnipeg.

Mr. Maloway: Well, the–I guess my question would be about the so-called consultations. I mean, 'cur', the consultations didn't do much good did they? When we have a bill that was produced like this that basically wipes out their entire investment–I mean, what kind of consultations produces a bill like that?

* (19:10)

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: Not a very good one, I'd have to say–yes.

Mr. Isleifson: This might be an unfair question, and, if you can't answer it, that's fine. I understand it's your father that's the cab–the owner-operator and not yourself. Part of the MNP report came back saying that it has determined that there's an inefficient number of cabs available to serve the population of Winnipeg, as in one cab per 1,555 residents.

      What would you say should be done with the taxi industry in order to fill that gap?

Mr. Vikram Sandhu: And, in this regards of 1 to 1,500, would this be regarding how many of those families or how many of those members own their own personal vehicles as well? Does that–is that in regard?

Mr. Chairperson: Time has expired on question period. We thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Sandhu.

      And we will move on to the next presenter. Next presenter, No. 19, Sher Grawal. Sher Grawal. Presenter No. 19? Sher Grawal will be–No. 19 will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      We will now move on to presenter No. 20, Sharabjee Sindhu [phonetic]. Sharabjee Sindhu [phonetic]?

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu (Private Citizen): Sidhu.

Mr. Chairperson: Sidhu? Sindhu? S-i-n–Sidhu?

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Sidhu.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for being here tonight.

      You can proceed with your presentation as soon as you can, Mr. Sidhu.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Yes, I don't have any kind of paper with me for my presentation. I just want to let you guys know, like, I'm driving cabs since–14 years in this city, and I'm a night driver. And, just three years ago, I just investment–invested my money to buy a taxi because it was getting hard to drive every day and give the lease, so I thought it's better to invest somewhere, because my kids are grown up now a little bit, right. So I was having a house here; I sold that house. I put that money to buy a taxi, and I'm paying 10 per cent interest on that loan. So–and my wife is a housewife, and it will be really tough.

      It's really hard to make money in the nighttime; it's nothing. Once in a while, it gets busy in the town. Doesn't matter if there's 50,000 taxis, the town will be still busy. But, besides that, as I told you, I'm a night driver. I sit one-one hour, two-two hours in one bad area to get a fare–five bucks, 10 bucks fare every single day. And I can provide that proof that I sit there for two two hours, to get a $10 fare every night, besides rush hour. And that is also because of the construction and everything–we can't use the bus lane and everything. Otherwise, those customers should not be waiting for their cabs anymore.

      And, besides that, like, Christmas cars are there, a hundred extra cars are there on the road for–to provide service in the wintertime. So that's the only thing I can say it. Like, it's a big investment for me. I invested two, thirty-seven, five hundred, selling my house here. It's–and driving seven days, 12 hours, single handed. That's it.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sidhu. We will now move on to questions.

Mr. Maloway: Could you review those numbers with us, as to what you purchased the licence for–and–[interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sidhu, you can't answer unless you–so, Mr. Sidhu, you can answer now.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Yes, I put two, thirty-seven, five hundred, for a half-share. Yes.

Mr. Maloway: So, then, what would be the value today? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sidhu.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Sorry, sorry.

Mr. Chairperson: Could you–yes, was the answer–

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Zero.

Mr. Chairperson: Zero?

      Mr. Maloway.

Mr. Maloway: Could you tell us what–were you driving before there were shields and cameras? Because, if you were, I'd like to know what you saw as how things changed when the shields and the cameras came in.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Yes, when I started driving cabs, there was camera shields and everything–13, 14 years ago. And it's still there, like, there's a new version camera now, so–and customers are really scared of cameras; that's for sure. Not for shields but cameras–that's–definitely worked for us in the nighttime.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Sidhu, for your presentation. Really appreciate it.

      I have a question for you, though. Couple of questions, actually.

      Back to value, you said you bought a half a share of 200 and–

Floor Comment: Thirty-seven, five hundred.

Mr. Wharton: And you say that the–now, it'll be worth zero, is that correct? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sidhu.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Oh, sorry.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sidhu, you can answer now.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Yes. I guess so, zero, if the Taxicab Board is not there; the value would be zero because it goes under the City.

Mr. Wharton: Okay, so if we transfer the regime from the Province to the City of Winnipeg, where every other city in Canada has authority to work as a taxicab–with the 'kakicab' ride-share industry, you're saying that it'll go from $237,000 to zero–

An Honourable Member: It's already done that.

Mr. Wharton: Did we ask for your opinion, Jim?

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Yes, so, yes, because if the City provides new plates, so the City won't charge that plate, like $100,000 or $200,000; they will give it free to other people, whoever needs that taxi, right? So, obviously, our value would be zero regarding to that.

Mr. Wharton: And you've heard this from the City?

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Not for the City, just–I'm just guessing. It might happen.

Mr. Wharton: Okay, thank you.

Mr. Marcelino: The potential losses that the–is $237,500 that you might suffer, is that something that's in your mind every day after this bill was introduced?

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: Yes, sir, it's been hard times since more than two months–not two months, maybe in February this year, this bill came up and every day's a stressful day, thinking about what will happen–what will happen. Like, there are fights in the home; like, why did you put that money, this and that, blah, blah and, you know, rumours around it would be zero value, whatever, like, working 12 hours but without no mind, I'm working 12 hours, no mind in the world, like, just working, working 12 hours, but thinking about future, like, what will happen.

Hon. Steven Fletcher (Assiniboia): My question is, just very quickly, as a driver, I'm wondering about the practicality of determining where a fare starts and where it ends and maybe where it starts again. If someone comes in, lands at the airport, asks to go downtown and then to Selkirk, then back to the–you know, it becomes–it seems very cumbersome, and how would that be policed and who would pay for that? Would taxi cabbies pay for that or would the City or taxpayer pay for that? And in many cases, aren't they the same people?

      And, also, would this increase the cost to business travellers overall? You know, it seems very full of red tape and impossible to enforce. But, what, from your perspective, would you have to say about the implementation? Is it even possible to implement a plan like this or–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Fletcher, our time for the question period has expired. I will allow Mr. Sidhu to answer whatever he can in a brief way.

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu: I don't know, sir, to be honest. I don't know.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Sidhu, and we will now move on to the next presenter.

      Presenter No. 21, Sukhtap Sandhu, presenter No. 21.

      Mr. Sandhu, do you have any written presentations for the committee?

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu (Private Citizen): No, Sir.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your verbal presentation as soon as you are ready. Thank you.

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu: Good evening, everyone. My name is Sukjinderpal [phonetic] Sandhu. I'm living in Canada for–since 1989. I'm married. My wife is a sub teacher. We don't know if she will get a job tomorrow or not until the morning time, and I have three kids. Older one goes to university. I–her–his piece is around $10,000; middle one goes to St. Paul high school, another $10,000. My daughter goes to IHMS, and that's also $1,800. I'm telling you about the prices, because tomorrow I don't know if I can afford those prices for the kids.

* (19:20)

      Okay, I have a–issues with the Bill 30. There's a few places–Mr. Wharton said that we are transferring the licences to the City; what is written in the bill is totally different.

      Why can't we say, just in the bill, make amendment, say: we are transferring these licences, as-is, to the City of Winnipeg? This is in section 10.1.

      Another section, 10.3, government is taking our rights away. At–if government is doing the right thing, why is the government is worried about it? Why put it in there?

      And, if we take the government to the court, if the government is right, they will win the court case in the court.

      Let's talk about the City of Winnipeg. They cannot make it tough laws for the Uber, such as cameras, safety shields, criminal record checks. Have you guys ever heard when the mayor said he's worried about the people who's riding in the cabs, or in the Uber? All he is worried about is Uber–bringing the Uber in. He's not worried about the customers. He's not worried about the drivers.

      When–like most places, Uber want to come in, and we are on opposite side here. Mayor wants to bring the Uber in. If mayor want to bring the Uber in, he have no leverage over the Uber. He cannot force them to say, well, we're going to put these regulations in or we cannot put these regulations in, because Uber's going to say no to all those regulations, because Uber–mayor said it already; he's in favour. He never said that, like, well, we will allow the Uber in as long as they're following the rules.

      There was a representative from Uber the other day here. He said: Listen, all. Look around and listen to the other cities, what the people are saying. I want–I have to laugh about that too. If you think about it, what's happening in London. There is every week, one sexual harassment in Uber. There was reported to Uber, but Uber never reported back to the police. So who's policing? Uber's policing itself, not telling no one.

      What's happening in Quebec? They don't want to follow the rules. They said they followed all the rules. Have you seen where they're, like, running their fleet without even authorized to run it? They said they will do it.

      They're even–where they're–if there's a tough regulations are made, they said we will leave.

      There should be a couple amendments in the–this bill. I think section 3–10.3 should be taken out. And, also, there should be another amendment made, where it says every cab or Uber car or Lyft car, whoever's transporting the people, should have a camera, shield and a criminal record check done by the City of Winnipeg police, not by themselves.

      And also transfer the business licences, as-is, to the City of Winnipeg. Do not cancel it; transfer as-is.

      There's also–there's–were a couple of questions yesterday and just now, a few minutes ago, they said there's only 410 cabs, in the city of Winnipeg, since 1945. I think we are forgetting there are more cars. They are not standard taxis; they're accessible taxis. We are not telling that in the media at all to anybody. We are just saying there's only 410.

      This represents 9 per cent more taxis every year with those accessible vans and, in 2015, from November to March, there's another 20–120 to 25 extra cars, which would reflect about a 15 per cent increase–those busy hours.

      Our industry serves every part of the city. It serves the disabled. It serves all the Winnipeggers. We provide service throughout the city 24 hours, 365 days of the year. We operate when it is plus 35, when it's -35. Snowstorm–we are out there.

      We also serve every community in the broader community of Winnipeg; Uber does not do that. They will not be picking up people from the North End. And, if they are allowed to operate to pick up only the good customers and if we have no business at nighttime, why should we be driving at nighttime?           

      Someone may need a cab ride to the hospital at nighttime. What he will do if he have no access to Uber? Taxi's not there.

      This insurance issue–we pay around $10,600 right now. If you allow someone in–to come into the market with a regular insurance, this also reflects onto our regular insurance too.

      As in Edmonton, when the Uber car goes to pick up the customer, they are on a regular insurance. Only time they are being charged is when they have a customer in the car and to do a drop off.

      While he is going–he or she is going to pick up someone, that's also–they're doing business at that time. If they have an accident, that's just going to be–that insurance will be going into a regular pool, which is all citizens of Winnipeg. What will happen if they are covered only half-time?

      We have a regulated price. It doesn't matter if it's the middle of the summer, New Year's Eve; when we get in the taxi, you pay the same fare. If it's rush hour, it may be one or two dollars difference. But for the last 15 years, we are trying to get a diamond lane and nobody's helping us. You think City will listen to us? They haven't listened last 15 years. This is to provide a good service to the citizens of Winnipeg.

      That's all. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sandhu.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Sandhu, again, for your presentation. Very well articulated and very informative. I appreciate that.

      I just wanted to review back on your comment regarding 10.1, in Bill 30, where you had mentioned that the licences would be cancelled. Well, 10.1 does read that the licences will be cancelled under the former act, The Taxicab Act, Mr. Sandhu. However, on February 28th, the same day, the taxicab holders under The Taxicab Act deemed to be licence holders under the Winnipeg bylaw, a person "held a valid licence issued by the Taxicab Board under The Taxicab Act on the day before this Act comes into force is deemed to hold a licence issued under the City of Winnipeg's vehicle-for-hire by-law"–so, essentially, Mr. Sandhu, from–on February 28th, if this bill moves forward, your licence under the old regime will be cancelled and renewed the same day under the new regime, the City of Winnipeg.

* (19:30)

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu: This does not say business licence, this say taxi licence.

Mr. Fletcher: Mr. Sandhu, you have made a lot of excellent points. The one that really is profound, I think, is your comment about Quebec and other cities. Manitoba's insurance scheme, no–called no-fault insurance by Manitoba public insure, is based on the no-fault scheme in Quebec. We're the only two jurisdictions anywhere that has no-fault insurance. Therefore, any other comparison to any other city is null and void, because they don't have the same kind of insurance scheme that we have here.

      So my question to you, sir, is, how will it possibly work when you are going in and out of the city, Uber or a taxi driver, who's going to police that? Who's going to pay for the police? Who is going to see the rates of MPI spike because of abuse of what is supposed to be an enforceable system, but in Manitoba and Quebec, because of the no-fault insurance, it is impossible to enforce this legislation?

      So, friends, I ask that the government withdraw this bill and reflect on the realities that exist in Manitoba due to unique no-fault insurance. Would you agree, sir?

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu: I totally agree with that. I guess the government should have consulted more than what they have. The MNP report they're talking about, it was done sitting on a desk, and it should have been done the way Dr. Mundy's report was done. People went out, took a cab ride every hour, seven days a week. They did that for one month, then they finalized the report. I guess that's what they should have done instead of sitting on the desk and just getting a submission from, probably–I don't know from who.

Mr. Isleifson: Thank you, Mr. Sandhu, for your very informative report. I find every time somebody takes the podium we hear a lot of similarities, but there is something that's a little different all the time.

      So you had talked about the number of licences being unchanged since 1945. I think you said there was, roughly, I think you said 410 licences. And yet you also said that you see an increase of 9 per cent in accessibility vehicles each year.

      So can you explain, if the licensing–licences that are being issued have not increased, how are you increasing the number of vehicles on the road?

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu: Sir, there is regular taxis and there are accessible taxis. Accessible taxis are the vans. They've got meters, they've got every similar–everything that taxis got, but they also transport people with disabilities, that they cannot get out of their wheelchair, they take it in there. So those vans do–whenever we talk, whenever the government talk, you don't reflect those ones in there. That's the 9 per cent we are talking about, every year, since 2008.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Sandhu.

We will now move to our next presenter. Thank you.

      Presenter No. 22, Lakhvir Gill. Lakhvir Gill. Mr. Gill is not present. We will move Mr. Gill to the bottom of the list.

      We will now move on to presenter No. 23, Edward Los. Edward Los.

      Do you have any written presentations for the committee?

Mr. Edward Los (Private Citizen): No, I don't. But I have been–

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your presentation whenever you're ready, Mr. Los.

Mr. Los: I have a presentation that was offered to me by a group from Duffy's or Unicity. I'm not sure yet from where, but it's very refreshing.

      I read it over, it's regarding safety.

       I also had a few questions regarding, like, who does Uber pay their taxes to? Which government do they pay it to?

      So,  anyways, if I can proceed. I will read some issues regarding safety, which would be very refreshing. It was to me.

      Many of the people represented to you know what safety is all about. We deal with unsafe situations all the time, racist threatening comments, robberies and attempted robberies. We even get assaulted. But it used to be a lot worse. We are very proud of the fact that we have one of the safest taxi industries in North America.

      This is an industry that is one of the most dangerous to work in. We are very concerned that there is nothing in this bill to maintain what we have. The best safety protection, yes, for our drivers, but also for passengers.

      I want you to know exactly how important this is. I am going to read from some of the reports that outline what the situation is.

      So how safe is Winnipeg for a taxi? I want to read what some of the reports say about safety. Reports like MNP, reports like presentations from the Taxicab Board. Winnipeg has the best safety equipment for taxicabs, such as in-car cameras, panic buttons, rooftop strobe lights, driver shields are mandated by Taxicab Board. Winnipeg appears to have the most vigorous safety equipment requirements of all companies in compared cities.

      Taxicab owners and drivers generally support in-car safety equipment. Driving a taxicab is a risky occupation, not fully made secure with current safety provisions. Stakeholders indicate that driver's facing significant safety risk are associated with violent or intoxicated passenger, discrimination and fare disputes.

      To protect the safety of passengers, the Taxicab Board requires drivers to undergo criminal record checks, mandatory training for driving safety and safe equipment handling for passengers, as well as regular vehicle inspections.

      Driving a cab is very dangerous. Driving a taxicab is an important public transportation service and one of the most dangerous occupations in North America. A taxicab driver is sixty times more likely to be murdered on the job than the average worker. In Canada, there have been 150 taxicab drivers killed since 1970. In Manitoba there have been 10 taxicab drivers killed while on duty since 1945.

      Taxicab drivers are at risk in terms of robbery, high-jacking of the taxicab, abusive and threatening behaviour, physical assault, traffic disputes and accidents, fare disputes in combinations of the above. With shields and cameras there is a dramatic improvement in safety.

      After the murder of Pritam Deol, the taxicab industry issued reports–was released in October 2001. It made 18 recommendations. One of the key recommendations was the development of a taxicab drivers' safety program to enhance driver skills to recognize and excess–assess risk and how to diffuse potential hostile situations. The effectiveness of cameras and shields is clear. The Winnipeg Police Service indicated that for the calendar year 2000, there were 20 fewer reports to taxicab robberies than in the previous year. This represented a reduction of 71 per cent in serious taxicab crime since then in-cab cameras and shields were introduced.

      When in 2003 is compared to 2001, the year before cameras and shields were introduced, taxicab robberies and other violent taxicab crimes have been reduced by 79 per cent. There was an increase of 10.5 per cent in crime rate overall in the city of Winnipeg. Over the same period, the arrest rate for crimes against taxi drivers was 35 per cent prior to the introduction of cameras, and the rate increased to 50 per cent, 2002, and 66 per cent in 2003.

      In Winnipeg, a requirement for all standard and accessible taxicabs has been in effect since July 1st, 2002, to have an operational in-cab camera, and the requirement to have a safety shield installed has been in effect since January, 2003. The safety initiatives taken in Winnipeg include other measures such as mandatory first-aid kits, improved taxicab driver training and a requirement that any taxi with GPS must have the system working at all times.

      Winnipeg Police Service data indicates that since the introduction of taxicab safety measures in 2002, robberies of taxicabs were introduced by–reduced by 71 per cent. The Winnipeg taxicab industry indicated that it is very pleased with the decrease in all crimes: fare-jumpers, assault, robberies involving taxicabs since the introduction of the safety measures. Drivers find that customers, while in the cab, will settle down knowing that a camera's taking their picture. There are very few instances of hostile incidents in taxicabs. Crimes that do happen in taxicabs are solved quickly by the police using the digital images to identify and find the suspects. In many cases, the perpetrator will admit to the crime, thus enabling a swift resolution to an incident.

* (19:40)

      So, when it comes to driver safety, we have taken an industry where you are 60 times more likely to be murdered on the job than other jobs and turned into an industry where there has been a single murder since 2001.

      Our concern is very clear: Safety must come first. Bill 30 is completely silent on safety. We are very concerned that this will lead to a watering down of safety standards, and, quite frankly, it doesn't really matter if we are 'tiking' about–talking about taxi services or if Uber comes here. Uber's basically a taxi service. It shouldn't matter who drives–who you drive for in the vehicle‑for‑hire industry in Winnipeg, should have the best safety protection.

      Please listen to us in terms of safety. Reject this bill. If you are going to proceed with it, protect the Winnipeg model that makes us the safest taxi industry in North America, our vision for our industry, our vision for Manitobans. Thank you and–

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Los.

      We will now proceed with questions.

Mr. Saran: Thank you, Mr. Los, for coming over here, and I did not catch–do you drive a cab, or do you own a cab or you are in the management?

Mr. Los: I've managed a cab. I own a cab for 49 and a half years, and I've driven it for 49 and a half years.

Mr. Saran: Yes, thank you very much, and now I am clear.

      Okay, did the cab industry–Unicity or Duffy's–ever try to have meetings with the minister and to make them understand what kind of problem this bill will cause? Because I don't think taxi industry could have that chance–because I come from the community where a majority of people are driving cabs and, from that community, I wrote letters to the Premier (Mr. Pallister) to settle that we have to find solution. I wrote letter to the–I ask at that time, minister, and she did not want to sit with me. I ask Finance Minister: let we find a solution that we can make money out of that. And they did not have a meeting with me.

      Were you guys ever be able to have that meeting with the ministers?

Mr. Los: Well, I 'creally'–really couldn't answer that, because I haven't been attending much of the meetings. Sorry.

Mr. Isleifson: Mr. Los, first of all, I–you don't look old enough to be driving for 49 years, but I do have a question with that. What is the value of your licence? So I have two questions. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Los, you can't answer until you get my–so I can recognize you, so you can repeat.

      Are you finished with your question? [interjection] Okay. Mr. Los, you can now answer that question.

Mr. Los: Sorry. I–as I heard today, it's zero with the exception to the price of the vehicle and the equipment in the vehicle.

Mr. Isleifson: Just a really quick comment, then–49 years ago what did you pay for your licence?

Mr. Los: I paid $7,000 down, and I made payments for five years to Moore's taxi. Payments of–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Selinger.

      Are you finished?

Mr. Los: No. Payments of, I believe it was, $88 a month. Yes.

Mr. Selinger: Yes, thank you, Mr. Los.

