LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Wednesday, March 16, 2022
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): It is my duty to inform the House that the Speaker is unavoidably absent. Therefore, in accordance with the statutes, I would ask the Deputy Speaker to please take the Chair.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Andrew Micklefield): O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
We acknowledge we are gathered on Treaty 1 territory and that Manitoba is located on the treaty territories and ancestral lands of the Anishinaabeg, Anishininewuk, Dakota Oyate, Denesuline, Nehethowuk nations. We acknowledge Manitoba is located on the Homeland of the Red River Métis. We acknowledge northern Manitoba includes lands that were and are the ancestral lands of the Inuit. We respect the spirit and intent of treaties and treaty making and remain committed to working in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in the spirit of truth, reconciliation and collaboration.
Please be seated.
Hon. Reg Helwer (Minister of Labour, Consumer Protection and Government Services): I move, seconded by the Minister of Economic Development, Investment and Trade (Mr. Cullen), that Bill 28, The Prompt Payment for Construction Act, be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Helwer: The prompt payment and construction act aligns with government priorities related to boosting both economic and regulatory competitiveness of the province by ensuring that payments flow through the construction pyramid in a timely fashion.
Delayed payment throughout the payment chain on construction projects has been identified as an issue by construction industry stakeholders. While delayed payment is not unique to the construction industry, the construction industry is especially vulnerable to the negative impacts of delayed payment due to its tiered payment structure.
This industry accounts for approximately 8 per cent of Manitoba employment and is a significant contributor to the economic stability of Manitoba. Deferred–delayed payments for construction work that these businesses have performed limits the ability of small and 'mediuh'-sized contractors to invest in their businesses and hire apprentices.
With the introduction of this bill, government is acting on the recommendations of stakeholder representatives and is in alignment with other Canadian provinces to ensure there are no barriers created for interprovincial trade or labour mobility.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The–is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Thank you, and good afternoon, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I move, seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources and Northern Development (Mr. Fielding), that Bill 14, The Drivers and Vehicles Amendment, Highway Traffic Amendment and Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, be now read for a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: This bill amends the Manitoba Public Insurance act, The Drivers and Vehicles Act and The Highway Traffic Act.
MPI has been conducting a full review of its delivery of services for personal and commercial automobile insurance, drivers licensing, vehicle registration and associated registry functions, as well as for physical damage claim processing.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, this bill amends 14–has 14 amendments, will ensure that MPI delivers its products and services with more business agility and more efficient processes, a better customer experience, and with streamlined operations and a reduction of red tape. It is a continuation of ensuring that MPI continues to provide world-class service to its customers.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration (Mr. Reyes), that Bill 26, The Officers of the Assembly Act (Various Acts Amended), be now read for a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: The purpose of this bill is to amend the appointment process for officers of the Legislative Assembly and their deputies while maintaining the role of the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs to provide a recommendation on the hiring of an office of the–officer of the Legislative Assembly.
The bill amends the appointment process to be made by motion of the Legislative Assembly, rather than the current process of being appointed by the provincial Cabinet. The bill would harmonize the appointment process for OLAs and provide greater oversight of the appointment process provided by deputy OLAs, by members of the Legislative Assembly. It would ensure certainty and continuity of service to the Legislative Assembly in the event an OLA becomes unable to perform their duties.
* (13:40)
So, in addition, it would properly reflect the division of responsibilities between the executive and the Legislative branches and increase the independence of our officers of the Legislative Assembly.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Friesen), that Bill 27, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Alternative Measures for Driving Offences), be now read for a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: The main purpose of this act is to address a gap in the legal framework to redirect cases that would otherwise be eligible to participate in the immediate roadside prohibition program to an appropriate out-of-court IRP resolution complaint with alternative measures under the Criminal Code of Canada.
However, the IRP process has not been used to its fullest extent possible since its introduction due to operational issues such as law enforcement suspending the use of approved screening devices in response to COVID‑19 safety concerns or when an approved screening device is unavailable sometimes in rural and remote areas.
Drivers who are deemed eligible for the immediate roadside program but not initially diverted to that program can now, under this act, be referred to an appropriate education and awareness program and be subject to IRP driving restrictions such as mandatory use of ignition interlock.
These measures will ensure consistent approach to dealing with first-time offenders who are eligible for the IRP process, and help to achieve the intended road and safety and justice efficiency benefits of the IRP program.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): I move, seconded by the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith), that Bill 212, the universal newborn hearing screening amendment, be now read a first time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for Union Station, seconded by the honourable member for Point Douglas, that Bill 212, The Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Amendment Act, be now read a first time.
MLA Asagwara: I'm honoured to bring forward this bill today for a second time, which will offer parents the opportunity to have their newborns tested for congenital cytomegalovirus, or CMV, the most common non-genetic cause of permanent hearing loss in children, as part of their regular newborn hearing screening.
This will prevent complications later in life because if CMV is identified quickly, newborns can be offered antivirals that are more effective earlier in life. More and more provinces are adding this to part of their regular screens, so I am looking forward to this bill receiving unanimous support of the House and making sure that kids get the care they need here in Manitoba.