      Forty nine and a half years, I want to congratulate you on your endurance, and you have done really well in terms of looking after yourself. What would you want to see in this legislation to protect the safety of the public and the drivers?

Mr. Los: Yes, well, as I've read today here, there's a lot of policing to be done, and, if you allow more on the road to act unpoliced, what's going to happen to the industry? What's going to happen to the public? What's going to happen to the customers, the drivers?

Mr. Selinger: So I want–I just want to get it clear: You would like to see cameras in every car. Is that correct?

Mr. Los: Absolutely. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Selinger.

Mr. Selinger: Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: You may now ask the question.

Mr. Selinger: You'd like to see shields in every car.

Mr. Los: Absolutely.

Mr. Selinger: You'd like to see adequate insurance for every driver?

Mr. Los: Good question. How do you assess the insurance if he's going to drive nine, 10 hours a week? We can live with nine, 10 hours a week when he's doing the rush hour, because, yes, there's a couple of hours where we could use that little bit of help. But I understand you're putting 60, what, 120 cars on now? They've put on already 60 now–it's not even Christmas yet. I sit during the day. I go golfing because what's the point of sitting during the day? I come in at rush hour and do my rush hour work because that's when they need the cabs, otherwise they don't need them at that other time.

Mr. Chairperson: Well, Mr. Los–oh, Mr. Selinger, you have a question? Mr. Selinger.

Mr. Selinger: So to summarize, you'd like to see proper shields, proper cameras, proper 'surance' even as–at a proportionate amount for the amount of work they do at least. Is there anything you'd like to see to ensure public and driver safety?

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Los, we only have a few seconds left, so if you could answer as quickly as possible. Thank you.

Mr. Los: Well that's probably the bulk of it, but I'm sure there's other little tidbits that I can't really think of right now. I'll go home and I'll think of a whole bunch of other ones.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Los, we thank you very much for your presentation and your answers. And we will now move on to the next presenter. Thank you very much.

      We will now move on to presenter No. 24, Baljinder Sandhu. Twenty-four, Mr. Sandhu is not here. We will move Mr. Sandhu to the bottom of the list.

      We will move to presenter No. 25, Jagtar Virk. Jagtar Virk.

      Thank you very much, Mr. Virk. I presume that you have a translator for yourself?

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Jagtar Virk: I'll be speaking on his behalf.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed when you are ready.

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Virk: Thank you, sir. Good evening.

      Mr. Jagtar is from India. He was nominated by PNP. He came here, he saved money for 22 years. He sold his house, he sold his land and he sold so many things. He brought money in 2008–

Mr. Chairperson: Could you move the microphone closer so everybody can hear?

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Virk: Okay. I want my two minutes back though.

      He sold all his property and he came to this land. Manitoba promised him that they would look after his property. He paid money for his cab, he bought a house. The cab he bought was $500,000 in 2010. Now, all of a sudden, in a capitalist system, whereby your property is protected on that law, now this bill is doing the opposite. You can look at him. The hope that he brought here is being–is evaporating.

      This reminds me of 1979 in Calgary, Alberta; when people came from Ontario they bought houses. The bottom fell, they left and they ran back to Ontario.

      Now here we are today. The man that put his money, and Manitoba government promised him when he was buying the cab it was signed, due, everything done by Taxicab Board that represents Manitoba government. Here we are today. Here we are today. He doesn't know what to do. He can't take his money back. He can't get his land back in India. He can't buy his house back in India. The only thing he has is here in Manitoba.

      How could it be? Come on. No place on Earth, especially when we have Conservative government, that believes in God-right change, they don't believe in change in a [inaudible], God-right change. But this bill is opposite to what they believe in. What do we do? What's he going to do? Who's he going to cry to?

* (19:50)

      He didn't ask for job, he bought his own job; because he couldn't get a job, he bought it. And the person he bought it from got the money. He's making his life. If he buys something, we know that he's going to resell it back. Why would the government now take that away from him? That's absurd.

      And I call on all of you here today; you are elected here for four years. All of a sudden, tomorrow comes and say, oh, no, you have to leave the office. Is that possible? You'll be going to 408 York to fight it out in there. What Manitoba government promised him, please, let him have it. There's no pension in this field. There's no UIC for him. The only thing we hope on is, at the end of the game, he will be able to sell his cab and rest in his perfect place. This is what we ask. What is good for the gander is good for the goose.

      And, again, remember, this is not Animal Farm by George Orwell. When he said, all animals are equal, there's some are more equal than the other. We have in capitalist system, your rights, your property, everything is protected. Why this industry is not protected? That is the question I'm asking tonight.

      So I leave you to your consciences. We are all human beings. We are born equal. We have the same blood flowing in us. You are here today; I could be here tomorrow. And Shakespeare said, the evil that men do do live after them. I hope it's not going to be like this.

      So I pray to all of you to please–please–I'm not talking to your brain; I'm talking to your heart–have feelings for us. I don't know if you've driven cab before. I don't know if you have anybody driving a cab in your family. We all drive 12 to 14 hours a day with the hope that we'll be able to put bread on the table. This industry's a melting pot. When people come, they go in there, they move up. Why do you want to kill it?

      There's a saying in English: if it's not broken, don't fix it. Our industry's not broken; it's working perfectly. We are the only ones in North America that came up with: I build cars. We're the only one with the–we're even the envy of North America, the best technology in dispatching system; we have it.

      What is Uber bringing? Uber is not bringing anything. Uber is like a lion in the forest. Lion is a very strong person–very strong animal, sorry. What does it do when it's hungry? He looks for the one that is lame, that cannot walk. He go after it. That's exactly what Uber is doing.

      Winnipeg Transit is not making money. Every year, they increase the fare. How come it's not going after Winnipeg Transit? Why is it coming after us? It's not spending money.

      I remember during the industrial revolution that started in London, England–what does it do? It change the way we manufacture, the way we do things. WestJet, when it started, its employees, what it do–what's it do now? They gave some shares to the employees and, as such, they work hard. The efficiency increase. Productivity increase. We own a cab. It is our passion. Work in there every day. We never ask you for handouts. This is what we do.

      This man is coming–Uber is coming. He is not bringing money in; he's not bringing investment; he's not bring technology; he's not bringing labour. And what he wants? He wants to use us. Then, after all, when it's finished, he takes the profit and he runs. I'll give you an example. Four years ago, some people went to Morley and Osborne; they kill some people in that apartment. The police could not solve it. You know what happened? They know they cab number.

They call the cab. They look at the camera. They got him within a day. Is that going to happen again with Uber? No.

      Why you call Uber? You know what Uber is going to tell you? Privacy law. They have money. They will fight you in court. But we? You have control of ours. You can call us any time, bring the cab in. We'll give it to you. We are not going to quote privacy law for you. So, please and please and please, don't let us rush into judgments. As I said, if it's not broken, don't fix it. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.

Mr. Selinger: Well, first of all, I'd like to thank you for a very passionate and articulate presentation. You did a very good job.

      What would you like–would you like this bill to be completely withdrawn or do you want it amended? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Virk.

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Virk: Oh, I'm sorry.

      Can I go ahead now?

Mr. Chairperson: Yes.

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Virk: Thank you.

      Yes, withdrawn completely, and I'll tell you why. If the house–in the foundation of the house is not built right, the house is going to fall. We all know that. When this bill is–the government came in, I believe, about one and a half years now, it did not even consult us. There was no, sorry, there was no examination at all. They didn't talk to nobody. What is wrong if they come to us and discuss with–and then we sit down? You see two heads instead of one. So what you are saying is that, look at us here, do you have jobs for us tomorrow if Uber comes in? Do you have jobs for us? No. And remember–remember–I will say this to you. This industry increased the economy of Manitoba. We all have loans, big, big loans. If you move that from this economy, it will have effects: mortgages, garages, car loans, student loans, and we still have it. So please withdraw the bill. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.

Mr. Nic Curry (Kildonan): Thank you very much for your presentation.

      Now you did reference George Orwell's novella Animal Farm. Were you trying to express the dangers? He was describing Stalinist Communist Russia, and you would say that Animal Farm shows the dangers of socialism? Is that what you're trying to get across?

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Virk: No.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr.–okay, Mr. Virk–but if you could translate–you're supposed to be here as a translator, if you could just sort of find out what this gentleman's thoughts were on it and translate that back for us, please.

Translator on Behalf of Mr. Virk: Yes, if this industry is medical or pharmacist industry, this would not happen to them. If they were to treat other industries, they treat it that way, that's fine. As I said, all animals are equal. And remember, what we do, you might think is just minute–is very important. We are the first one to see and remember in English, first impressions last forever. If you do a bad job at the airport, people will not come back here again. Remember that. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.

      We will now move on to our next presenter, presenter No. 26, Lathuinder Dullat.

      Mr. Dullat, do you have a written presentation?

Mr. Lathuinder Dullat (Private Citizen): No.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your verbal presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Dullat: I'm ready.

      Okay, I'm starting here from the New York Stock Exchange, right? They have blue chip shares. Those are like on very high price. They are like in market selling, same like our industry here. We make our goodwill in the city, then our prices goes up. So through the government, last car in maybe two years ago sold in $525,000; that is go through the government of Manitoba. It's our goodwill to–like, the price goes up from the bottom.

* (20:00)

      Our people work 12 hours every day almost 4,000 hours yearly. They're working, going home, sleeping–the next day, again start. Mostly people in this industry working every day.

      Due to this Bill 30, them–like–same share market crash, our shares, like, crash, and $2-billion loss, not $2 million, $2-billion loss to our industry.

      We are paying $6 million, roughly, insurance to MPI, the whole industry. A hundred years ago when Europeans came here as a farmer, the government of Manitoba gave them free land to develop this state. But we are–we came here, too, sold our properties in–like, our ancestral properties in our home, and we bring money here to put in businesses, like small–it's kind of a small industry. The taxi industry's a small industry. So we are paying, like, lots of interest, mortgages. We–like, insurance.

      We–if, like, Bill 30 came, it's not a benefit to any–a few guys bring Uber or Lyft here–not a single benefit to government here. We make money; we spend here. We pay EI here; we pay the work compensation here; we pay GST here; we pay income tax here. If, like, a ride-sharing company came here, the money goes to other countries, like 35 per cent share, like, they took to other countries as a profit. It's not a benefit to us. If we make money here, we spend here in our city.

      Now, like, through the free trade in Quebec, through the dairy products they bring from Europe to here. And they give them compensation to our farmers, but I think not for us. So, if you guys bring companies here, we need compensation, like farmers or dairy farmers.

      And if you bring those companies here, in rush hour, they work and they charge as they like, right? In rush hour, they charge more, and we charge the same, and our cars are working 24-7 in the city. If you bring those companies here after–in the evening, we could not find drivers, night drivers, right? And so many people, those are sick like senior people, going lately to the hospital in the night, our companies now took them to the hospital in the late night. Between 2 to 5 in the morning, we have 70 to 80 calls. Those are going to the hospital every day.

      So Uber make money in rush hour and they sleep at home because you could not find drivers. And senior people, especially here, those are not using this latest technology, so how they call Uber or other companies? And we go through all processes like security, criminal check or other–cameras and shields.

      And, second, if you–if the government issue licences, they are not bringing Uber here. They issue licences every year through the bid system. So government can make money through that if they issuing plate–like, they can make money for our state. If Uber came here or any other ride-sharing company, it's not a benefit to us.

      In article 10, subsection (3), in this bill, we cannot challenge this bill. It's like, I think, the government snatch our rights to challenge this bill.

      Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Dullat, for your presentation.

Mr. Maloway: I want to thank you for your presentation, and I think that it's pretty clear in my mind that the Conservative members opposite are really thinking about what you're saying in your presentation. I've been doing this now for 30 years and I got to say this committee has operated over two nights now, a lot different than any other committee I've seen, and I do think they're honestly thinking about some of this and rethinking some of this. And some of this information is even new to me, who's, you know, involved in the community to certain extent, right.

      Now, last night, one of the members talked about how Uber will conduct its business, and I was surprised to hear that the average Uber driver drives only two hours a day or something like that, and then they only pick up, you know, the good fares to the football game and the hockey game and do a little bit of pick up around rush hour and then they go home and watch TV for the night.

      Now, who is going to be out doing the fares where there's not a lot of money and lot of fares on the–who's going to be doing the off hours? Well, that's what everybody else is going to be doing. So I'd just like you to explain a little more about what the life of an Uber driver is like in other places.

Mr. Dullat: In–like, it's in big cities like in Toronto, Los Angeles, New York. Those are big cities. Our city is not big, so they make money in rush hour and they pick cream in rush hours, like cream fares, and after that when it's no business–like, business going slow, they are going home and they are doing other jobs after that. Like they can–they work when they are free, right.

      We are available 24‑7. Does not matter it's windy. It's like any kind of weather; always we are on road. It's big storm; we are on road always.

An Honourable Member: No Uber drivers.

Mr. Dullat: No Uber drivers.

Mr. Wharton:

Again, thank you, Mr. Dullat, for your presentation tonight. Again, as I mentioned earlier to presenters prior to yourself I really appreciate the input that you're providing to the committee tonight and again I thank you for that.

      Who determines–and I do have a question: Who determines the value of your licence? We've heard conflicting amounts tonight. [interjection] I'm sorry?

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Dullat, if you could just wait until I recognize you to answer.

      Mr. Dullat. You can answer now.

Mr. Dullat: Can I speak now?

Mr. Chairperson: Yes.

Mr. Dullat: Okay, taxi board approved these prices, then, like suppose it's going in $5,000. Obviously, next cab is in similar price or more than that. It's passed by taxi board. It's on record.

Mr. Wharton: So I just–I want to be clear how this works because I obviously–this is an important issue, not only for you but for the committee to understand. So what you're saying is the Taxicab Board currently determines the value? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Dullat. You may answer now.

Mr. Dullat: They pass these values. If they have any objection, then why they pass these cabs on these values, why they not issue plates to control this price.

Mr. Wharton: Well, that's a good question for the–thank you, Mr. Chair–that's a good question for the current regime to find out why they don't control the price. So further to that then, I'm concerned that I want to make sure I, again, fully understand. The values seem to be kind of all over the map. Where does that money go once the transition is–or, the transaction has been completed? Does it go to somebody else, to the taxicab industry–where does it go?

Mr. Dullat: The money goes to–like, suppose I'm buying from someone, I'm paying to him, right, through the bank or any private financer, right, and he pays capital gains there to the government. Each and every thing is on record.

Mr. Wharton: So the transaction is a private transaction between two parties. Is that correct?

Mr. Dullat: It's through the lawyer and through the taxi board.

* (20:10)

Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Dullat, but our time has expired for questions.

      We will now move on to the next presenter. Thank you very much.

      Presenter No. 27, Hapreet Sangha–Harpreet Sangha.

      Mr. Sangha, you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Harpreet Sangha (Private Citizen): Okay. My name is Harpreet Sangha, and I came in Canada in 2001. So I start out work in Kitchen Craft, so I working there six months. After six months, so I'm driving a cab. So I drove like four years as a driver, and then I bought a half-share, like about $80,000. And then I working another, like, four to five years, and I bought another half-share. So, like, full cab. And I pay another $80,000.

      So I was working like seven days a week, every single day. So after work, when I go home and my children ask every single day, dad, why you working that hard? So–because they don't know, like, I have to pay the installments, right? And I'm working like seven days because I have to. I know the, like, I'll have to pay the loan. And you know, the, like, most dangerous job in the world, like, for the waiter and the taxi driver. So–because it's–I think, as a taxi driver, like, as a taxi driver–so lots happenings every single day, like lots of rude peoples. So that's why it's a–dangerous, right? And we pay the, like, lots things, like insurance, pay the EIA, GST, income tax.

      If you let [inaudible] Bill 30. So if you open the door for them, like, for ride-sharing, so–because we have same thing. Like, app is same and we have, like, nice cars and we pay, like, whatever–we have a meter in the taxis.

      So you know that, like, in London, that's the biggest city, I think, in the world. So they kicked them out because–for the life safety reason. So a lots happening in the taxis, like, and Uber are something. So lots–we heard that lots happening.

      So only, I think it's the reason here, like, with the people are complaining in the rush hour because we have lots of construction in the city. If you put, like, more taxis, like a hundred taxis more or two hundred more, so it's the same thing in the rush hour because we don't have like bus lanes or–so, otherwise, people don't complaining like in–without rush hour.

      So in the morning or in the–after, like, midnight, we are waiting sometimes like hour, two hours for just–for $10 or for $5 tip. And the dangerous city in North End, nobody going to want to play there, but we–our drivers going to be working there, too, right? So any other area like West End, so lots happening, you know that. And lots–cars that we saw, like, and the cops' cars there, like, every single day. And lots happening. So–but still we are working for hard work, like, in 12 hours a single day.

      I think that's it.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation. And we'll move on to questions.

      Do–does any member of the committee have a question? If not–

Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): Thank you for your presentation. It's–it is interesting. We hear this over and over again about safety and I think it was very important you brought that forward.

      So thank you for your presentation.

Mr. Chairperson: We have one more question here.

Mr. Selinger: Could you just summarize for us what safety measures you would want to see in any future legislation? Shields?

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sangha, you can proceed now.

Mr. Sangha: Okay. Yes, for like safety, for like camera, shield and that those, like, major things, right, like camera and shields. Say if we have a camera in the car so people are scared because we have a sticker outside when they come to the cab and they don't like the camera, on their ride. So that's like a major for the safety.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Sangha.

      We will now proceed to the next presenter.

      The next presenter, No. 28, Harvinger Singh. Mr. Singh is not here. We will move him to the bottom of the list, and move on to presenter No. 29, Jaswant Gill. Jaswant Gill. Presenter No. 29 is not present. We will move that presenter down to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 30, Jaswant Deol. Jaswant Deol. Thank you very much for coming here tonight.

      If you don't have any written material for the committee you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready,

Mr. Jaswant Deol (Private Citizen): Hello, good evening, everybody.

      I'm just asking all these members who's benefiting this bill, because this bill destroying $4 billion of our people in investment, equity and their mortgage, their livelihood, our kids' future. That's not good. Because government not thinking. There's indigenous people who many–how many have–they have credit card. They're not going to use Uber or Lyft.

      So I'm hearing the news our Prime Minister dealing with the NAFTA and Bombardier. They put 219 per cent tax on it, and also on lumber dispute. And what we doing? We putting our own people out of business and make those billionaire company to bring–make easy way to come. Why not they come same level to fight with us. We welcome them and talk same level we do. We follow same rules, why not they can do? What investment they have in the Canada? They just making–grabbing the money from our pocket, our people pockets.

      So we should learn the lesson what Trump administration doing for Canadian people? We not thinking. We have to think why the government need to bring this bill. Who's benefiting? I work 12 hours, and I'm not spending six last night, six hour again here and I couldn't sleep last night. I'm feeling a lot of stress in my body, maybe I can die. Who's responsible?

      All these people, they're not going to speak, they're going to work hard, 12 hour. I work 18 hours, 24 hours to establish this. This is run by government of Manitoba Taxicab Board. They should think of before when the prices goes up. It's not our fault. It's government fault. Why the prices go down, because government bring the bill. They're not thinking anybody. They're just using the powerful people. People never can forget this. This can make history in Manitoba. I never see and I am 20 year in this business, I never see this kind of crisis.

      We go to City Hall. They don't listen to us. How many times we have to go to City Hall? We asking them give us diamond lane, give us couple of sports in downtown. They never listen to us. We go to pick up a fare at Superstore, there is fire lane. Their camera comes. They can snap my picture, send me $150 ticket.

* (20:20)

      They're not listening us anything. We loading, unloading; they're a policeman. They're going to arrest us anywhere. They can say, you guys don't pick up; other way, I can give you a ticket. There is–sometimes there is no stopping zone. Nobody listens. If you guys not listening us, how you–we can expect from city guy? They will listen us? No.

      Government should think seriously. It’s people's life, people's goodwill, people's equity, people's life savings. We sold property back to India–a lot of people. The previous NDP government, they bring lot of entrepreneurs, lot of PNP people. I have one family living in my home, five members. I'm feeding them, helping them to establish in Manitoba. What they going to do? What have I been thinking about my future? I can't work since this bill is lodged in my brain; I can show I am going to a special doctor for heart. I have lot of mortgages pay, my children's education–who's responsible? I'm talking to my kids, we have to sold this house, we have to be in the apartment next couple days. They're thinking, oh yes, the government are punishing us. What I did wrong? I worked hard for this Manitoba.

      I used to come in BC, I come here; no people want live in this bad weather. It's very hard winter. Nobody wants to live. Lot of our fellow friends move to Alberta, Ontario. What government thinking about us? They punishing us. Then the next, my friend, I will told, let's go to Ontario, don't live Manitoba. This is not good place to live. This is not good for us. How many people these people work 12 hour and spending six hour yesterday, six hour today? That's why we elected this government. What about the government gaining, like, 1 per cent PST? That's they want? To people make out of work, out of business? That's not fair; that's injustice.

      Bring the Uber [inaudible], why government punishing us 40 year? We can follow same rule, we, why we have to pay $10,000 insurance? We putting brand new environmental friendly cabs on the road, 24-hour service. Whoever, lot of people, they don't pay for the next destination. Who responsible, Uber we will serve them? When this bill pass, Uber will come. Our people go bankrupt; they lost their jobs. They will go home to sleep. Nobody will be responsible for emergency services, people going early in the morning to airport. Who's responsible?

      This is not government. Government should do for own people, not for companies sitting in America grabbing app technology they're making billions, billions of dollar. Government not thinking anything.

      We go every safety. We have experienced drivers 20-40 years; they know how to operate in bad weather, bad situations, somebody in emergency. How can government not listening us? They should do same thing. In the winter I can tell you a story. Right now 15 of October our company, taxi board, put 100 cabs more. Today I work eight, nine hours. I made $100, not even minimum wages. How I can pay my mortgages, how my grocery? Everything goes expensive. Every year City raise property taxes; insurance every year go $600–who's responsible? Government just using their powers, punishing us. Somebody got killed or pass away. Who's responsible? Who's playing my health?

      One cab feed almost 10 people at home; my driver, my family. Two families surviving on each licence. We agree bad weather. There was game in the summertime, so our company put 60, 70 cabs for one month. We ready too, we don't want, I personally saw [inaudible]. I feel bad, I don't want rid anyone. I always try to do my best, but people panicking. There is lot of construction, so people cannot wait. They're waiting hour, hour on the road. We not fixing anything. We need lot of bridges. What are we thinking of? City just reducing the lanes, four to three, two to one? People waiting, waiting; nobody thinking about them. So this is totally mistaken.

      People should be consulted and government should be serious. This will be it for–PC government pass this; they will be one day regret for this. This will be history in Manitoba. It's one community, East Indian community, lot of people discriminate us. They say, oh, Paki, fuck you, go to your country. We don't like you here.

      That's we are–that's a system. This is–back home is better system. We tired for that system, same thing we're seeing in here, Manitoba. This is not good. We want if there is more cabs, government can't afford the Taxicab Board, why not put the price? People can pay $300,000, government run with that money. Not all people billion dollars throw in the garbage. That's not–this is totally nonsense. I don't think this is right.

      All I request, if I speak loud, so please apologize me and please be serious. This is very serious matter. Don't play with people's life. Our people are hard-working people. They making good money, investing good money. We buy bigwig homes, investing more money, paying everything at Manitoba. We want build Manitoba better place, not like ruining people's life, to playing people's life. Couple hundred thousand government save not going to do anything, not achieve any goal. This is not right. I feel bad all the time, all the time stress. This is not good for us.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Deol.

Mr. Saran: Thank you very much for coming over here and I think what we are missing here, we are missing rep from the Uber and we could have asked many questions and that could have cleared. Yesterday, I tried to take leave. Leave means you can ask questions beyond that time if unanimously it's agreed, but unfortunately previous minister responsible for cab industry and she refused it. She took away our chance. I don't understand why minister wants to protect Uber. So do you have any idea why they are doing it and do you think that a Uber rep should have been here? We could have asked that many questions.

Mr. Deol: Yes. I heard news in Quebec, the government pass the law they should go to 35‑hour training, their cars should be every 12 month safetied and drivers should be criminal checked by the police. What, they're trapping them; they won't hold because they just want money. They don't care about people of Manitoba, people of Winnipeg. They just want to make one app and grab the money. They're not responsible.

      We are here 24 hours. Our service is here, our office is here. If somebody lost in my cab anything I try to go back to give him cellphone, his belongings. If I don't know the customer's address I always bring that things to the–my company. He can phone and get his next day back. Who–what about–who's responsible for Uber? You can find the app? No. Nobody's here. Nobody listened to you. Just they make money. That's it.

Mr. Maloway: I want to thank you for an excellent presentation and I wish every presenter would speak as loud as you do so we can hear every word you say.

      You asked several times who was responsible, and the fact of the matter is that this whole situation can be resolved by the Premier (Mr. Pallister) asking his House leader to pull this bill tomorrow. Now, the members sitting opposite me are Conservative members, all–we're all elected MLAs here, but they are from the governing party, from the Conservative party. They have 40 members, and you'll notice if you're here last night there was some different ones here the night before. But they meet every day in caucus and they–Premier (Mr. Pallister) will be getting a report about everything that happened here tonight. It only takes three or four of these people to demand that this bill be withdrawn and it will be withdrawn.

      I've been here 30 years. I've seen governments of both stripes withdraw bills all the time, amend bills all the time. So I'm just saying to you, keep up the good work. You're talking to the right people on the other side of the table. It's just the Premier's not here, but they report to the Premier.

* (20:30)

Mr. Deol: Yes, I know. I have a couple of MLAs just living in my neighbourhood. They come to our temple. We always talk to them. They try to help us. I don't know Brian Pallister. They're not listening or whatever happened, I don't understand. They are very helpful. A couple of MLAs with my Facebook, they always are community–go to Diwali Mela, everywhere. I knowing they are good people.

      I want PC government to withdraw this bill. They can–next four years–not four years–they can run like same NDP, 16 years in business. We want to work with you guys, not so just shut my mouth and go home. That's not right.

Mr. Wharton: Again, thank you, Mr. Deol, for your presentation tonight.

      How long have you been in business for, Mr. Deol?

Mr. Deol: Twenty years.

Mr. Wharton: You've been an entrepreneur for 20 years?

Mr. Deol: First, I came Manitoba in 1995. I worked three years, like, beginning business. Two years, I be a cab driver. Eighteen years, I'm owner-operator of Unicity Taxi.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Deol, but, unfortunate, your time for questions has expired. We want to thank you very much for your presentation.

      Our next presenter, presenter No. 31, Taswant Deol [phonetic]–[interjection]

      No, it starts with a T, okay? So Taswant [phonetic] is not here. We will move on to–the–Mr. Marcelino.

Mr. Marcelino: I just want to know if you could canvass the committee and ask if two students who are willing to participate in our process could be heard early on tonight because they still have to attend school. The names are Arshdeep Kensray and Karemdeep Kensray [phonetic]–[interjection]

      I think–they're not on the list yet. But if it's–if–

Mr. Chairperson: 'Misler'–Mr. Isleifson.

Mr. Isleifson: It's a late night.

      I have no problem with them speaking. I'm more concerned with the–as we just heard, there was a number of people that came out and spent six hours here last night. They're back again tonight; they've registered, and it's going to put them back even further. So, while I certainly appreciate, and we want to hear from as many people as possible, I don't think it's fair to the ones that have registered, and again, it's going to put them later, and it may even take them right off the list for today, so they'll have to come back again on Thursday, which I don't believe is fair to the ones that have registered.

Hon. Cathy Cox (Minister of Sport, Culture and Heritage): Could we just, instead of 10 minutes, give them five minutes each to speak? Would that be something that would be considered?

Mr. Maloway: Well, Mr. Chair, I would suggest we make the exception and give them their 10 minutes and–or less, whatever it takes, and let them go. We did it last night, and that–I guess that would be my argument for doing it.

Mr. Chairperson: Is there leave of the committee to call these two presenters tonight? Is there leave?

      Okay, it's the will of the committee to have these two students–[interjection]

      We'll just redo this. Is there leave of the committee to allow the one student to present tonight? [Agreed]

      Arshdeep Kensray, am I pronouncing your name correctly?

Mr. Arshdeep Kensray (Private Citizen): Yes.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your presentation when you are ready. Thank you.

Mr. Kensray: Hello, everyone. My name is Arshdeep Kensray. Tonight I am here to express my thoughts about passing Bill 30.

      When my dad told us about Bill 30, when my dad told us of–and the effects it would do on many families, we were really worried about our future. Since taxis only about–is the only source of income in our family of seven, he works hard six days a week to fulfill our needs.

      My dad came to Canada with big dreams and a brighter future for his family. I don't know much about this Bill 30 but all that I know is my dad is upset about passing of this Bill 30.

      As a son I am just playing my role because I can't bear to see my dad upset. The dreams in my dad's eyes will not be fulfilled and our lives will be ruined if this bill is passed.

      My dad wants us to be successful in life and this will not be possible if our only income–source of income is affected.

      I request to all the committee members to take this matter seriously and not pass the bill.

      Thank you all for listening and giving me a chance to express my feelings.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Kapri  [phonetic]. You're certainly a very well-spoken young man and you articulate yourself very well and I appreciate the fact that you took the time, and I know you've got school tomorrow and thank you for coming out tonight and speaking about your dad's industry, the industry that he's worked in for a number of years. And, again, we are pleased as a committee to listen to all the concerns tonight and we really appreciate the broad scope of folks that are coming out tonight and making their opinions known to the committee.

      And, again, I thank you on behalf of our government and the committee here tonight for coming out and making your issues known. Thank you so much.

Mr. Marcelino: The question that I have usually deals with the effects. The–you said you're afraid of seeing your dad upset.

      What was he upset about?

Mr. Chairperson: Arshdeep, you can speak now.

Mr. Kensray: I don't really know the reason, but he was upset.

Mr. Marcelino: The number of persons in your family, is it the taxi that's feeding or putting food on the table?

Mr. Kensray: Yes.

Mr. Marcelino: Thank you. I think that says it all.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation. We have no more questions of you. We thank you very much for coming here this evening and presenting.

      We will now move to presenter No. 32, Ranjodh Chhokar. Mr. Chhokar, you may start with your presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Ranjodh Chhokar (Private Citizen): Good evening, committee members of the Legislature, Manitoba Legislature. Today, I am here regarding the Bill 30. I want to present some of the facts and figures as I want to contradict a little bit of honourable minister when he said about the section 10(a), that your same licences will be passed on to the city. And that's not true according to section 1(a)–subsection (a). It says they will be seized, and what will be carried on to the city is the driver licences issued by the Taxicab Board. I think it is very well drafted by a smart lawyer, so that's the figure.

* (20:40)

      And now there is another clause which says about the compensation, and I was there at the Legislature that day when the bill was passed, so that was a very heartbreaking and–thing. On the one side, our MLAs, they were passing a resolution condemning the federal government about the small-business tax. But, on the other side–whole two hours were waited for that. But on the other side, with the stroke of the pen, around 400 and 450 small businesses were being destroyed in Manitoba. So isn't it a contradiction? It is. I will–you are setting two standards for different people. So one side, our heart is like weeping for the farmers. On the other side, let's go to whatever you want to go.

      And so far, my knowledge, the Province, by dismantling this act, is passing on a blank paper to the city, whatever you want to write, you can write. Now this is his wish. What's he's going to do? And his intentions are very clear. He wants our tech-savvy–municipal politicians, they want to bring certain kind of services which are–they call ride‑sharing. First, let's debate what is-ride sharing. Any Oxford dictionary will tell you what is a ride-sharing. Ride-sharing is simply when you take your friend to your place, or work, or somebody you share the ride and give and take money. Here, you are dealing with poor taxi business which is done through the Internet. It's like transporting people, and, in lieu of that, you are charging money. So what is that? So you are putting into–people are putting into mouths like ride-sharing, ride-sharing. This simple taxi business.

      And now you are–what you are doing is you are setting up two different rules for the same type of business. So the other business, how long it will survive? Within four, five years it will get eliminated. It's just like two flower shops. They are set up on Broadway selling the same product, and one is not paying the Hydro and the 'elecsity'. And city taxes. How he can sell the, like, same flowers at the same price? And that–also, you don't know for how long they are selling that for cheaper rides. And now they are in the laws making board. You don't know when they will come into the profit-making board what they will do. You don't know. Once, like, the competition's eliminated, you are here, you will be passing another legislation in this building regulating it. Once the destruction is done.

      So it's better to reform this system rather than create a new regime and then making the rules like in the coming time of 15 years. That's what going to happen. And another thing is, the way things are going, I think the safety standards will come down. And what will happen is, like, you see the other jurisdictions like London and all–they are not complying with anything and now the cruel things are happening in the cars. Police are, like, facing a dead end for the probes. So now, after certain times, you again will be passing like there will be camera here and there, like–and that will be done here only. But once the honeymoon is over, that's going to happen.

      And another thing is, let's talk about the background of these licences, about the history. So most of these licences, they were issued to the world war veterans so that they can have it–good life after that day come from the war. Somebody doesn't have a finger, and, like. And those, and these people, they first started driving for those people. And then they bought these licences from them for a market value. And that time, they paid for their retirement. And when–now–when now it's their turn for the retirement, everything is gone. You say bye bye. So is this justice? No. And it is–and at least you know, in this kind of setup, who's the investor. They are sitting behind you. So, when these ride sharings, or whatever these are, they will enter into Manitoba. Will you be asking who are the investors? Maybe the bin Laden family or Gaddafis or who–you don't know what's happening.

      So these are your local businesses. Like, at least they should have some kind of protection. So that's what I wanted to say–yes.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Chhokar, and now we will move on to questions from the committee.

Mr. Selinger: Mr. Chhokar, what would you like us to do? Would you like this bill withdrawn completely, or would you like amendments?

Mr. Chhokar: Safety standards shouldn't come down, and all the expenses which cabs are putting on the table to make the ride safer for the passenger and driver should stay. If you bring it down, then you–like, bring it up, like, that will ruin the whole show.

Mr. Selinger: So you want safety standards and you want all the same requirements for the licensee and for the vehicle.

      Can you talk to me again about the clause that you thought misled the public or wasn't as clear as you thought it should be? You referred to–[interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Chhokar, you can't answer until I recognize you.

      Mr. Chhokar.

Mr. Chhokar: Yes, the clause regarding denying of the compensation.

Mr. Chairperson: Seeing's no–Mr. Saran.

Mr. Saran: I think I have to dig out some questions, and question is that I tried to bring that idea that if government taxi board says, okay, either you can buy that licence for us or you can buy from the market, and, say, there's 100 more taxis are needed or people come forward to buy 100 taxis and price is $350,000 per ongoing price, and possibly government can make $35 million–and they're very hungry to get those funds. Sometimes they want to create other tax on the health services, that kind of tax.

      Don't you think it will make sense if that kind of regime is set up? Either you can buy licence from the market or you can buy licence from the taxi board. Government will make money, and it will be fair play if all the regulations are equal to everybody. What do you think about that?

Mr. Chhokar: Yes, that's a fair, good thing. Like, that way, like, government can generate the revenue without, like, destroying anything. But you should know how to do the business.

Mr. Selinger: One of the–Uber's selling points is its software, where they say that you can phone up, dial up or text up and get a prediction of how much it's going to cost before you get a ride. Can the industry that we have in Manitoba compete with that software?

Mr. Chhokar: There are certain misconceptions about the Uber model of business. One is the–like, when they say the fixed rate. There is nothing called a fixed rate. Its software meter is running behind the app. It's just like the taxicab meter. Like, suppose you are going from point A to point B, you stop, like, on the way, like, to pick your kid up, it will go on the waiting. It's the same; in the background, it's running. It's a taxi meter. It's a misconception that it's a fixed rate. It's totally a misconception.

      There are so many misconceptions about it and up to this, like, point even our city politicians they don't know. Like, when you talk to them they say, like, we are not aware of it. I think once you, like–you are going to implement all the new systems, like, one–the government officials should be aware of, like, how the things work.

* (20:50)

Mr. Saran: I'm trying to make sense, but I don't know whether I'm able to make–understand the government side. Why can't we be leaders instead of a follower? Government is talking about every city has their jurisdiction–only Manitoba we are province have jurisdiction. Why we cannot have that jurisdiction, and all the cities, village, whatever, Brandon, Thompson, all are under Manitoba taxi board, and, in that way–because Winnipeg is 68 per cent of the total population and it should be under province, it should not be under–and Toronto could be only 5 per cent, 10 per cent of the whole Ontario. So why we cannot have that regime as compared to Manitoba City, and let them do whatever they want–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Saran, your time has expired. So if you want to quickly wrap up and then we'll give Mr. Chhokar a couple seconds to answer the question. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Chhokar, could you repeat that because you might not have been on the recorder.

Mr. Chhokar: It's a good regime to regulate something because what Winnipeg is, what Manitoba is; what Manitoba is, what Winnipeg is.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Chhokar.

      We will now move onto the next presenter. Presenter No. 33, Jagmohan Singh. Jagmohan Singh will be moved to the bottom of the list since they are not present.

      Yaduinder Gill. Yaduinder Gill is not here, we will move them to the bottom of the list.

      No. 35, Charjit Gill. Charjit Gill? Mr. Gill is not here, will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      No. 38–36, Karam Brar. Brar? Brar is not here, we will move–sorry.

      Karam? Brar? Karam Brar, No. 36 presenter. Yes, thank you very much for–here. You may proceed with your presentation when you are ready, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Karam Brar (Private Citizen): So I've been in Canada for about 30 years now, and I–

Mr. Chairperson: If you could put the microphone close to your, and speak louder.

Mr. Karam Brar: Okay, so I've been in Canada for about 30 years now and I've been in the cab industry for 15 years now. I'm owner-operator for about eight years, and I bought my cab for $90,000 back in the day, about eight years ago.

      And now with this Bill 30 here, I totally think it's unfair and it has no protection for any of us over back here, in fact it has protection for the government where we can't seek any legal action. They protect their selves, they don't protect any of us in the bill. There's not even one single thing in the bill that's for us, everything is against us. All right.

      Now, and for safety issues. Okay. Safety issues, we want the camera, the shield, and we want criminal record checks done by the police which we have to get, so in this ride-sharing act, we think it should be fair where everybody has to get the same stuff. The camera, which is not a dashcam, it's a proper camera that only the police can take the footage out of. Not where I can turn it on and off whenever I please. Okay. And criminal record checks done by the Winnipeg Police Department, not by private companies on the Internet. Okay.

      And another question I have for you guys, when you guys were trying to pass this over to the City, and what–the City, it takes about $500,000 to run this Taxicab Board, so who's going to pay for that? Are they going to pass that expense on to us? That's it.

Mr. Chairperson: Are you finished with your presentation, Mr. Brar?

Mr. Isleifson: I thank you very much for coming out tonight and sharing. I know we spoke last night and you had some hesitation about speaking, so I want to thank you for coming back and taking your place at the podium and sharing with us your thoughts, because again, all of us on all sides of the table here are here to listen and I appreciate what you brought to the table.

      I do have a question for you in regards to safety, because that is a huge component of what we're hearing. I know I have gone through the bill line by line about 30 times now, and nowhere in the bill does it say the word Uber. So–it does talk about ride-sharing, and safety is a huge concern.

      So would it make a difference once–if this does pass and the City creates bylaws to make enforcement–if everything was even across the plate with every ride-sharing person, company, car, whatever there is in Manitoba–would that make a difference in how you feel about the bill?

Mr. Karam Brar: Yes, okay. So, if everything was same; same insurance, safety shield, criminal record checks done by the police, cameras which police download 'imlage'–images, not webcams where I can just turn it off whenever I want. I think that would be fair.

Mr. Maloway: What he didn't mention, though, was that you'd be–they'd be passing a bill with section 10(3), which denies any compensation whatsoever to any single cab owner.

Mr. Karam Brar: I mentioned that earlier. The government has put stuff in the bill to save themselves. Nothing for us, but to save themselves. And that was what was I was referring to.

Mr. Maloway: So then I take it that you still wouldn't be happy with the bill if they did the safety changes, but left the prohibition on the compensation. You still wouldn't be happy with it.

Mr. Karam Brar: I agree with that. Thank you.

Mr. Maloway: You mentioned earlier in your presentation that you had paid roughly $97,000 for the cab eight years ago. We've heard other people say they paid 300 to 400. We had another gentleman said he paid twos–two hundred and something, but it was only half a share. So how–you've got one good deal there.

Mr. Karam Brar: All right, I was nervous, I made a mistake. It was $90,000 for half share.

Mr. Chairperson: Any further questions from the committee? If not, we'd like to thank you, Mr. Brar, for your presentation. Thank you for coming out tonight and we will move on to the next presenter.

      Oh, yes, Mr. Brar?

Mr. Karam Brar: I asked a question about the expense, about running the Taxicab Board. Nobody answered that question. Who's–are we going to be responsible for covering that $500,000 to run the Taxicab Board?

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Brar, and we have been in consultations with the City, as well. And as the bylaws are being developed, of course, we'll be moving forward with further consultations with the stakeholders and the City of Winnipeg to ensure there's a smooth transition going forward.

Mr. Maloway: Well, we just heard the minister now talk about these consultations with the City and all sorts of stuff that you, I think, are claiming you never had with him and with the City. Do you have any confidence that what he's saying now is going to be different from what you've been experiencing in the past regarding consultations and dealings with the City?

Mr. Karam Brar: So, when looking at the bill, I'm not a lawyer, but it doesn't take rocket science to figure that out. This is a very bad bill for us. And you're saying you consulted us? But in the bill, it doesn't show any of our input in there.

Mr. Chairperson: Time for questions has expired. We want to thank you for your presentation, Mr. Brar.

      And now we will move on to presenter No. 37, Harjit Chahal. Harjit Chahal? Not being present, we will move Chahal–presenter No. 37 to the bottom of the list.

      We will move on to presenter No. 38, Jagroop Bhangoo. Jagroop Bhangoo? Jagroop Bhangoo does not seem to be present, we will move presenter No. 38 to the bottom of the list.

* (21:00)

      We will move to presenter No. 39. Inderjit Bedi. Inderjit Bedi?            Do you have any written presentation for the committee?

      Do you have any written presentation for the committee?

Mr. Inderjit Bedi (Private Citizen): Yes, I am.

Mr. Chairperson: As soon as we get this distributed, we will–you can go ahead with your presentation as soon as we just wait for one second here.

Mr. Bedi: Hello, everyone. Good evening. First time I faced towards coming on speaker with the respected members.

      I want to start with safety. Every day, we face real challenging. You can end up in an accident. You can have someone trying to rob you. You can have someone trying to assault you. Our industry has been talking about the fact that taxi driving is actually one of the most dangerous occupations in North America. But here in Winnipeg, things are different in a lot of ways. It is not that we don't face challenging with safety, but we have done a lot over these years to improve safety.

      If you get in a cab today, you will see the most obvious example being shields. You will also notice cameras, warning lights and shields. What you may not know you–know is we also have training for drivers to ensure they are aware of safety. So how safe is Winnipeg for taxis?

Mr. Vice-Chairperson in the Chair

I want to read the–I want to read what some of these reports say about safety, reports like MNP, reports like presentation from the taxi board.

      Safety–Winnipeg has the best safety equipment for taxicabs such as in cameras–in-car cameras, panic buttons, rooftop strobe lights and driver shields are mandated by the Taxicab Board. Winnipeg appears to have the most vigorous safety equipment requirement of all compared cities. Taxicab owners and drivers generally support in-car safety equipment.

      Driving is–taxicab is a risk occupation not fully made secure with the current safety provisions. Stakeholders indicate that drivers face significant safety risks associated with violent or intoxicated passengers, discrimination and face–and fare disputes. To protect the safety of passengers, the Taxicab Board requires a driver to undergo criminal record checks, mandatory training for driving safety and safe equipment handling for the passenger–for passengers as well as regular vehicle inspections.

      Driving a taxicab is an important public transportation service and one of the most dangerous occupations in North America. A taxicab driver 60–is 60 times more likely to be murdered on the job but the average worker. In Canada, they're having 150 taxicab drivers killed since 1970. In Manitoba, there have been 10 taxicab drivers killed while on duty since 1945.

      Taxicab drivers are at 'riks' in terms of robbery, hijacking of the taxi, abusive and threatening behaviour, physical assault, traffic disputes and accidents, fare disputes and a combination of the above. After the murder of Pritam Deol, the Taxicab Safety Issues Report was released in October 2001. It made 18 recommendations. One of the key recommendations was the development of a taxicab driver safety program to enhance driving–enhance drivers' skills to recognize and assess risk and how to defuse potentially hostile situations.

      The effectiveness of cameras and shields is clear. The Winnipeg Police Service indicated that for the whole calendar year 2002, there were 20 fewer reported taxicab robberies than in the previous year. This represents a reduction of 71 per cent in serious taxicab crime since the cab cameras and shields were introduced.    

      When 2003 is compared to 2001, the year before cameras and shields were introduced, taxicab robberies and other violent taxicab crimes have been reduced by 79 per cent. There was an increase of 10.5 per cent in the crime rate overall in the city of Winnipeg. Over the same period the arrest rate–the crimes against taxi drivers was 35 per cent prior to the introduction of cameras and the rate increased to 50 per cent in 2002 and 66 per cent in 2003.

      In Winnipeg, the requirement for all standard and accessible taxis has been in effect since July 1st, 2002, to have an operational in-cab camera, and the requirement to have a safety shield installed has been in effect since January 8, 2003. The safety incentive taken in Winnipeg include other in the years such as mandatory first-aid kits, improved effective July 1, 2002–improved taxicab driver training and the requirement that any taxi, the GPS must have the system working at all times.

      Winnipeg Police Service data indicates that since the introduction of taxicab safety measures in 2002, robberies of taxicabs were reduced by 71 per cent. The Winnipeg taxicab industry indicated that it is very pleased with the decrease in all crimes–fare jumpers, assaults, robbery involving taxicabs since the introduction of the safety measures. Drivers find their customers while in the cab will settle down, knowing that a camera is taking their picture. There are very few instances of hostile incidents in taxicab. Crimes that do happen in taxicabs are solved by police using the district camera, a means to identify and find the suspect.

      In many cases, the perpetrators, they admit to the crime, enabling a swift resolution to an incident.

      Why did I read all of this into the record? Because their theory puts all of this at risk. If you read the MNP report, they are already talking about not requiring shields and cameras for our drivers. You cannot just wipe out of our licence, not do anything in terms of safety. What you should be doing is requiring the best safety standard.

      What is the best safety standard is what we have in Winnipeg right now. You should be requiring that any licensing system ensure that it makes no difference whether you are driving for a taxi or Uber or anything like that. You should have the kind of protection that's in place now. If we don't have that kind of protection, we will be going back to the days when people were not only assaulted but murdered as well.

      I ask you to make safety the priority. Please amend this bill to put safety first. Support our industry for safety, fairness, and community.

      Thank you very much.

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Bedi.

Mr. Maloway: I'd like to ask the presenter, you said that you wanted to amend the bill to improve the safety features, but did you deal with the issue of the compensation because at the end of the day you can amend this thing as much as you want, but it's still a bad, bad bill if it's got that compensation prohibition in it. [interjection]

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Mr. Bedi, go ahead, sir.

Mr. Bedi: Sorry. Yes, compensation is absolutely one of the issues, too. It is our right you say we have compensation because we lose too much money in this, but when the bill is considered, we lose too much money after that.

* (21:10)

Mr. Maloway: How long have you been in the taxi business, and what did you pay for your licence at the time–and.

Mr. Bedi: Two thousand one, I came here and start 2002 taxi business–15 years, I in this field. And I do my best for the community, not just only the–my business, with honesty everything. So–I forget, yes, well–

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Thank you.

      Any further questions?

Mr. Selinger: Thank you for your presentation.

      Could you tell me, sir, how many years you've been in the–in business? [interjection]

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Mr. Bedi, go ahead.

Mr. Bedi: Sorry. Sorry. First time, that's why.

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Not a problem.

Mr. Bedi: Yes, 15 years.

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Yes, go ahead.

An Honourable Member: Yes, could you tell me what kind of safety training you were required to take which has helped make your business safer for you?

Mr. Bedi: Two thousand one, when I came here and–I came here and many–nominee program, and that year's Pritam Deol murdered, right. So where–after that, shield and camera is coming and I–we feel–personally, I feel–everyone, not personally, everyone feels more safe after the camera and shield. Personally, I go out the experience a lot of time. I did not get only one or two chances–get like hard time. Otherwise, when I–the history, like, before 2001, before camera or shield, a lot of bad happen in the carrier–taxi industry.

Mr. Selinger: In your presentation, you indicated there is also training for drivers. Can you tell me a little bit about the training drivers get?

Mr. Bedi: First, I got the training English test, then seven days, I class–taxicab class started. Then, also, I accessible classes, which one new one classes started this one. Every two years, this one–the training we did.

Mr. Selinger: Can you tell me a little bit more about what you learned in those classes?

Mr. Bedi: Oh, a lot of things. The customer service, how to handle the disabled person, how the–how to give the good–the best for the civilian. Yes, I learned those lot of things from the–thank you.

Mr. Vice-Chairperson: Any further questions? If not, Mr. Bedi, thank you very much for your presentation.

      Next we'll call on Jadeep Uppal, No. 40. Okay, seeing none, we'll move him to the bottom of the list.

      We'll go to No. 41, Barinder Singh. We'll move it to the bottom of the list.

      Number 42, Jagbdeep Kainph. Seeing no, we'll move that Mr. Kainph to the bottom.

      Number 43 is a Kulwinder Sandhu. Kulwinder Sandhu, No. 43?

      Seeing none, we'll move to No. 44, Amitoj Gill. Seeing none, we'll move Mr. Gill to the bottom of the list.

      Number 45, Manpreet Toor. No? We'll move Mr. Toor to the bottom.

      Number 46 is Navtej Brar. Navtej Brar, No. 46?

      No, we'll go to No. 47, Sam Sidhu.

      Welcome to the podium, and, if you have any written material for distribution–if not, please proceed when you're ready.

Mr. Sam Sidhu (Private Citizen): Good evening, everyone. My name is Sam Sidhu.

      I came to Winnipeg in 1984, and I started in cab in 1985. In 1988, I was stabbed here at Broadway and Osborne here. And then my family asked me not to drive cab anymore.

Mr. Chairperson in the Chair

      I went to Red River College, then I got a job, but, unfortunately, in 1994, I got hurt; I lost my deltoid shoulders–muscles. It was very damaged, and I have no choice to come back to drive taxi because I cannot get any job. At that time I put all my money from my house to buy a cab.

      And so, basically, this bill is not fair for us. It's putting a lot of pressure on the family, and, hopefully, you'll reconsider that. And one thing I'll also share that back in 1984, and if you guys remember, the bars used to close that time was 10   o'clock, 10   p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and we used to park the cab and go home around 11:30. If somebody needed a cab after 11:30, there was no cabs to find. Sometimes also calls came, but there was no cabs to serve because, for the drivers only make money when they have a fare, but there was no business that time; people used to park the cabs and go home. And I think the City must–Province make sure that Winnipeggers get service 24 hours, seven days a week because some people, they need service that time. And I guess, that's about it, if you have any questions–just put yourself in our shoes and think how we feel. And I'm willing to take answers after this–questions.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sidhu.

      Questions?

Mr. Maloway: I want to thank you for your presentation, and I–one of the previous presenters had made a suggestion that the bin Laden family was part owner of Uber, and, you know, just so people know how big Uber is or how much it's worth, they, in fact, did get a $3.5-billion investment from Saudi Arabia investors, and this particular company has investors like Goldman Sachs, Google Ventures and other private equity companies. So, you know, a lot of people out there in the public, across the river here, think, you know, Uber is really trendy, and they don't really understand or know the money and who's behind this company and how bad it's acted across the world in terms of not following local laws.

      Uber's biggest financial backer is TPG Capital, was co-founded by David Bonderman, one of the wealthiest people on the planet. He's also on the board of directors of Uber, and I also thought, too, that Uber's practices have been so bad worldwide, that they just replaced their operating officer, if I'm not mistaken, in the last few months.

      So I think there's a lot of people out there that don't really know what Uber is. They're excited by the idea of Uber, and they're all–they're positively thinking about it, but they don't recognize what it is and what it's going to do to the industry here. And, clearly, the government is as delusional as those other people are because they think that they can move–eliminate the taxi board, save a half a million a year and shovel off the problem to the City. So the City's going to do all the deregulation, right, and put you–put all the taxi drivers, basically, eliminate all your investment, your equity in there. And I know the people aside–you've got three or four Cabinet ministers right here at the table, and some of them have business backgrounds, and they understand this more than any other MLAs in the building, you know. And so I know it's a hard one for them, and I'm really hoping that they're going to do something to help you out and pull this bill.

Mr. Sam Sidhu: I–that's why I say, hopefully, you know, guys consider yourself in our shoes, how we feel, especially running another business. We are regulated, and Uber is not regulated. So it's not fair for–

Mr. Chairperson: The honourable Mr. Wharton.

* (21:20)

Mr. Wharton: Mr. Sidhu, I thank you, as well, for your presentation: short and very informative. But I really appreciated it.

      And I must admit, too, I appreciate the history lesson from the member from Elmwood, as well, giving us a little history on–background of a well-known terrorist.

      Bottom line is, I guess we're talking about, today, Bill 30. Bill 30 is about moving the current regime of the taxicab industry to the City of Winnipeg. Essentially, starting a new bylaw to ensure, again, that your interests are heard as well. So, again, this is not about Uber. This bill is about–Bill 30 is about simply transferring the authority from one regime to another.

      And, again, there has been–contrary to the members opposite–and the member of the NDP, they'll tell you that there has been no consultation. I can tell you, Mr. Sidhu, that there's been a lot of conversations and consultations throughout the industry, with stakeholders from Unicity and Duffy's. They met with my colleague, Minister Clarke, in her office and then, again, afterwards, have other consultations as they’ve moved forward. They've also had over 10,000 responses to the ride-sharing industry and the process of Bill 30 moving forward. So there has been a lot of consultation.

      I really appreciate the time you took today to come out and share your concerns. The committee appreciates it, and I thank you very much for your time.

Mr. Sam Sidhu: Yes. Regarding your consultation you guys have, whatever consult you took, there was not a single input in with Bill 30. And same thing–the mayor is doing the same thing. He's to the–send the letters to all the taxi–the limo companies, but not a single to taxi companies. He haven't invited taxi companies yet, but he invite all the limos there. The letters only went to limo drivers; he never call the taxi drivers. It's happening; same thing.

      There's a–just for the name, there's a 'consulation', but input? There's nothing. I think the consultation just for PR only, not in real.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sidhu. Our time has expired.

      We will now move on to the next presenter.

      And I could remind members, this is a question period. So, if you could keep your questions down to a little less than three minutes, it would be greatly appreciated. Like, it's not a debate. It's not a history lesson. It's a question period. So, in order for everybody to get, you know, access to questions, please be considerate of other members. Thank you.

      We will now move to–we have a request from No. 149, Asmeen Gill, a student, who would like to speak early because she must go to school in the morning. Is it agreed by the committee? [Agreed]

      We will–it is agreed that we will now hear speaker No. 149, Asmeen Gill. [interjection]

Ms. Gill, I will recognize you as soon as–you may start speaking now, but I must recognize you for the recorder to start. So, Ms. Gill, please proceed.

Ms. Asmeen Gill (Private Citizen): Hi. Good evening. My name is Asmeen Gill, and this is my sister Sohbat, and this is my brother Gurshan Gill.

      We are here tonight to talk about father, Kalabir Singh Gill's [phonetic] taxi business as an owner of a Unicity taxi.

      He came to Canada in 1995 to start a better life for him and his family. He started as a driver for someone else a few years earlier, then he became an owner. He worked very hard for over 20 years. As his business become successful, he was a very proud taxi owner. He was able–financially able to support his family–the three of us, our mom and his parents–in this country–he.

      Unfortunately, my father died in a very young age of 42, in July 2010, leaving behind my mother, supporting the three of us. She has been a very brave mother that continued his business. In our culture, having and owning a business like this is very difficult, especially for a lady. Men do this. It's a job for–mostly, taxi is run by men. Owning a business like this is run by men. Our mom ran his–is running his business. We wanted to keep it, because he put all his efforts, day and night, all his hard work in this. All our family relies on this income.

      If Bill 30 is approved and Uber comes, we are worried. I'm worried for their future. They're young, he's eight, she's 12. They are still in school. They have university, they have college to go to. We have drivers that drive it. If Uber comes, what's going to happen? Our drivers are going to. What are we going to have? We're going to have nothing. We haven't even paid off the amount–the taxi. We don't–what are we going to do?

      I work two jobs. I go to college to support the family. I'm 19 years old, and I'm doing my best to support the family. And if Uber comes or if Bill 30 is passed, what about these kids? What if this happens and unfortunately, they're not able to go to university? Their dreams, their dream jobs, they're–what–they're all going to go. Their–all his hard work–everything–is all going to go. It's all going to go in–down the drain. We don't want that. We don't want all his hard work in the drain.

      We might lose what we have, what we made, it could be all gone. This just won't affect our family; hundreds of families. All these people behind us, they have worked all their lives; their years, all their effort, it will go down the drain.

      You guys sitting all here, if anything happens to your families, your anything, your business, what will you–you guys would be stuck–all these taxi owners, they have families; they have kids that rely on them. They have kids that go to university that have a future. They plan futures. They have plans ahead. And all–they rely on their fathers like we did at a time that–yes, with our dad, we'll go here, we'll plan this, we're going to go to university. We're going to show this. We're going to stand in front. We're going to prove this that, yes, I'm his daughter. I'm Kabir's [phonetic] daughter, and I'm standing here today just for him, doing this for him.

      I'm the girl that in high school couldn't stand in front of five kids, couldn't present a presentation and was the one who was so nervous, would cry, couldn't present in front of five kids; I would say my name wrong. And I'm standing here in front, never thought I would be doing this, but I'm doing this all because of him, for his business, for his taxi, for all this, for all these fathers out here, all my uncles out here, all for them.

      I hope you understand our future and many of others rely on this taxi. If you pass this bill, if Uber comes or if any, not just Uber, if anything else comes, their business, it will all go down the drain. All our drivers, they will all be gone. There won't be the safety. It's not just about the work and the safety, it's also–if Uber or any other company or anything comes, safety may leave here.

      You know who it is, who's the safety and everything. The officer, you have the criminal checks, you know who the drivers are, you know everything about the person who's driving. The owners, you know the owners. There, you don't know who's going to be coming, what's happening.

      All I just want to say is just think about all those families out there that all have futures, and all they have is just those taxis and they're their businesses. And that's what they got as–that's just it. That's–they haven't even paid their–them off, and they have worked all their lives. They came to Canada, and that's what they have.

      I'm sure if you had a family business and was at risk and you were stressed, upset, you would be at the same spot where I'm standing and talking and requesting how I'm requesting you all–please think about this. Think about all these people, not just about us, all of the families and hundreds of people. And we're requesting–please don't.

      Thank you–think that's all I've got to say.

* (21:30)

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your difficult presentation, Ms. Gill.

Mr. Wharton: Ms. Gill, thank you so much for sharing your story. And I know I–speaking on behalf of the committee, we are very sorry about your loss of your father as well. Your father and your mother have done just an outstanding job raising three beautiful, well-spoken, and very strong, brave, young children. And I thank them for that.

      I also thank you for bringing your concerns today to this committee. And you have my word that your concerns are going to be heard. And, certainly, our thoughts and prayers are with your family–and, of course, your mother, who I'm sure couldn't join us tonight, but, if she did, I'd like to congratulate her on her efforts, as well, for raising three beautiful kids.

      And thank you for your time.

Mrs. Cox: I would also like to thank you so much for being here this evening. I know it's very difficult for you, and my heart really goes out to you and your family. And I'm so sorry to hear about your dad.

      I know that it's difficult for you to be here, but I'm so proud of your strength and being here, presenting to all of us this evening. And I really appreciate your effort and your strength and just wish you all the best. And thank you again. And God bless you.

Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Asmeen, to you and your brother and your sister and your friend who's helping you out tonight. And sorry about the loss of your father. But I also want to commend your mother for taking over the business and keeping it going all these years since 2010. You're very brave.

      I think you've made a big impression on the committee tonight, and I hope it makes a difference. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Ms. Gill.

      We will now move on to presenter No. 48, Gursewak Singh. Gursewak Singh? Number 48? We will–Mr. Singh? Not here–we will move Mr. Singh to the bottom of the list and move on to the next presenter.

      Presenter No. 49, Jatar Kalar. Jatar Kalar? Presenter No. 49?

      I see that presenter No. 49 is not here. We will move presenter No. 49 to the bottom of the list, and we will move up to presenter No. 50, Sukhwinder Sharma. Sukhwinder Sharma?

      Mr. Sharma, do you have a written presentation for the committee?

Mr. Sukhwinder Sharma (Private Citizen): No.

Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation as soon as you are ready.

Mr. Sharma: I have lot to say.

      Thank you, Mr. Chair, and honourable ministers, but this young lady had just–I have so many things to say, but my heart goes to these young girls and the family.

      Like, she was saying something about her father passed away, and her mother took care of the business. Now, there'll be two drivers probably working, and that's how they are–probably getting their end of the money to survive.

      I don't have to say anything about the Uber, since this is talking about the ride-sharing, or if there is Uber. In here, I seen somebody talk about even their 'representive' was here yesterday, and it's kind of keeping us in the dark.

      So back to this, young lady was saying about what's going to happen if the Uber comes in and all the drivers going to be gone, and who's going to be driving? She's just a eight year old, and she got two jobs. It's tough. I told her I have a problem, I have young kids too, mine's all grown up, they all going to university, but I do support them too. Been here since 1988, and business was good, just like the other driver was saying. You just go make your run and just go and park your car and start. Go home and spend time with your family. Things are changing.

      For all these years I see the lots of different in the taxi industry. I consider it as a big pie, and every time some big event comes and we're cheering, oh, we're going to lots of business and all that, and then we see they have their own rides arranged by some of the big businesses, whether they are dealers or where they are sitting in an exact community or something. They come in with their rides and all that, and they are giving you ride and we're sitting here and okay there's a Pan Am game here, and we're going to get lots of business and lots of people. We even had that Spanish course to investor courses to just, and I have only one trip at that time in 1999 at the Pan Am Games.

      And times go by and some other organizations comes in, whether they come in with taking own slice of pie away from the taxis, whether they come in as a shopping centre, they have their own vans to serve their customers; or whether it's a hotel that want to have their customers to be served and they come in with the vans. DD, some, one of them designated driver something that I'm not sure, they come in and take away the piece of pie from us, from this business.

      All these, whether, like, they are doing for their business, I have no problem with that, but we'll still survive, we just keeping maintain our service and serving all kinds of people, whether they are in Tuxedo–or I'm not saying like, all kinds of customers whether they are now West Kildonan, North Kildonan, or anywhere, we'll just go everywhere and serving all these people equally, everybody.

      Whoever comes into my cab, he become family to me. And majority of drivers think that way, whether it is a senior, they become either grandparents or my own parents. Young lady, we have a trust here, I have two girls, I don't want to send my two girls to, if there's some sort of ride-sharing, if there's going to be in the future I'd rather than send them, first of all, there's a daddy's taxi there.

      I'm working hard and they all going to university, and I don't know what's going to happen next, after this bill passes, it's totally–honourable minister was saying, what are you feeling about this business. I'm telling you what I'm feeling about this business. I don't know.

      Section 10 or, of this bill is saying that I have, what I was explanation is already given, I don't have to go through this. But it's keeping me in the dark. Or keeping all these people in the dark. How I'm feeling? Feeling, putting all these drivers into one wooden box, hammered them on top of them, close their eyes and throw them in the river behind this Legislative. From one bind to another bind and took us out from the Alexander Docks and then, rather than a surprise come from the box, and the people on top of you have a surprise for you, and you don't know what your future is going to be. This is what I'm feeling right now.

* (21:40)

      I'm lucky. I have my kids are–either they are doing a part-time job and supporting themselves and–but the majority of the time, it's not enough. I help them out. They're all over 18, and I just keep them in my house until they finish their education. I have lucky to have a family like this, and I'm still thinking about these three young kids.

      I don't know if I can oppose this, the Bill 30 or if I'm allowed to do that, but I'm still want to–the current government to reconsider this. A lot of lives are depending on this. I have four bosses to look after me when I'm doing business out there, whether it's a provincial, city–because I get the licence from them to do the business. They're–I consider them as my boss–or the Taxicab Board or MPI. See, that's another one. They all set up rules and regulations for us, and we follow that.

      And time to time, if there's any changes, if there's any needs, we put some extra taxis. Yes, sure enough, sometimes in a busy time, the taxis get behind with their calls. Why is that? I give you that example, because of that–since I've been driving, the traffic is triple of since. On–I was–well, I don't know if it's–in just the last year alone, 60,000 cars got on the road, and they have to be going some–they're going to be going into the main arteries, and all the traffic's going to back up.

      And some of the–like, they're coming out from the Sherbrook Street, from that River Heights, and there was–used to be a three-lane or four-lane and now 'descreased' to three lanes because the cyclists want their way too. I have no problem with, but at least cycles–it's used to be changed that. Like, I'm not saying that, like, more roads are, like–I'm sorry. I have so many things in mind–okay, in rush hour, say, picture yourself out, you're in a car and you going towards Portage and Main.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Sharma?

Mr. Sharma: Yes?

Mr. Chairperson: If you could wrap it up, because we're over the 10-minute mark already for the presentation, so if you could just mark–wrap it up.

Mr. Sharma: The traffic is so much–just two minutes–traffic is so built up, like–

Mr. Chairperson: Two minutes–we haven't got two minutes–if–10, 15 seconds, yes, but not two minutes.

Mr. Sharma: Yes, I guess just one more thing. Like I said, I have four bosses to do the business, and the other party, if they're going to be incoming in the future and they were just going to be, download the app and they are in business. Please reconsider this Bill 30, and this is my request from all of us, and especially for this young–I don't even know them. Like, if I'm–

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sharma.

      We will now proceed with questions from the committee. Does any of the committee members have–the–Mr. Isleifson.

Mr. Isleifson: Just a really quick question for you: Could you repeat–I understand you said you had four bosses. You consider them four bosses. Can you repeat who those four are for me?

Mr. Sharma: The four bosses are the provincial government–I got the licence from them to do the business; and the City of Winnipeg–I got the licence to do the business; Taxicab Board–I got the licence to do the business; and MPIC and also do the–get the licence to do the businesses. And not mentioning the Duffy's taxicab or Unicity Taxi. They're also considered as my boss too.

Ms. Lamoureux: My question is just to give you an opportunity to finish your thought from your presentation.

Mr. Sharma: I have not much to say just regarding this, like, since I already can say that I have four bosses to do the business, and the other person is just going to be download the app from the phone and he's in the position of doing the same kind of job.

Mr. Isleifson: So just a really quick question for you, then, in regards to the four bosses that you've outlined: Would it be easier if you had two bosses, or one boss, in your consideration, rather than four?

Mr. Sharma: The bosses, I don't care if it's four or five or one or two bosses, but it has to be fair game to everybody. If they're doing the same kind of job, it's supposed to be safety first. Like I said, when the customer comes into my car, they become a family. Whether they're young–they're my young daughter or somebody else with that age or–I just want a fair game. Like, it has to be those safeties, cameras and shields be present to everybody who doing the same kind of business.

Mr. Maloway: You know, it's long held that if the government wants to expropriate, if a jurisdiction wants to, you know, build a road through your front yard, they expropriate the piece of your property that they need to build the road. Like, what is so hard to understand about that?

      And so to have the government write a bill and specifically put in here–obviously, they knew in advance that you were going to sue for losses. So they put this in here deliberately. They can't say they didn't know. And you're talking about a number of business people here at the table who are also Cabinet ministers.

      And, you know, I don't–you know, obviously, they're afraid of the boss, because I know what I would be doing if my boss was–former boss was sitting right beside me here when he was premier. I'd be on his doorstep, you know, banging on his door, say we can't do this. You know? And–[interjection]

      Well, I don't care whether you say it's a bad example or not, the point is you're the government, you're responsible for this mess, and you should pull the bill and solve the problem before you try to ram this through and hurt these people any more than you are already.

Mr. Sharma: Absolutely, I'm–agree.

      The way the system was going, I don't know why they need to push us to the City or something. Is–already everything's going well. That's all I have to say. Why? What's the reason behind it? Why are–this government is so afraid to–dealing with industry than pushing us to worse? I don't have any right answer for this.

      If any of honourable minister have this answer, please can you tell us what's the reason behind it?

Mr. Curry: Thank you very much, and I want to touch back on your point about the different bosses.

      As my friend from Elmwood, Mr. Maloway, has claimed that he doesn't really know a lot about this, could you explain–especially to him–the difference between the licensing between, say, the Province or the City, because that is a different process. So, if you could just explain to him–and all of us, really, but–for those of us who are kind of aware. But just for him–I know he might not be aware of it. So if you could explain.

Mr. Sharma: I have no comments.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sharma. Time has expired on question period so we will move on to the next presenter. Thank you for your presentation.

      Presenter No. 51, Surjit Bawa. Surjit Bawa? Mr. Bawa is not here, he will be moved to the bottom of the list.

* (21:50)

      We will move on to presenter No. 52, Baljit Chana. Baljit Chana.

      Do you have any written materials for the committee, Mr. Chana?

Mr. Baljit Chana (Private Citizen): No, Sir.

Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready. Thank you.

Mr. Chana: Thank you, honourable minister, in letting me to present here and giving my thoughts about this Bill 30.

      I came in Canada, in 1991, and that was a recession time during that time, and it was really hard to find a job. And I took that–these taxi board course to get a taxi board licence and start driving my–like, a taxi for someone.

      After driving for someone for a couple of years, I bought my own taxi, and then I became a part of the taxi industry as an owner-operator.

      And I have two beautiful children, my daughter and my son. Both, they go to–in the university. And that was my passion since they born. I wanted them to be–get a good education, and there were very brilliant in high school. And my daughter got gold honour when she was in grade 12, and I want her to be, like, achieve really good higher education in university.

      Both of my kids, they are in University of Manitoba now, and I've been keep working, like, day and night, seven days a week. And I bought my house, and I sent my kids in the private school to get good education, and, like, a couple of years ago, 2013–2015, I bought another share of the taxi, because I thought that that would be a better investment, and I was supporting my kids and supporting my family, and my kids might go to a different country to get a better education.

      In 2015, when I bought another share, I paid $500,000–[interjection]–total, yes, $500,000, and I refinanced my other taxi. I got finance on the new share, and I got, like, private loan, because I never had any idea about passing the Bill 30 or dissolving the taxi board. Or I'd never–I knew about this kind of idea, like, what the heck the Uber is or Lyft is.

      And so since that a rumour about the Uber and–oh, sometimes when I'm thinking about the Uber and I'm thinking, like, the–I have two taxis. I can't have two taxis myself, and if Uber coming, I don't know who's going to drive for me, and I don't know who's going to pay these–the loan I got–private loan. I got some loan on my house and these cabs.

      And now, sometimes I'm afraid to wake up in the middle of the night, because of what I'm going to say to my kids, that have the–oh, I want to go to study in the US. Dad, you were saying that: I will help you. So I don't know how I'm going to help her when she goes to school over there.

      So, if Uber–this bill is going to pass is going to ruin our whole industry. It's going to ruin our family life. I don't know. I would be out from, like, my house and moving in–declaring bankruptcy. I don't know what we're going to do.

      So same like a few other people brought that over here, that our government–so I don't know why–what's the benefit to bring in the Uber. Is the benefit for the government, or it's a benefit for local people? Or who's benefiting to pass this bill to bring the Uber or Lyft over here in Manitoba or in Winnipeg?

      And all these, our traditional taxi companies, Duffy's and Unicity, we have a physical operating office in Manitoba–in Winnipeg, and we have some people even sitting over there, employees. How many employees they working? Well, they have a job as dispatcher, as supervisor, as it–like, a call taker. And, well, once that–our all traditional industries melt down are no–are we going to afford to keep them in the office and they going to work over there?

      And I request all honourable ministers, Cabinet ministers, pull this bill back and dissolve this bill, and that's my request.

      And another thing I want to bring on–like, well, in previous government–I think it's four years ago or five years ago, there was a survey done by the government about how many taxis we needed and–Winnipeg–like, do we have enough taxis? Everybody aware of that. So they–when the result came, they said we don't–according to our population we do not need more taxis.

      And, well, we had a survey last year and, like, after five years, this survey, I don't know how it had been done. We need 150 new cabs, and we need a share–a ride-sharing company to Winnipeg. Are we, like, increased our business, then, these five years at high level, or we have a more population within these five years between previous survey and this survey? And these honourable people, MLAs from previous government over here, too, who have done these surveys there.

      And I don't know if is a previous survey, it was relevant or this survey is relevant, which is like day-and-night difference between these two surveys.

      So thank you very much.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Chana.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Chana, for that very educational presentation. We certainly have learned a lot from your presentation tonight. And furthermore, I just wanted to touch base on the survey that you had commented on that was done about five years ago by the former government. And your–the results of that survey you had mentioned, I believe–and I don't want to assert my answer for you, but did you say that the survey was shown that there was not a need for additional cabs in the city of Winnipeg?

Mr. Chana: Yes, so that–the survey has done, and that one, and that survey they–I don't remember which company had done that, probably Mr. Selinger, he would know that one because they were in the government at that time. But during that survey, they said, according to our business in Winnipeg, according to our population we have enough taxi plates here. We don't need more taxis.

      And plus, as the previous presenter, he explained about that, every year we have the extra accessible van and every year we, like, now since last year, we have it not only for three months and now four or five months these seasonal taxis we putting on the road every year. And never mind about these accessible vans and all these handivans. So is–uncountable handivans, we have handivans even handicars. And all these people transporting and these handicars they are part of the taxi business too.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you again, Mr. Chana, for that. So this survey was done around 2013? Is that correct?

Mr. Chana: Yes, I think, like, it's four or five years ago.

Mr. Saran: Okay, I still think about coming later. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

* (22:00)

      Why–what the industry thinking about that? Why is this government is torturing the people economically and emotionally? Is there a agenda by this government? Otherwise, it is very simple. They can keep it the way it is or they can develop to the Manitoba Taxi Board. Why they are doing this? Is there any feeling in the community why they are doing this?

Mr. Chana: That's really hard to understand why it's had men–like happening last couple of years since the new government here. But, like, that was a really good formula, as we were mentioning earlier at–like, they were thinking that there's a lot of these expenses which the provincial government have to pay to run the taxi board. They should put–like, we having a $100 or $200 per shared fee when we renewing the business licence every year. They could increase $200 to $500 and plus have that survey or have they thinking we need a more licence. They put a price for the licence. They can okay it. So anybody, like Duffy's, Unicity, or even anybody else want to apply the new licence plate, we setting up $250,000 or $300,000, and they can–that way they can make–generate revenue for the running the taxi board and plus they can generate the revenue for the provincial government.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you again, Mr. Chana, for that. So just to kind of map out a road map here for the clarity for the committee: 2013 a survey was commissioned by the former government which said at that time, according to your words, that there wasn't any need for additional cabs on the road. So I guess my concern is in 2015, the former government, the former NDP government, commissioned a report by Meyers Norris Penny to essentially look into the entire industry, the ride-share industry, to confirm whether it needed to be upgraded. So I just wanted to make sure we had that road map clear for the committee tonight, Mr. Chana. And, again, thank you for educating us on that, the history of where we are today on Bill 30.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Chana, but we are out of time for question period. We're well over our allotted time.

      Kuljit Gill? Would Kuljit Gill be in?

      Thank you, Mr. Gill. Do you have any written presentation?

Mr. Kuljit Gill (Private Citizen): Yes, I do.

Mr. Chairperson: We will distribute that to the committee, and when you are ready for your presentation, you may proceed.

Mr. Kuljit Gill: First of all, I like to thank for the time–

Mr. Chairperson: If you could just hang on–

Mr. Kuljit Gill: Sure, sure.

Mr. Chairperson: The committee would like to have the report in their hands before you present it. Thank you for that.

      Okay, Mr. Gill, you now may proceed.

Mr. Kuljit Gill: Thank you. I like to thank again to all of you for taking the time to consider.

      My name is Kuljit Gill. I'm a father of two. Came to Canada in '94. I was 15 years old when I came. So, in 1999, I started driving a cab when I was a student, part-time. Slowly, it became a full-time job to me. So, in 2005, on the trust of the government of Manitoba I invested into a taxicab. Why I invested? Because I had a faith on the Province of Manitoba, on the government of Manitoba that my investment is safe and secure.

      So over the years I have supported a lot of families. I sponsored and supported my brother, my in-laws, my friends, my cousins. They are also in the taxi industry. So, as Kulveer's [phonetic] daughters came earlier and their son–I knew Kulveer [phonetic] when I was a child, and I seen Kulveer [phonetic], how he was working. He was working with us pretty hard, and we have a lot of other families that are struggling like this. I know there was one family, Jepta [phonetic], and also I had a uncle who passed away two, three years ago and his wife is totally stressed. She can't even hear properly that stressed out, and she can't even work. And, when we told her the story, she was shocked. What's going to happen?

      Their daily income is taxicab and they had a full faith on government of Manitoba that it's pretty smooth and secure. Now, as the government of Manitoba is washing their hands and passing us to the City of Winnipeg, it's like going to a whole new world for us. We don't know which kind of regulations we're going to be facing. We don't know what regulation or what safety measures we're going to be facing. It's like a totally a new home to us, and we don't even know where we're going, where we lived. Thirty-some of the drivers lived under, I recall–I will use the word lived, that was a family to us sending us–leaving us in the middle of nowhere whether the government of Manitoba give us guarantee or government of Manitoba has full right to put conditions when they pass us to City of Winnipeg.

      So, if they like to pass us to the City of Winnipeg, they should show us a clear picture what we're going to be facing.

      I read the bill, and I was not clear on the bill. Still I'm not. So I have a question to the caucus. Section 10(1), it says–it talks about two licences: taxicab business licence and a licence. Even now under The Taxicab Act we have two licences, a driver's licence and a business licence. In the bill, it shows both are going to be cancelled as–I forgot the name of the gentleman–he was saying it's a licence; it's just the one licence it's being cancelled and it's being reissued.

      Which one is being reissued, a business licence or a driving licence?

      So we'll discuss at the end.

      Another thing is buying a taxi or investing into a taxi in Winnipeg for me is not a business. For me, it's a job. I'm buying a job. I'm securing a job. If I'm buying a full taxi for me, it is I'm securing my job and I'm creating two more jobs: night driver, weekend driver. Which we did. Some of the–we all know we have–because it's hard to find jobs here. It's not easy to find jobs. There are a lot of students that are driving taxicabs to make a living in Winnipeg, Manitoba, because it's not easy to find a job.

* (22:10)

      So, if we invested into a taxicab it is–it's–not a business it's–I'm repeating that again–it's a–it is a job security for us. We feel very comfortable under government of Manitoba. Dealing with the city–I was–I've been a volunteer for Unicity Taxi for eight, nine years, back and forth. I have dealt with the City. Dealing with the City is, I would say, horrible. I'll give you one example. Bill–25-year plan came up. If City really worried about us, we should be somewhere there. In–I can't remember accurate year, we have written to Brian Bowman–sorry, the Mayor of the city of Winnipeg, to put us somewhere in year 20–25-year plan. We were never heard–never–until now.

      I was the first one, and my work–board of directors that I was–we were the first one to apply for diamond lanes, fire hydrant and, as probably everyone heard in the news in the past several years, for parking lots on the bars–where we had no stop. I was the one who was fighting for parking lot. So they gave us parking lots, and it took us three years to just get a 15-minute stop zone, even the driver is in the vehicle. So we didn't request a sole parking lot where the cabs can park.

      So, if the City really cared about us–I don't think so they really cared. So we feel much safer under government of Manitoba if–if–not now when–since Bill 30 came up, we're really scared. We had full faith. That's why we invested that amount of money into the taxi business–we had full faith–that's.

      As we're talking about Uber–Uber is another taxi company with different decals or different logo or different name on it. Is Uber–if it came in Winnipeg, it's going to kill full-time jobs. Taxicab is a full-time job to me, to my drivers. My–there are a lot of drivers that drive weekends. They drive weekends, and they work for when the weekend's going to be there, because they are going to school, whether they're doing another part-time job or taking some sort of courses. They are waiting for a weekend, because they work two days a week. That's only the busy days where we can make money: Fridays and Saturdays.

      If–if–someone thinks there's so much business in the city, I totally disagree with this. Dr. Mundy's report–he recommended, as previous a guy was discussing, Dr. Mundy's recommendations were Winnipeg is a seasonal city. And it is a seasonal city; I totally believe into it. So, when is a season? Season is when it starts snowing, when the weather gets bad. Winnipeg is a seasonal city. But he said one other thing in that report. He saw a best service and a best time-consuming service, like, that–would service the customers really fast than any other cities. Winnipeg was the fastest cab service anywhere else. So, if you have a chance, please read it over.

      Will Uber serve those customers that are–there are thousands of customers. They are new immigrants. They cannot afford rides for even cabs. They call cabs. Why they call cabs? To–where there's bus services, to the bus stop. Is Uber going to take them there? I don't think so. For a four-dollar, three-dollar ride? No.

      And, if you're thinking Winnipeg has that much business, I totally disagree with it again.

      Does anyone know, in this caucus, what taxi industry is paying to the airport–Winnipeg international airport to–for a business? Does anyone here know this? Two dollars per a trip. Two dollars per a trip. Why–do we have to pay that kind of money if we had this kind of business? No.

      Unicity has–we–Unicity and Duffy's fight for that contract. Why? In order to have business, because we don't have a business. It's a seasonal city. When–in the winter, we're busy. Yes, we're busy, but we added extra 100–120 to 30 cars.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Gill.

Mr. Kuljit Gill: Yes.

Mr. Chairperson: Your 10 minutes has expired on your presentation, so we will now move into questions.

      We thank you very much for your presentation.

Mr. Maloway: Thank you, Mr. Gill, for an excellent presentation. I would like to give you the opportunity to expand a little bit on your last points that you were making and finish your answers. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Gill, you may proceed.

Mr. Kuljit Gill: We're paying two dollars just to get one trip. Forty-five per cent of the trips from airport averages seven bucks, minus two–five bucks.

      Sometimes we don't even get away from there for three, four minutes–sorry, three or three to four hours. Sometimes waiting time is three to four hours. It's on record. It's a airport authority. They have a data. Take it. You will find the data there.

      Just one second, please. One thing I like to, again, say: please, do not push us to the City. Keep us where we are. If we–if you guys, if someone wants to, really desperate wanted to bring Uber into Winnipeg, bring it, but under same rules, same regulation, under government of Manitoba.

      So thank you very much for your time. Thank you.

Mr. Isleifson: I just–a really quick question for you. Thank you again for the presentation.

      I read through your report that you submitted to us, and I was just curious if you could share with the entire committee. You talk about safety regulations and training. Can you just explain, briefly, the training aspect of how do you be safe out there?

Mr. Kuljit Gill: Three minutes to speak, please. Safety measure is very important. I was stabbed in 2004 in Transcona which my speech was different, but the statement I gave to you guys is totally different. I wrote my story, who I was when I started driving, when I was stabbed, all that.

      In 2005, my friend–he used to drive for Unicity–he was stabbed. That was his last day of driving cab. He moved to Calgary. He works for pizza, Johnny's Pizza or something. He works–I go and meet him every second, third year, whenever I have time.

      What saved my life when I was stabbed? We had a computer system. It had a button that we could press. It will tell the entire fleet that I'm in trouble and dispatch will forget everything else and just concentrate on that particular car. And there was a panic button there–I happened to press a panic button. I was stabbed here, right in my stomach, but I was lucky. That panic button saved me. Why? Because when I pressed the panic button, I opened my door–I knew what I was doing. They were forcing me to back alley. I knew what I was doing because of training. They wanted to take me somewhere where it's dark or through a back alley where they can stab me easily and rob me. And that robberies, I had seen a lot. I have a lot of experience. I've been in the business when I was 19, 20 years since now.

      So that training saved my life. That training saved my friend's life. I–life–if I had more time, I can share hundreds of stories. Give me time. Thank you.

* (22:20)

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Gill.

      Are there any more questions?

Mr. Maloway: I'd like to ask you, Mr. Gill, regarding section 10 of this bill, what your thoughts are about that and its intent to make certain that you are not able to collect one nickel in compensation for what could be–in the last driver's comments–a half a million dollars' worth of losses.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Gill, we're out of time, but we'll allow you a few seconds to answer.

Mr. Kuljit Gill: I deeply believe, if the government of Manitoba is going to wash their hands and–this is okay?–going to wash their hands and stand up to the City, absolutely, each and every driver who have invested should be compensated. If they're going to wash their hands–I'm repeating that again–washing their hands and standing up to the City, but at last word I would request all of you, please think deeply and I'll request all of you, please withdraw Bill 30.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation. Time has well expired.

      We will now move on to presenter No. 54, Alem Hailemariam.

      If you could repeat your name when you come up, I'm sorry if I mispronounced it. But if you could just repeat it for us.

Mr. Alem Hailemariam (Private Citizen): I don't think you will be able to pronounce my last name, but if you call me Alem, that will be enough. Thank you, Sir.

      I like–

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your presentation.

Mr. Hailemariam: Could I–

Mr. Chairperson: Oh, if you have a presentation, yes, please, we'll get that distributed.

      As soon as the committee has your presentation, you may start.

      You may proceed.

Mr. Hailemariam: Good evening. My name is Alem Hailemariam. I have been a part of Unicity Taxi for 23 years, both as the owner and operator. I also elected twice as a board of directors and held a managerial position at Unicity. And this business helped me to raise three children, two of them currently attending in the university and one in high school.  

      This industry itself provides income for thousands of families. Bill 30 gives unfair advantage to ride-sharing companies, for instance, what we can offer is we have a regulatory safety inspection that's twice a year, including a driver shield, surveillance cameras and strobe light, which assist recognizing danger and informing authorities for a driver in a dangerous situation.

      Drivers that work, like myself, for 12 to 18 hours in order to make ends meet under harmful situations with customers also more prevalent at night and the drivers are all unable to defend themselves while being subjected to violent behaviour. Our lives are constantly at risk, and this should be recognized and acknowledged.           

      As a company, and as you all know, this technology is available to us. What Uber is offering to everybody, it didn't came from us. We have the technology. We have the GPS. We have the pre-booking cabs by the city–by the Unicity apps in Android and app stores.

      One thing this bill specifies that there will be no–absolutely no compensation for the loss of income. This is injustice, because this directly imposes the idea that the hardship and the struggle endures by people like myself are no longer acknowledged for efforts and commitment offered to providing reliable transportation service in the city of Winnipeg.

      We are your neighbours and we deserve respect to–for what we do.

      One thing, we're not afraid nor trying to stop our competitors but we should be offered the same opportunities and options as well. In fact, by not giving us this opportunity and options, you alienating our community by giving advantage to others and this is unfair.

      We are dedicated to contributing to our taxicab business in our community in a long-term view, committed to providing our children with as many opportunities and support to encourage their financial endeavour so that one day they will be making a difference in the community, and possibility–possibly sitting, like you, in the Legislative Building, to make a significant change.

      In short, I would like Bill 30 to be amended in order to ensure fair competition and established and then maintained throughout. I also would like to urge you to consider the opinion and the concern that have been raised by people like me and all my colleagues who are directly affected by the bills that you going to pass. This pass–this–if this bill pass, it has a negative impact on the lives of many who are rely on this occupation to provide for themselves and their family.

      And thank you for the opportunity. If you have any questions, I'm willing to answer.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Hailemariam. We will now proceed to questions from the committee.

Mr. Saran: Thanks for your presentation and I still–I could not figure out myself what province will gain, sending taxi industry to the city, other than saying other cities have the same thing. While other countries have the many things, they have bully and goon politicians; do we need those bully and goon politicians over here?

      And what did you think–why government is doing this? Because I–still, I couldn't understand. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hailemariam, I have to recognize you first, so please go ahead now.

Mr. Hailemariam: Sorry, sir. Sorry.

      Can I proceed? [interjection] Okay.

      In fact, I will go to the extent why this government is thinking this. And consider this as their first priority. To me, I am really puzzled. There's a lot of things that this province needs and it can be done. Why, all of the sudden, they become a first job to do–list for this Conservative government. I am very–that's a mystery for me.

Mr. Maloway: And I just want to expand on what you just said.

      It's a mystery to everybody on this side of the table, for sure, as to why they make this as a bigger priority as they do. I mean, they've got lots they–the government's bitten off a lot of things. It's, you know, closing down the three emergency wards out of six hospitals, and here and there, and doing lots of things, and the results are there; there's recent polls that showed them down at 27 per cent in the city. Like, they're just falling like a stone. Why they want to pick a fight with the taxicab industry, when in fact, things will be better off if they just leave them–leave you alone at this point. Okay? So you have to ask them to explain why they want to do this. There's just no rhyme or reason to this Bill 30. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hailemariam.

Mr. Hailemariam: Sorry, Sir.

Mr. Chairperson: You may answer the question.

* (22:30)

Mr. Hailemariam: In fact, I am repeating the same, like, what of my colleague. He said: If it's not broken, why you try to fix it?

      And this system was efficiently working, and we don't have any rules regulation. We will be abiding what the government of Manitoba is giving us. And we were very comfortable with that. And why all of the sudden they're trying to send this bill to be drafted by the City? Why is so necessary?

Mr. Maloway: Well, thank you–[interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: You had stopped, so then I had recognized Mr. Maloway, and then you'd started again. So we have to have an even–a clean cut-off. So Mr. Maloway did have the floor, so I'll let him continue. And then, when he's finished, you can answer the question.

Mr. Maloway: You know, it's too bad that you weren't asking the questions, because we have a minister here who could probably answer them.

      I mean, maybe he will take the floor on the next question and give us the answer as to why we're sitting here at 10:30, second night of hearings, going to have hearings Thursday night, going to have hearings all day Friday, probably Monday and Tuesday.

      Why are we going through this exercise? Like, what is the huge importance of ramming this thing through without proper consultations? You know, maybe he'll answer that question.

Mr. Hailemariam: I will be anxious to hear that from the minister.

Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Mr. Hailemariam, for coming here.

      Is it your belief that, if there's going to be any other people enter the market for providing taxi service, that they should have to meet the same standards that you have to meet, in terms of safety measures for the vehicles, licensing requirements, insurance requirements? Do you think it has to be the same standard for everybody?

Mr. Hailemariam: Absolutely. It should be a fair–across the line, so everybody should be treated the same. Rules and regulations should be applied to whoever come–is coming.

Mr. Chairperson: I'm sorry, our time for questions has run out. We'd like to thank you, Mr. Hailemariam, for presenting tonight.

      And we will now move on to the next presenter, presenter No. 55. Presenter No. 55, Baljinder Bhumber. Baljinder Bhumber? Presenter No. 55 is not here; we will move him to the bottom of the list.

      And we'll move on to presenter No. 56, Gaim Yohannes.

      Gaim Yohannes, do you have any written material for the committee?

Mr. Gaim Yohannes (Private Citizen): No.

Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Yohannes: By the way, my name is Gaim Yohannes, not Gaim Yohannes.

      Good evening, everybody. My name is Gaim Yohannes. I'm a owner-operator, Unicity, since 1995. I choose this job because to support my family. Even I know there is at risk on it. First, the health, safety and investment–safe–healthy is about sitting in a car for 12 hours. Everybody knows even eight hours is too long. They say–the doctors.

      Safety is–everybody knows, driving a taxi is a dangerous job in the world. As investment, well, I invest–I bought the job, to be honest with you. Every time you work for somebody, they lay off. They're not there. Well, I tried. I said let me try taxi. That time, I was taking taxi from–I used to live River–on River Avenue. So I was taking a taxi from Safeway to River. One of the guys, he took me there, then I ask him: How do you get a licence? Then he told me. Get driver form, then go taxi board, then that way, I got that business. But the first risk is coming is, it's coming from the government, which is without consulting us. We've been here–taxi industry, I don't know how many–but 100 years, have been here, so should be consulted. We are part of the community.

      So, if they consult us, if there is a problem, then, well, it might solve it. So, instead of consulting us–I don't know why. To be honest with you, I don't know why–neglecting a business which is a healthy business supporting a family, which is not a burden for the government. We never asked for subsidies. We never ask. Everything we do is from our budget.

      Example: Since 2007, we never have a raise. Look at the bus industry. It's been subsidized, and still they increase every year, 5 cents–us, never, for 10 years. Some people here ask, why don't you apply? Myself, to be honest with you, I ask–I never been in the board of directors to ask to the board. We should ask, but everybody afraid. Well, if we ask, all people do is say, expense–but our expense is going high.

      In this country–I came here when some businesses having increased their expense, what do they do? They pass it to the public. But us, we budget. In our company, what we do is we buy hybrids. At the same time, we budget in our house. So, still, to be honest with you, in my opinion, we still suffer. You understand that since 2007 the insurance is–I don't know–about $5,000–right now, over $10,000.

      The benefit of this business is, for me, economically and socially. Economically is, I support my family. I raise them to be good citizens. You know, in a government, we listen. We hear in the newspaper and the TV. So they invest a lot of money in some communities to get them to be a good citizen. Whether it's going to work or not, nobody knows. But us, we are working. We try to raise good citizens to be good for the city, for their community, for the city, even for province or the country. But here, the government, to be honest with you, neglect us.

      Socially–listen. Even socially, I don't get enough money–time with my family. I drive–if I have a driver, I drive 12 hours. If I do not have a driver, I drive 16, 18 hours.

      So look at this. You guys, you work only eight hours. To be honest with you, I don't know, but the majority of the jobs in Canada is eight hours. Us, we work 16, 17 hours. So we are to raise kids to be a good citizen. Where the time is? Family is not around. You know that, where the kids are going. The direction of the kids' probability going to the wrong direction is high. If we are around our kids–to be honest with you, my kids, they are very young: 15, 13 and eight–three boys. Until this time, they're doing really good in school. I help them, in the evening even I am tired, because Canada is a good country.

      Canada is a good country. It's not because of the buildings. It's not because of the land–the rule of law. The law in this country is–I came from Eritrea. The weather in Eritrea is the best weather in the world. You don't need air conditioning; you don't need heat. But I prefer bad weather than a bad government, you know, and bad weather, good government, is good for a country.

* (22:40)

      So we trust this government. To be honest with you, all the time some of my friends, they said Canada is not a good country. You know, you work hard day and night. Listen: it's a peaceful country. You work hard; nobody asks you anything unless you follow the rules. But here we can see the government is bending the rules on us, which is not right. A good citizen has the industry. He should support it, not damage it.        

      How the industry can be supported, you know, and the government, most of the time he said if you have a good–I don't know–to be honest with you, I'm not a politician, I never even vote, but you see them, for some people, they invest a lot of money, like I said before.

      But whether it's going to work or not–but we never asked for a subsidy or anything, but we are helping ourselves, we are helping the community, the city, the province and the country.

      Now, then, what I have to say is we need a regulation. Like I said, Canada is a good country because of the rules and regulations in this country. It's not because of the land or the money.

      We need some insurance for everybody, treat us the same as this company coming, whoever is coming, ride-sharing. Ride-sharing, in my opinion, has been created a long time ago. Maybe I'm wrong. Bus transit is ride-sharing, but this–I'm using my car to give a ride to my neighbour is not ride-sharing. I am doing a business. If the transaction is happening, it's not ride-sharing; it's just doing a business.

      So please help us to get, to be honest with you, to get rid of this bill, not to pass it. So thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Yohannes.

Mr. Maloway: And I wanted to congratulate you on an excellent presentation. I want to ask you if you're aware or other people are aware that the state of Victoria in Australia is providing compensation to the cab industry. There's a–I have a press release here from February 22nd of this year by the minister of the Victoria state government, and in it he describes how compensation is being provided to $100,000 for the first cab licence, $50,000 for up to three more, and the package also includes $50 million targeted assistance for financial hardship cases and another $25 million for other issues.

      Now, this is a jurisdiction. It's a state in Australia. Australia has a national government like we do, and rather than provinces, it has states. So it's very similar. A state in Australia is a province in Canada, okay, and these states, individually, all for the last couple of years, have been bringing in legislation dealing with Uber and things like that, and in all cases their compensation packages are being provided. I just mention Victoria because it's the best of the bunch.

      Now I just want to ask you whether you're aware of this and why you think the government would deliberately not only not offer you this, but specifically put a clause in their bill saying you can't sue them. You cannot go after them for any change in the value of your business.

Mr. Yohannes: To be honest with you, it's like I said, it's not fair. Like, I put out the three risks I am taking. The fourth risk is coming, which is not good for us, which is the government is–well, you could say they did it–well, they know; they are educated. They know what they're doing. Well, I could say they do it on purpose.

      You know what it reminds me? Back home. One, my dad–he was a good–he was doing good. He was a businessman, and he's a farmer. He was a farmer. When Ethiopian government is–try to take away property from Eritreans overnight. I'm telling you, overnight they came by gun. They took his property. And everything is gone. This bill is reminding me–I've been working hard all these years, being taken away. That's almost the same. That one's by gun; this one is by their power.

An Honourable Member: Don't tell them about the guns.

Mr. Yohannes: No. You don't say in legislative gun, sir.

      Anyway, but–it's–it hurts because the government has to understand to help a healthy business community.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Yohannes.

      Are there any more questions from the committee? Seeing as none, thank you very much for your presentation, and we will be moving on to the next presenter.

      I would like to call presenter No. 57, Tejinderpal Gill. Tejinderpal Gill.

      Seeing as Mr. Gill is not here, he will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      We will move to presenter No. 58, Davinder Grewal. Davinder Grewal. Mr. Grewal is not here, we'll–he'll be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Number 59, Auldie Singh. Auldie Singh. Mr. Singh will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      We will move to presenter No. 60, Ameron Woodlassie [phonetic]. Voldelassia [phonetic]. [interjection] Voldelassie?

      If–Asmeron, if you could please correct my pronunciation of your name, I would greatly appreciate it.

Mr. Asmeron Woldeselassie (Private Citizen): Yes, my name is Asmeron Mokanin [phonetic] Woldeselassie.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your presentation.

Mr. Woldeselassie: I came to Canada 2003 as a refugee here. Some charity, they sponsored me. I came with one, my son. Then I started work here–hard with my wife. After two years, I improve my English skills. I went to adult education centre. After that, they approve me to take a course to drive a taxi.

      After two weeks course, I pass all the tests. Then I start to drive a taxi. I work hard. And my wife, too, she works hard. She works in St. Amant Centre. It's a [inaudible] job–maybe you guys, you know that.

      Then we start to invest our money for the taxi business, because we trusted the government. The taxi business is under the government; that's why we invest our money. In this time, we have three kids. When we come in to Canada, was one son, and this time he's starting to go to university. And have another two daughters. They still–they are young. Both of them, they need me to help them.

      Every day, they have more information than me about Uber taxi. They listen on news. They check in. They ask me: Daddy, Uber is coming. Daddy, if Uber is coming, so what you going to do? So I want to say how we suffer in the family. And it is really, really–it's very hard for us. Still, we didn't pay our loan.

* (22:50)

      We pay all this–we invest our money. And, if this bill is passed, I don't know what we going to do, because our business is going down. We don't have enough income and very–last year we bought house. We was living in apartment, then we started to pay our mortgage and I don't know. If everything is going–screwed up in our life, and I believe you guys, you hear this, everything in the [inaudible] don't pass this bill.

      And one thing I learned when I came to Canada is first safety. Then–safety is very important. When I was working–when I was driving nighttime, I remember in 2010 a drunk woman she come in with a big bottle whiskey. She sit in backseat, she ask me bring money. Even you didn't pay the fare, how I am going give you money? And then she remove the bottle from her purse and she started to hit my head here. It's good thing the shield protected me that time, and the camera. Everything was in camera what she was doing, so this safety is very important. Why in this time we not really concerned about safety?

      And Uber is coming, is working as a regular car, and Uber is, as I see in my experience, if Uber is coming to work here, Uber is a taxi just it's changed the name. It's going to transport the same like us. So we have a lot of expenses. I believe on competition on business, but it's not really–that is not competition. We pay $10,600 for insurance and I don't know what they're going to pay. So I believe to have the same regulation for both of us and we can compete on the same time if we have the same floor.

      Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Asmeron.

      The floor is now open for questions from the committee.

Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Mr. Woldeselassie, for your presentation, very well put together, very compassionately delivered.

      Can you talk to me a bit more about what you think we need to ensure in terms of safety standards, what technologies, what training for the public and for the drivers, no matter who's providing?

Mr. Woldeselassie: Yes, this–about safety, what technology. The technology we have now is we have camera and we have shield. The camera we have, we upgraded last–I believe two, three years, and are here now we have another updated camera. When our cameras get broken or whatever we go and fix it the updated camera. So every time we work with taxi board what technology's there we going to put it, and do we need this support from the government, because safety's the first priority. Without safety, I don't know, I can't trust my working myself so–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Selinger.

Mr. Selinger: When you said earlier that you didn't think–you believed in competition but you didn't believe what was going on here was fair competition, can you talk a little bit about what you think is fair competition?

Mr. Woldeselassie: Yes, I believe on competition on business, because if there is a competition can be a quality job it's coming with that. If there is a competition, everything is going fair, even for the customers, even for operators. But, if it's not the competition, if we go in without competition, for example, if you give first for Uber this opportunity that we have–we not going pay for–they not going to pay for insurance, everything what expensive we have. After five years, what kind of quality job it's going to be seen here?

      We put now on the road $33,000 price of car, it's updated car, hybrid. If our business is not here, we're not going to afford that one after a few years. We're not going to do that one.

Mr. Isleifson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker–or, Mr. Speaker, my gosh. It has been a long day.

      Thank you for your presentation.

      A question for you. I know you've talked a bit about fairness in the market, fairness with competition, and I know there's a lot of talk about Uber because that's the chatter coming into the city of Winnipeg. The act itself, though, if you read Bill 30, it deals more with the relationship between the industry provincially wide.

      So when you talk about fairness, do you think that the system is currently fair between the city of Winnipeg taxi operators and the rest of rural Manitoba, which is treated totally different? This bill will bring it all together. Do you think–I guess I'm just looking for your opinion on fairness.

      We're not all from Winnipeg. I represent a rural area, which has a taxi industry. This bill makes a lot of sense, but in fairness, they're not looking at this point at Uber. So I'm just wondering what your opinion would be on fairness in the taxi industry throughout Manitoba, not just in Winnipeg.

Mr. Woldeselassie: I don't know if I understand your question about fairness. Yes, it have to be the same for all, as I say before, for both companies, for Uber and other companies here. If it is not the same, I don't think so–the business is going to be smooth for both of us.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Asmeron. Our time for questions has run out.

      We will be moving to the next presenter. Thank you very much.

      We will move now to presenter No. 61, Arsh Singh Sekhond. Arsh Singh Sekhond?

      Mr. Sekhond will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      And we will move to presenter No. 62, Rajwant Brar.

      Rajwant, do you have a written presentation for us?

Mr. Rajwant Brar (Private Citizen): I do.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you. We will get it distributed, and as soon as it's distributed around the table, you may start your presentation.

Mr. Rajwant Brar: Good evening.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed, Mr. Rajwant Brar.

Mr. Rajwant Brar: I want to start by thanking the Legislative committee for their time.

      My name is Rajwant Brar. I have been an owner of Duffy's Taxi for the last 31 years.

      When I first came to Canada in 1984, the taxi industry afforded me the opportunity to create a better life for me and my family. Over the years, as this business transitioned, a goodwill was created, which today we consider our pension fund. Some of your honourable members like to call it a–the medallion, sounds more like a lavish name rather than a reflection of hard work.

* (23:00)

      Bill 30–this cost–this goodwill was created by the taxi industry and paid for by the taxi industry. This was not a cost which was passed on to the taxpayers.

      Bill 30 is detrimental to many people for many reasons. This bill would destroy the job security that over 1,000 Winnipeggers have relied on for decades. This ride-sharing bill is ultimately designed to bring companies like loft, Uber, into Winnipeg market. Although it does not explicitly mention them by name, it is very important for this Legislature to look at the impact that these companies have had in other cities throughout its existence.

      Just recently, the city of London banned Uber due to concerns over public safety. Last month, police in London accused Uber of not reporting sexual assaults by a driver on a passenger, which allowed the same driver to strike again. The city of London had major issues with Uber's approach to reporting serious criminal offences and the way it obtained medical certificates and security checks. Uber's corporate culture has resulted in litigations all around the world.

      Uber's now effectively banned in London, France, Spain, Belgium and it is facing litigations and investigations all around the world. These are just a few examples that shows that Uber tend to operate without regard for public safety. The Taxicab Act was enacted for the safety of the public. Its main purpose was to provide safe rides to the public and to ensure that its drivers were properly screened and insured.

      In our industry, background checks, Child Abuse Registry, criminal record checks, are conducted on all drivers. We must also successfully complete disability training for providing services to those that suffer with a disability. We enjoy doing this training because we understand that it is for the betterment of the society. This bill dampens this thought, as it allows companies that do not hold themselves to these standards to enter the market.

      It is not competition that we are worried about. We just ask if Uber, loft and other ride-sharing companies are to be allowed to enter the Winnipeg market, they should be held to the same standards that those operating taxis abide by, and this bill fails to address that.

      Those in support of Bill 30 talk how Winnipeg has a service problem, which is just not true. The problem lies with the road system in the city. We do not have freeway systems as other cities do. Downtown Winnipeg and Osborne Village are unworkable because extreme traffic, lack of access. As an example, even if there were 1,000 cars on the road, the problem of not being able to move in traffic will still not be alleviated because the road systems are not designed to support the influx of the vehicles.

      If we wish to be like Toronto or other major metros, rather than introducing ride-sharing, we need to work on our infrastructure and build better roads. If our roads are better and we can move more freely, this will make the taxi option much more attractive to those millennium generation. This would immensely help the city.

      Again, this bill will be detrimental for many reasons. Uber has a track record for disregarding public safety concerns and for not properly screening those they employ. We do not want to subject the city of Winnipeg to a company like this unless stricter regulations are placed on their conduct, which is not the case at this moment.

      This bill will also completely ruin the investment and futures of more than 1,000 people. Like many others, I was able to put both my children through university and build a stable, worry-free life for my family because of the opportunity the taxicab industry had provided me. This bill will greatly affect those opportunities for people going forward and will completely destroy the job security that myself and many others rely on to make ends meet.

      And, before I finish, there was a gentleman yesterday who represented drivers. And he called all us owners a selfish bunch of guys. We charge rent for providing our taxicabs, our business. Since when it became a crime to expect a return on your investment? Forget the goodwill part, just on providing equipment: you rent a car from a rental company, you expect to pay rental charges. Taxicabs are chosen professional–professionally because of flexibility to go to schools, attend other chores in life. Nobody's forced to work. They choose on their free will. Here's how–only for six or seven years, this guy was here since–he told me since 1999–and six or seven years, he expected a free ride–or free opportunity. He's on something–others like myself obtained by working through the better part of my life.

      Taxicabs have overhead costs, average about 30  to 40 thousand. Full-time drivers provide about $24,000 of revenue to the owners, about half of the appraising cost. And have the half access in 24 hours, pays a nominal fee towards the investment with no liabilities. All they have to do is drive and go away and not worry about anything. The same driver could write off a car or damage a car, put the owner out of business with his fault. MPI would not cover us. And drivers are never asked to cover the downtime.

      I believe this bill is really bad. It should be withdrawn. This–by bringing this bill, I personally feel this government is targeting a particular community. I really do hope you take these matters into heavy consideration as you make a decision on this bill.

      I want to thank you for your time.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Maloway: I want to thank you for an excellent presentation, and thank you for defending me with those comments made yesterday by the other gentleman.

      I did want to note that in the bill the Premier (Mr. Pallister) wants 137 municipalities to have regulatory responsibility for the taxicab industry. Like, how is that supposed to work, in your mind?

Mr. Rajwant Brar: As we know, the majority of the population lives here. It is called Taxicab Board of Manitoba for a reason. Well, they choose not to pursue to the smaller community. I don't know why, maybe it's a cost factor. It should be Taxicab Board right across the province.

* (23:10)

Mr. Maloway: So, now, what happens if Unicity or Duffy's, you know, sell their property in the city and move out to Headingley or move outside the city and operate out there? Does that in any way affect the way they've written this bill?

Mr. Rajwant Brar: It wouldn't really, other than City of Winnipeg losing on licensing fees and stuff.

Ms. Lamoureux: First of all, thank you for coming out and presenting to the board, and–or, to the committee. You recommended another solution that we haven't heard tonight and it's more of a amendment, more than anything, but you talk about infrastructure. So, so far we've heard about dissolving the bill, we've heard about bringing forward amendments, now we're talking about infrastructure. So thank you for bringing forward that potential idea.

      And I guess my question for you is: Do you feel that the government is sort of passing the buck, that they're washing their hands of this issue by passing you on to the City?

Mr. Rajwant Brar: I think the provincial government should not take Taxicab Board, taxi industry as a liability, something they can pass on to City of Winnipeg to balance the books. It's an essential service. What is next? This is not the way to go. If I start selling my stuff to run my household, how is that going to last? How long it's going to last?

Mr. Maloway: I noticed in your presentation you did talk about Uber's record in other jurisdictions, and, as I've mentioned before, Uber is worth something like $65 billion. So that's a pretty big company here that pushes its weight around, doesn't follow laws, and it really seems passing strange to me that a provincial government that's supposed to be looking out for Manitobans would be rolling out the red carpet for a predator like this. I mean, the–you know, Unicity Taxi is a little taxi company, and it's supposed to fight against a $65‑billion company that doesn't respect any laws that you set up anyway. I'm just trying to get my head around why people are enamored with this Uber idea and why people can't seem to see what's really happening here.

Mr. Rajwant Brar: I don't know. Maybe it's a big company, it could pay people money, they can push around, they can show some muscles. Their model is like Province of Manitoba. They can run a deficit knowingly, just for the name's sake, so they can show the world that they're operating in so many cities, and they are running a deficit, as you know.

Mr. Maloway: I just find it very interesting that the company could be worth that kind of money, $68 billion, still be running a deficit and simply running rampant like it has in many parts of the world, not–I think they're paying their drivers' fines in some jurisdictions, right. The drivers are violating the local laws and they are–they've ponied up the money to pay the fines, totally disrespecting the laws of the states. I think it's in Australia that this is happening. Any comments about that?

Mr. Rajwant Brar: Well, their business model is–when I first moved to Canada, I was offered a job opportunity, I went to this store to sell books. There were hundreds of people lined up, so we were given books. We loaded in our cars, we supposed to sell it door to door.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Brar, time has expired but I'll allow you a few seconds to finish off.

Mr. Rajwant Brar: We all of us end up selling two books each and we decided to quit the very same night, but end of the night the guy he end up selling two books each on us free of charge. It's the very same model Uber's operating. There's 500 people walks in, they find out's not for them, they leave, they make their 25 per cent, another 500 fools'll walk in. Their business keeps going on.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Brar. We greatly appreciate you presenting here tonight and we will now–time has expired in question period. We will now move on to the next presenter.

      Presenter No. 63, Jasunder Jaswal. Do you have a written presentation for us, Mr. Jaswal?

Mr. Jasunder Jaswal (Private Citizen): No.

Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your verbal presentation when you are ready. Thank you.

Mr. Jaswal: Hello, everyone. My name is Jasunder Jaswal. I came here about 1982 just working in the–factory. Then, after 10 years, the government make a new rule and they are going to free trade and then all the factories close. Then I have the unemployment. I have no choice–to where I'm do? So then I drive a part-time cab, then I can survive to my family and my kids and everything. Then I go to my country, bring them money to buy the half share. Then, after working hard, 18 or 16 hours–working for like that, well, then I full–buy the full share after three or four years working hard, no sleeping–no sleep, no time, nothing about that one.

      Now with–Bill 30 is like that, get no safety, nothing about that one, because we have to do the work hard for the company. We have a–when we issue the taxi licence, then the taxi board say, you have to–need accessible licence; otherwise, you can't get any taxicab order–that's any taxi licence. So, then, we have to eight-hour training, so they must have to be when the rules and regulations–when the Uber is coming, they have rules and regulations, safety, camera, everything and that. They have to do fingerprint and everything.

      I read the Uber. They have–asking about the fingerprint and background. Government asking the fingerprint and background, and they didn't give and they refused that one. And they're going to kick out like that one. Lots of countries like that one; they have kicked out Uber. So we will try to–we have–we thinking about–we have–our cab is about $450,000, so we have a future for the pension, everything. And, for the weekend, we can relax our life.

      But the government make, like, a rule, like they're going to 'brug'–they're going to–Bill 30–they're going to break that down, and they're going to, like, liability car–competition is zero like that one for the taxi.

      So I request you, present government, before they have to do it, they have to redo this one and then fair for everyone. Before they have ready, the girl, she's coming here. She survived just only cab because her mother is–because why only cabs? Like, they have, well, two drivers; they're hiring if they have an only job, so what they–what she can do it.

      So we will try to take–look after everything for the bill again and make it fair for everyone so then we can survive. We can coming here to grow the business, grow the economics for, like, Manitoba, because I want try to grow my kids–like a good education, everything.

      If you like it, taxi price is zero–'competish' zero, so who–how can we survive like that one?

      That's it. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Jaswal.

Mr. Saran: Yes, thanks for coming over here, Mr. Jaswal.

      And my question is that, this government would not do–treat the way they are treating the taxi industry–they won't treat the same way the farmers or other industries. What they–why they are doing this? Is that because other people have political muscles we–you don't have, or there is some other reason? Because otherwise, it's pretty clear it won't–they won't gain anything by moving the taxi industry from Province to City. It shouldn't make any difference at all. It's–it already is working. Why they are doing this? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Jaswal, I must recognize you, so you may start now. Mr. Jaswal.

Mr. Jaswal: Maybe they have a government who's–present government and Uber, they have make a deal. I don't know what they happen, like, the deal like that one. They have to clear for everyone, okay, what's–what if they make a deal like Uber and that one, so we have to–everybody happy like that one, so, like, they don't want to clear like then they want to break the bill, like, be–Bill 30. What's the reason? Why they break the bill? Because rules and regulations–they don't follow the rules and regulations because they got a sixty–how many billion dollars they going to give–they bring it here, so I said, it's the government–I don't know what's the advantage for the government.

* (23:20)

Mr. Wharton: Thank you so much, Mr. Jaswal, for your presentation tonight. And, again, as I'd mentioned earlier, a number of your colleagues have presented, and this has certainly been an educational evening. The last two evenings have been very educational.

      Further to the comments made by the independent member from The Maples in respect to not knowing where this came from, we were presented with a bit of a road map earlier by one of your colleagues that had mentioned that the former NDP government, which the member from The Maples was a part of, commissioned a survey to find out any information about the industry and whether they were looking at additional cabs on the streets for the city of Winnipeg. At that time apparently the industry didn't require it.

      In 2015, the same government, led by the independent member from The Maples and the NDP under Mr. Selinger from St. Boniface, led the report commissioned by Meyers Norris Penny to determine whether there was a further need that was commissioned again back in 2015.

      So, again, just a bit of a road map where this has come from, from 2013, and I really appreciate, Mr. Jaswal, your presentation tonight. Certainly it's been very informative, and again I thank you for coming and taking the time to present tonight to the committee.

Mr. Jaswal: Thank you so much.

Mr. Maloway: And just to follow-up on the excellent comments from my colleague there from The Maples and pursue this roadmap a little further. You know, the fact of the matter is the Quebec dairy farmers are being compensated under the Canada European free trade agreement, okay. Over a 10-year period they are receiving compensation because those dairy farmers are being squished under this agreement because the European countries are bringing dairy products into the country.

      Well, the federal government didn't cut them loose like these guys are with you. They took care of these dairy farmers. Why? Well, maybe dairy farmers elect MPs. Maybe there's enough of them in Quebec to make sure there's some more Liberal MPs getting elected–I don't know. But it's happened and they're getting compensated. Your case, no.

      Now, go back to 1971 when the Schreyer government of the day set up Autopac, and there was a lot of agents operating selling auto insurance here in the province and they didn't like the idea of the government selling car insurance.

      So they set up a fund, two and a half million dollars, which I think today would be like $15 million, and they offered any agent, any insurance agent in Manitoba that didn't want to sell government Autopac insurance they could take the compensation, and a lot of them did, and that was the government of Manitoba, one of the predecessors–now it was the first NDP government, but it was a government of Manitoba just like they're the government of Manitoba now.

      So they want to look for precedents of compensation–hey, the government, the taxpayers of Manitoba did it with the Autopac agents in Manitoba. Why can't you do the same thing for the taxi industry?

Mr. Chairperson: Time has run out on question period. We will have to move on to a next presenter. Thank you very much.

      Our next presenter, presenter No. 64, Gurminder Suntan. Gurminder Suntan? Mr. Suntan does not appear to be here. His name will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 65, Jasvir Rai. Jasvir Rai does not appear to be here, will be moved to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 66, Kulwint Brar. Kulwint Brar? Mr. Brar does not appear to be here. His name will be moved–oh, Mr. Brar, you're here? Mr. Brar? Do you have any written presentation for the committee?

Mr. Khushwant Brar (Private Citizen): No.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your verbal presentation when you are ready.

Mr. Khushwant Brar: My name is Khushwant Brar. I'm associated with the taxi–Manitoba taxi industry since 1996.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Brar, if you could speak a little closer to the mike because it's–it's louder, because it's very difficult to hear.

      You may proceed, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Khushwant Brar: Yes. I am associated with the Manitoba taxi industry since 1996. When I took my taxicab classes, it was held by Manitoba Taxicab Board, and our instructor was an ex-police officer and he was explaining to us rules and regulations and deal with the public, you know, with his experience. And then he show us the picture: my small business on the wheels. And I'm not a business man. We are farmer. I just bought a job. And every time, it's just–you know, all my life, 20 years spent behind the wheel. Now government is moving the taxi industry towards the City.

      I know honourable minister says this is just a change in the jurisdiction. But it's not that. Our mayor is–open his arms welcoming ride-share services. I don't understand what is ride-share service. What is the difference between a taxi cab and ride-share? It's a scam. It's the same service with less expense, no insurance, no safety, no driver safety, no public safety. And it's support for big corporation. And all I believe–it's a friendly Manitoba. Small businesses should be supported by our government. And it's not what we're seeing here.

      I'm looking–my future is dark, and I don't know what to say. That's all.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Isleifson: Mr. Brar, thank you for the presentation. It sounds like–and we've heard it a number of times tonight, it sounds like the status quo is the best way to go; just to leave things alone–they seem to be working. That's what I'm hearing from yourself and others.

      I want to go back, though, to–as we just heard in the previous presentation from the honourable Minister Wharton, is there was a report that was commissioned by Meyers Norris Penny, in 2015, when the opposition were in government. It was determined, through that report, that things weren't working. And I want to just read a quote from Andrew Swan, who is the MLA for Minto. He says: I think it is fair to say that when the report was commissioned, everybody agreed that the status quo was not working in the interest of Winnipeggers. So–and this, again, is coming from the former government, who would–now opposing the whole plan.

      So, in your opinion, it's been identified that there is a problem. How do we fix it, if not by this bill?

Mr. Khushwant Brar: Nobody take our opinion when they bring this bill. Nobody consult with us. Mayor doesn't want to talk to us. Government doesn't talk to us. They just bring the bill, boom, boom, boom. I don't know where we are.

Mr. Isleifson: Again, thank you for that. I just want to follow up, though. If I can find it really quick at my fingertips here, there were–and you say that you weren't consulted. And I'm assuming you mean you, as an individual.

      I do understand there was–over 10,000 people participated in providing feedback. I understand the minister's department at the time had met with both individuals from Duffy's and from Unicity as well as–and I can't find the number, so I might be a little off, but I think it was around 650 cab driver owners were also involved in the process.

      So are you saying nobody was involved, or you're saying yourself as an individual was not involved?

Mr. Khushwant Brar: You're talking about online survey?

Mr. Isleifson: No, I'm talking about the entire process. There was online–I agree with that, there was online, but I'm talking about the entire process involved over 10,000 submissions, interviews and things like that.

      So I'm hearing regularly that a lot of people were not consulted. But we have evidence to show that over 10,000 people were a part of it. So I'm just trying to clarify if you're saying you as an individual were not consulted or the industry as a whole, in your opinion, was not consulted.

Mr. Khushwant Brar: I don't think whole industry is fairly consulted. I don't–I believe we are not fairly treated, and this bill is bad. It's bad. It's going to kill our 'livehood' and I don't know. It looks like I'm hanging in the air. I can't sleep. The taxicab, that's the only thing I have.

* (23:30)

Mr. Maloway: I want to thank you for a really excellent presentation.

      You know, the government's dragging–government members here are dragging up surveys from four years ago, and the Meyers Norris Penny study, once again, a couple years ago, and they have absolutely nothing to do with what these people are doing to you in Bill 30. It has nothing to do with it. There's no study been done on liquidation of all your assets and wiping out your equity. There was no–was there some question in this survey four or five years ago about should we wipe out the equity of all the taxi owners in Winnipeg by putting it in a bill, you know, section 10(3)? Of course not.

      All this stuff, this bill, they're totally separate things. You surveyed four or five years ago; then you did your Meyers Norris Penny. And people have questioned their recommendations on the required number of cabs and they'd explained it very well, several times. You keep asking them and they keep telling you that the number of cabs is fine.

      Well, this bill is like–there's not connected to those other things. This is a bill that's going to sell these people down the river, dump them over the City and not compensate them one nickel for their investments, and some of them could lose up to a half a million dollars in this process.

      And you know something, when it comes to the Quebec dairy farmers–

Mr. Chairperson: Time on this–time on question period has expired.

      Thank you very much for your presentation here, Mr. Brar.

      We will now be moving on to the next presenter. The next presenter being presenter No. 67–[interjection]

Mr. Saran.

Mr. Saran: Yes, I think Mr. Brar did not take his 10 minutes and therefore–total time's supposed to be 15 minutes, and I think we could have asked more questions to complete the 15 minutes.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Saran, the time–and we have   discussed that earlier. Presentation time is 10 minutes; question‑period time is five minutes. Those are the rules. I didn't make the rules, but I am–I must follow those rules. And it's not a total time limit; it is per questions and per presentation. I know that there's other times that we could have maybe, but like I had mentioned several times, if the members would take a little less time in their–and get to the question, it would be a lot easier, it would be a lot better for both the presenters and everybody at the table.

      So I want to thank you very much for your comments and we're–Mr. Maloway.

Mr. Maloway: I have really good news for my colleague, the member for The Maples (Mr. Saran). We are going to finish tonight in 25 minutes at 12 o'clock. We are going to do another six hours on Thursday and I'm sure there are going to be–

Mr. Chairperson: This is of no relevance to the committee this evening. We are just wasting time, Mr. Maloway.

      So we will move on to the next presenter, presenter No. 68–67, Naudeep Bagri. Is Mr. Bagri here? No?

      Then we will move on to presenter No. 68, Inderjit Sharma. Mr. Sharma is not present.

      We will move on to the next presenter, No. 69, Suah Sandhu. Mr. Sandhu doesn't seem to be present.

       We will move on to the next presenter, Ranandeep Brar. Is Mr. Brar present? If Mr. Brar is not present we will move him to the bottom of the list.

      Presenter No. 71, Manjinder Grewal. Do you have a written presentation for the committee?

Mr. Manjinder Grewal (Private Citizen): Just only one copy, yes.

Mr. Chairperson: Okay, so then you'll just be making up a verbal presentation. You may proceed whenever you're ready, Mr. Grewal.

Mr. Grewal: Good evening, everyone. My name is Manjinder Singh Grewal. In 1994, I immigrated to Canada to start a life. I knew that Canada will help me make a living, give me equality and fairness and would help me provide for my family.

      I came to Manitoba in the month of September '94, and in the following January of 1995, I received a job as a taxi driver. And I knew that because of this job I will be able to provide for my family and give my children a well-educated life with hopes and dreams that they would achieve.

      But what about now? Now there is a new bill, Bill 30, that will not only affect my job, but will also affect my family. For 22 years I have been a taxi driver and from this job I have supported my family and hope to do so in the future. But how I will be able to wish this new bill?     

      I not only have four members in my family but also have my parents living with us, which is six members that I have to give financial support to. I also put my kids' education first, so on the top of all of our house bills. My daughter will be going to university next year, which comes at a cost that I'm proud to pay for because of this job. My children are in well-educated schools and my wife got the opportunity to get a job in Manitoba and help me support our family. My wife and I care for six members in our family, including ourselves.

      Now, about the safety. We put up shields and cameras and strobe lights, ensure safety, took training to avoid any possible dangers and have put all our efforts into making the taxi a safer drive for everyone. Here are some personal experiences of mine of how taxi safety helped me.

      In 1997, I was held at a gunpoint from a man sitting in the seat behind me. And this was only two years when I started my job. I was lucky enough to escape from the car, and even when the man was firing bullets at me and I hide behind a garbage bin, and the police came. But because the lack of safety, security, they were not able to find any arrest the man because there was no way to describe a man of the shooting.

      But in 2009, a man also held a knife to my neck, and I was try to fight him off. He left the knife and ran away. Because of the safety improvement that was made in the taxi industry, from the camera and the fingerprints in the taxi, the police were able to arrest the man and put him in the jail.      

      So if anyone likes this was to happen again, it will be avoided as much as possible and we would be able to defend ourselves much more. We should focus on making this industry a better service with safety for drivers and passengers.  

* (23:40)

      If Uber are accepted in Winnipeg, it will need to be a fair playing field. All the rules would be applied to everyone in the industry. There have to be a fair rules and equal share of service and improvement in safety for 'boths'.

      The taxi drivers have put a lot of effort, time and money into making this industry safe for both passengers and the driver. It is one thing to look at a way to improve the taxi industry, but the government initiative is clearly aimed in destroying this industry and many families who depend on this job to making a living. This job has put my kids through 12 years of school. I depend on this job to help my family with any needs that need to be taken.

      Having Uber in Winnipeg will cause risk of thousands of families. Parents will lose their jobs and families will go onto financial debts. Having Uber in Winnipeg will cause competition, but we are not against that. We ask that it should be fair and equal to both drivers in this industry. I knew when I came to Canada I would–offered a fair life with equal rights as everyone. If our demands are not met, it will prove that Manitoba government did not think about fairness and equality with this bill.

      Manitoba has abused their power with Bill 30. This will–this bill will ruin thousands of families and many jobs will be lost. We have poured our lives into making this industry a functional and safe industry. If we allow the cab industry to be put under the city's jurisdiction, it will cause damage–taxi industry.

      Most of the taxi drivers in Winnipeg are 'immigranted' and depend on this job to support their family. Manitoba has to understand that this bill could ruin people's lives, including mine. What is really wrong with this bill is the way which this targets as industry where the vast majority of owners are now immigrants, many of whom have followed the rules and have built a family because of it. The government needs to understand that there are families and future families that depend on the taxi industry with their life. I support my children's education–this job, and I want them to get the opportunity to make a great living and someday make a family of their own where they won't have to worry about losing their job. Think about not only the city itself but about the families that will be greatly affected if this bill does not pass and there is no fair playing field and fairness in any way with the taxi drivers.

      I 'immigranted' to Canada because I knew my family and I would get the rights and freedoms that we deserve. Don't take away my opportunity to give my family all of that and much more support. Think about people, not just the city.

      Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Grewal, for your presentation. We will now take questions.

Ms. Lamoureux: I just want to start off by thanking you for sharing your stories and for being vulnerable with us. It really, really speaks volumes the importance of safety and just what the taxicab industry does for the rest of Manitoba, and so thank you for being vulnerable and also for your services in our province.

Mr. Grewal: Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Selinger.

Mr. Selinger: I think–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Curry.

Mr. Curry: First of all, thank you so much for sharing your story. It's very brave to bring your experience to us, and I thank you so much for coming. And thank you for continuing your work, despite the dangers, and I'm so glad you were able to have the courage to tell us your story tonight. Thank you so much.

Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Manjinder, for coming tonight. You've been very brave and honest in telling your story.

      Can you tell us a little bit more about what safety measures are necessary to protect, not just drivers, but the public? What's absolutely essential no matter who's running a cab in the city?

Mr. Grewal: Thank you, Selinger.

      That's the all safety measurements we need that we already have in taxis, like shields, cameras, strobe lights or kinds of decals, like, you're–smile, you're on camera. Like, those are–people knows, like, if they're doing something wrong, so they're going to be caught.

Mr. Selinger: And is there a button too, an emergency button?

Mr. Grewal: Yes, there's a button if, like, we have a computer system so it's comes in that system to push the panic button.

Mr. Selinger: Can you talk a bit about the training you've received that helps you deal with the public more safely?

Mr. Grewal: Yes, on that, because I took the training a time ago in '94. So now I think they improved, lots of improvement in their training, two, three weeks training, and they explain, because my–one of my cousins got that just licence last week, and he told us now because they have lots improvements and they explain for little things how you can avoid or where you can play or what's that precaution you're going to take when you're driving at the nighttime or the areas, or you can maybe see the person through the way how look or make the judgment, like, that person's–because that's all comes in the training to make it professional in that business.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Grewal, for sharing that unbelievable journey and challenge that you've been on throughout your career in the industry that you love so much.

      And, of course, I've heard your–and the committee has heard your concerns about safety. You obviously have experience and have experienced these terrible concerns that obviously the entire industry has. So please, please be assured that those concerns have been noted.

      And, again, I really appreciate you sharing that very true story about some of the challenges you face on a daily–daily jobs. Thank you for that.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Grewal.

      Are there any other questions?

Mr. Maloway: I want to thank you for presentation.

      I would like to ask you, when you purchased your cab, what did you pay for it? And what do you stand to lose by having this bill come through with no compensation?

Mr. Grewal: I purchased my car in 2002 and at that time was around $200,000.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Grewal. We appreciate you coming out tonight and giving us your presentation.

      I have another little note here for the committee. We have representatives from Duffy's and Unicity that would like to address the committee tonight just on a quick note.

      And is it will of the committee to accept their presentation–just a quick, brief request? [Agreed]

      If you gentlemen could please state your names so it would go in to the recorder, please.

Mr. Kuljit Gill (Unicity Taxi): Kuljit Gill.

Mr. Harjinder Dhillon (Duffy's Taxi): Harjinder Dhillon.

Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed with your request.

* (23:50)

Mr. Kuljit Gill: I would just like to request to our honourable MLAs, we have scheduled Thursday night from 6 to 12, and there's another Friday during daytime. So we have discussed amongst our drivers, shareholders, same as Duffy's, we tried to–if you can put something after 6 p.m., because all shareholders, all drivers, there's a lot of drivers that didn't appear. They'd like to be a part of this committee, so if you can set some different time or have something after 6 p.m. or 5 p.m., please and thank you on behalf of Unicity and Duffy's.

      Thank you very much. [interjection]

      Fridays, that's fine. Yes, if something Friday or Monday, we don't mind that as long as it's after 6 p.m., not during the daytime because–the reason behind is we're–I was here yesterday, six hours. I was working during the daytime. Today, I was working during the daytime. I was here six hours. So the same thing is going to go on Thursdays. Friday we're going to be working or we have to pull cars off the road, so, please–it's deeply requested if we can have some other time, but it has to be after 6 or 5 p.m.

      Thank you very much and thank you for the request.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your request. I'd just like to state a committee cannot set its own meetings. Members from the parties–we've heard your concerns, but it's the House leaders we'll have to consult with and get–like, somebody will have to get back to you, but as a committee here, we cannot decide the times that the committee meets.

      Thank you for your concerns.

      As everybody in the committee knows, we are scheduled only to sit to midnight. We do have a presenter, No. 77, Gurcharn Singh, who cannot come back to committee. Now, we may have to sit for a couple minutes after midnight to hear him. Is that okay with the committee? It's the will of the committee to sit a little longer? [Agreed]

      Thank you very much. We will now call the next presenter–[interjection]–we might as well hear him right now then. Gurcharn Singh.

      Do you have a written presentation for–

Mr. Gurcharn Singh (Private Citizen): No, I don't.

Mr. Chairperson: So, then, if you have a presentation, you might as well just get started. Thank you very much, Mr. Singh.

Mr. Singh: Good evening, Chairperson and all of the members and my fellow workers. Thank you for giving me time. My name is Gurcharn Singh.

      Three decades ago, I came to Canada. Before that, I was working as an agrologist for the department of agriculture, Punjab, India. We work hard and believe in raising good children with good education so that our kids can contribute in the Canadian economy.

      Yesterday, a few committee members told the presenters that the MNP report says that we have less number of taxicabs per capita in Winnipeg. I agree with that member, but I have an explanation for that. In comparison with other cities, our city is not like Toronto where big corporations have their head offices. The number of universities and colleges are way more than in Winnipeg. A huge number of students and teachers use these taxicabs and other ride services.

      The 401 Highway is always plugged up and consume way more time to transport one passenger from point A to point B. That's the reason they have more taxicabs in Toronto.

      In Edmonton, the airport is 40 minutes away from the downtown. Here in Winnipeg, it takes only 15 minutes to the airport from the downtown. In Edmonton, 40 minutes going and 40 minutes coming back. From the airport–comes to Winnipeg, almost 80 minutes. And in Edmonton, they're always–all–the majority of roads, they are connected with flyovers. In Winnipeg, we had only one flyover in Plessis.

      Yesterday, another committee member also mentioned that we did not increase the number of taxicabs in Winnipeg for decades. Yes, I agree with him. In the past and until now, the Taxicab Board created other categories and brought up the number of other categories of passenger vehicles-livery plates to over 600. Plus, limousine numbers went up; plus, party bus service number went up; plus, Handi‑Transit van number went up. Now, less work is left for the standard taxicab's livery plates.

      The taxicab used to deliver blood from Red Cross–used to be on Osborne Street–to all the hospitals in the city. Now, private vendors are doing this job since the creation of Canadian Blood Services. Another work was shortage of taxi–standard taxicabs.

      The taxicab used to drive customers to the stores, to the shopping–to do the shopping, and now, people do online shopping through Amazon or Alibaba or some other online services; and the UPS, the FedEx and other gazillion companies are delivering those goods. This era of online shopping is the simple reason that we lost Eaton's in the past and recently, the Sears is going to close its doors soon as well, and we are going to lose those customers who were going to do the shopping in those stores.

      The taxicab used to do courier services and now, the private vendors are doing it. This work is totally different than I mentioned above and delivering online goods by UPS or the FedEx. I'm talking about deliveries from law offices, deliveries from the insurance offices, deliveries from PC or NDP or Liberal Party headquarters.

      Thirty years ago, there was no zero‑down payment option to buy a vehicle. Now, every household has average two cars. These days, kids work at the McDonald's restaurant and they drive their own car to part‑time work; another dent on the taxi service. All the hotels in Winnipeg have their own vans to transport their passengers to and from the airport.

      I humbly request to the committee to withdraw this Bill 30 because this bill does not have few important clauses, and these clauses I'm going to explain to you.

      The same existing insurance coverage of passengers and the drivers of standard taxicab for ride‑share vehicle for 24 hours. If any passenger takes a ride in a vehicle without full‑time insurance and involved in an accident or collision, then that passenger and the driver wouldn't be covered. Who will take the tab in this accidental collision? Our health care or MPI.

      I have a question for the committee. For example, a young man registered his vehicle with a ride-share and his vehicle is in a mechanic's shop for a couple days. On that night, if there's a Jets game, what he will do? He would in the middle of the night he will take his dad's car, and that car doesn't registered with Uber and doesn't have insurance. If that car is involved in an accident and that person, driver and the passenger, who's responsible for his injuries? And in the worst‑case scenario, the accident could be fatal. How many people in this room want to see someone dying in an uninsured vehicle?

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.

Floor Comment: Still I did not finish yet. I'm just emotional, you know. That's why–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Singh. You can continue on when you're ready.

Mr. Singh: The same camera and shield for ride‑share vehicles. That camera is a silent witness. These cameras help the police to catch criminals off the streets. Also, it's a big safety concern for female passengers. In London, England, why did they boot out Uber from there or ride-share? Because police was pissed off and police didn't like that what they were doing over there. Police couldn't handle that. In Winnipeg, we don't have that–enough police.

* (00:00)

      Child 'abude' registry and criminal record check. All the drivers have to provide fingerprints and criminal record check before getting the licence. Until now, we have the following measures in existing taxicabs, and, if Bill 30 will be passed without these measures and if any mishaps occur to any Winnipeggers or Manitobans or Canadians, then the voters would have question in their mind that why our elected officials ignored the consequences? Even the presenters made the committee aware about these consequences.

      Compensation. One committee member said yesterday that taxicabs were sold by private citizen to private citizen. Yes, I agree with that. Whenever every sale was made, the government was taking taxes on the 'tapical'–capital gains. The government had all those years to cap the price, just like the federal government did some changes in the mortgage industry couple years ago. The CMSC would not insure the mortgage if the house price is over $1 million. The loss of $500,000 of each taxicab is a huge loss. You will see, there will be so many bankruptcies, and people will kill themselves.

      I have $140,000 line of credit to send my kid to Toronto in Schulich School of Business. He just finished his M.B. over there, and I paid for that because I want to see my kid to contribute in this economy. I don't want to see him a bum and sit on welfare.

      In the past, I heard on the radio that our province does not want to sign the health or transfer payment agreement with the federal government because we have the most number of First Nations and indigenous people in this province and we need more money than other provinces because those people come from northern communities and it cost higher than other provinces. Our Province is saying to the federal government one way that we have a high cost for those. The Bill 30 needs to add that the ride share must transport First Nation and indigenous people from and to the group homes from and to their medical appointment in the city of Winnipeg.

      Income. First of all, whatever the ride share will make, 30 per cent will go to the US and the Trump doesn't want to give us business. Look at what we did to Bombardier. He wants to charge 300 per cent duty on that. Everybody we talk about–every day, we talk about the deficit. Ride-share company would take the first 30 per cent of the share, then the other 70 per cent would be divided among 1,000 drivers. How would this division affect the government revenue? Now, we are at the 25–we are making $25,000 on net income, paying a 15 per cent what we call taxes. And the people doing a part time job, they are only making $45,000. They would be the 45–60,000 bracket.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Singh, your 10 minute presentation has–the time has expired for it.

      We will now go into questions.

Mr. Wharton: Thank you, Mr. Singh, for that information and the report and the time you took to prepare it. And obviously you have a lot of experience in the industry by sharing the–your stories tonight.

      And one of the stories that you mentioned, I just want to go back to it and I would like a little bit more information. And you had mentioned about, essentially, over the growth of the industry, you were losing contracts because of the way the world was evolving. Going forward, you mentioned Sears, you mentioned the Bay. You know, people not travelling as much or going–getting picked up. That kind of thing.

      So just on that, I guess my question would be: How, in your opinion, do you see the industry continuing to evolve and grow and be sustainable going forward and in the future?

Mr. Singh: As yesterday, one member mentioned that we do not have enough number of cabs in Winnipeg–per capita in Winnipeg. That's the reason I prepared that answer that, because the number of riders are getting lesser and lesser and lesser and–every single day. So that's the reason. If other ride-share company comes here, these 420 cabs in Winnipeg, they will have a meagre amount of what we call riders.

      And this is not a city like Toronto, 24-hour hustle and bustle over there. Here, Winnipeg–after 9 o'clock, who want to go on Main Street? Who want to drive on North End? It's not a city like other big cities. So I mean, this city is only seasonal taxicabs. In summertime, they get–we get a tip after three, four hours. And wintertime, to cope with the winter rush, we put extra 150, 200 cabs. And Mr.–what we call Ray Mundy, he's a professor of logistic and economics. And what do we call–in MNP–I don't see anybody from a professional background from economy–economics or from what we call logistics or from transportation or supply chain or from statistics. They're just accountants.

      And yesterday someone say that MNP were hired by NDP. Yes. It was hired by NDP, but a general physician, if you want to go deep into the patient to health, then we get a second opinion from the specialist. Why we do not hire–this government hire the specialist rather than this MNP? We could hire someone else, just like Ray Mundy. He's a professor in the University of Tennessee and he's in charge of transportation and logistics. We should have another survey and where we can see if for this ride-share would we have an economic dent on the economy of Winnipeg.

Mr. Chairperson: Do we have any more questions?

      We thank you very much for your presentation–oh, Mr. Selinger.

Mr. Selinger: First of all, thank you for your passionate presentation. Is there any other key points you want to make before we wrap up? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Singh.

Mr. Singh: Very, very sorry. I'm so emotional. Just withdraw this bill because MNP doesn't say that have this bill. I never read anywhere where it says that prepare this bill, and if they have–want to have this bill then have a level playing field.

      And that's what our Premier (Mr. Pallister) he promised to us, and I've been with this party for May, 1990, and at 23 Kennedy majority of people they know me. And what do we call?

      Premier promised to us that there would be a level playing field and I want to see this level playing field.

Mr. Wharton: Well, thank you again, Mr. Singh, and I just wanted to, on behalf of the committee, thank yourself and everybody that's still here this evening, two days in a row, six hours, and we're very pleased to hear all the concerns and challenges that the industry has had over the many years, and we're looking forward to continued dialogue. So, again, thank you. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Singh–Mr. Singh.

Mr. Singh: I wouldn't be able to make it on Thursday. Thank you so much.

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being midnight–past midnight–in accordance with our rules, committee rise.

      We will also be on Thursday evening, as well, hosting this same committee and on–possibly on Friday.

      Thank you for your attendance.

COMMITTEE ROSE AT: 12:07 a.m.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Re: Bill 30

Hello sir /mam.

I am sending this massage regards uber or ride share i am lived in canada winnipeg i am a canadian citizen as well i been driving a taxi since 1990 my depends on me 3 childrens and house wife born in winnipeg  last year sept 2016 i bought half share in unicity taxi $390000 i am making monthly payments to bank if mayer or want to bring uber or ride share in wpg then mayer is making my life my wife which is house wife my 3 young childerens in a critical situation whole family depends on me. Mayer can bring the uber or any other then mayer and committee pay my outstanding bank loan $390000 i paid to buy half share year sept 2016. I and my family only dependes on me i stay on the road 12 hrs driving a taxi about 25 years now just ladt year i purchased a half share this is my earning i paid for half share pjease think about that. I have more more to say please email me if you need a proof that i bought a half share thru lawyer and taxi cab board of manitoba thnk

Gurdial Singh

TIME – 6 p.m.

LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba

CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye)

VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East)

ATTENDANCE – 11    QUORUM – 6

Members of the Committee present:

Hon. Mrs. Cox,
Hon. Messrs. Fielding, Pedersen, Wharton

Messrs. Curry, Isleifson,
Ms. Lamoureux,
Messrs. Maloway, Marcelino, Selinger, Smook

APPEARING:

Mr. Mohinder Saran, MLA for The Maples

Hon. Steven Fletcher, MLA for Assiniboia

Hon. Ralph Eichler, MLA for Lakeside

Mr. Kuljit Gill, Unicity Taxi (by leave); and Mr. Harjinder Dhillon, Duffy's Taxi (by leave)

PUBLIC PRESENTERS:

Mr. Gurshvinder Singh Dhillon, private citizen

Mr. Kulwinder Toor, private citizen

Mr. Manmohan Uppal, private citizen

Mr. Chamkaur Brar, private citizen

Mr. Vikram Sandhu, private citizen

Mr. Sharabjeet Sidhu, private citizen

Mr. Sukhtap Sandhu, private citizen

Mr. Edward Los, private citizen

Mr. Jagtar Virk, private citizen

Mr. Lathuinder Dullat, private citizen

Mr. Harpreet Sangha, private citizen

Mr. Jaswant Deol, private citizen

Mr. Arshdeep Kensray, private citizen

Mr. Ranjodh Chhokar, private citizen

Mr. Karam Brar, private citizen

Mr. Inderjit Bedi, private citizen

Mr. Sam Sidhu, private citizen

Ms. Asmeen Gill, private citizen

Mr. Sukhwinder Sharma, private citizen

Mr. Baljit Chana, private citizen

Mr. Kuljit Gill, private citizen

Mr. Alem Hailemariam, private citizen

Mr. Gaim Yohannes, private citizen

Mr. Asmeron Woldeselassie, private citizen

Mr. Rajwant Brar, private citizen

Mr. Jasunder Jaswal, private citizen

Mr. Khushwant Brar, private citizen

Mr. Manjinder Grewal, private citizen

Mr. Gurcharn Singh, private citizen

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:

Gurdial Singh, private citizen

MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:

Bill 30–The Local Vehicles for Hire Act

* * *