Thank you.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Committee Reports? Tabling of Reports? Ministerial Statements?
Mrs. Cathy Cox (Kildonan-River East): I rise because tomorrow is Manitoba Human Trafficking Awareness Day, and every year, thousands of Canadian families are impacted by human trafficking, including many right here in Manitoba. What starts as a seemingly innocent conversation online or in person can quickly turn sinister and create long-lasting trauma.
Human trafficking is the recruitment, transportation and harbouring of persons for the purpose of exploitation, typically in the sex trade or forced labour. It is the fastest growing, third most lucrative criminal enterprise globally, producing annual profits as high as $36 billion per year and keeping approximately 30 million people. This means people are enslaved today more than any other time in history.
And with 93 per cent of Canada's sex-trafficking victims born right here in Canada and entering at an average age of just 12 to 14 years old, sex trafficking happens in our own communities with traffickers targeting our very own children and grandchildren here in Manitoba.
Trafficking victims are carefully groomed either in-person, and often by perceived friends or boyfriends, or online via popular social media where traffickers can reach as many as 100 children an hour.
Using face-changing software to appear like teenagers, traffickers make their young victims feel comfortable and gain their trust, in hopes that they will confide in them and share information about their life and interests. And once a relationship is established, victims are exploited through manipulation, fear, dependency or debt bondage.
This is why just a few months ago, the National Human Trafficking Education Centre opened right here in Winnipeg, to serve all of Canada. The centre's website offers numerous educational resources to help Canadians young and old recognize and fight human trafficking. Numerous courses are also available for a variety of audiences and contexts, and many are free, all available at the joysmithfoundation.com.
Know the signs, know–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The member's time has expired.
Is there leave for the member to continue?
Some Honourable Members: Leave.
Mrs. Cox: I ask everyone to know the signs and know the facts.
Human trafficking is real and happening all around us and education is our greatest weapon as we work together to end human trafficking for good, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Thank you.
Mr. Adrien Sala (St. James): Mr. Deputy Speaker, today I rise in the House to recognize St. James resident Janis Gillam and pay tribute to those who have died from overdose.
Janis Gillam is the co-founder of Overdose Awareness Manitoba, an organization that works to raise awareness about the opioid crisis in this province. They also support families who have lost loved ones and advocate for increased addictions supports.
Janis lost her daughter Phoebe and stepson Chris to overdose. She describes her children as kind, funny, and creative. Phoebe died on a wait-list. She was scheduled to go into treatment on Monday and passed away the day before.
Across the province, many Manitobans continue to struggle with addictions, and the pandemic has only served to increase the number of overdose deaths. People are dying and the community is stepping up and calling for action from the Stefanson government.
On Black Balloon Day, I was able to attend the vigil organized at Janis' home where I learned of her story and what needs to be done to save lives. It is clear that those needing treatment cannot afford to wait and the Stefanson government must make real investments now.
Secondly, advocates are calling on the government to provide timely and accurate data summarizing overdose deaths. Manitobans need to know how many people are dying and what they're dying from so proper action can be taken.
Lastly, advocates are calling for a harm reduction approach to address substance abuse disorder, calling for a safer drug supply in Manitoba where people who are at high risk of overdose can access prescribed medication as a safer alternative to street drugs.
These are the solutions that Manitobans like Phoebe and Chris needed, wanted and deserved.
I ask all members to join me today in recognizing what Janis is doing for families across the province and ask for leave so that we can observe a moment of silence for all those who have lost their lives to overdose.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is there leave to observe a moment of silence? [Agreed]
A moment of silence was observed.
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Families): I rise today to recognize and honour a remarkable man who lives in my constituency of Riel, who offers a hopeful and insightful story that serves as a reminder of the importance of peace.
Eugene Kirichenko, a retired teacher, taught math, business, science, accounting, as well as biology to students at Glenlawn Collegiate for 40 years before retiring. Upon retirement, he began writing and recently published his book entitled Maya's Memories, recounting his mother's memories of living in Ukraine in the mid-1920s until early 1950s. This book honouring his mother's legacy offers readers a first-hand experience of what life was like under the dictatorial rule of Joseph Stalin, and later, under Nazi rule.
* (13:50)
Eugene interviewed his mother Maya over four years, accumulating anecdotes that would later result in a striking account of his mother's experiences, such as when German Nazis took control of her city and loaded her and other teenage girls into a boxcar. Then the girls were taken to Bavaria, Germany, to become slave labourers.
Eugene's mother and father eventually immigrated to Winnipeg, and though immigration proved to be a challenging venture, his father would go on to say that Canada is heaven, describing the new-found freedom they found in our country.
Maya's Memories serves not only as an important historical document, providing insight into the suffering and deaths of millions under Stalin and the Nazi rule, but also as a message of warmth, humanity, resilience and hope. I am sure Manitobans will agree, it is important now more than ever that we take opportunities such as the one Eugene's book provides to reflect on the importance of freedom and democracy.
Eugene is a remarkable individual, who, outside of his writing career, dedicates his time to working as a substitute teacher, where he continues to enjoy spending time with teens.
I ask all my colleagues to help me honour Eugene Kirichenko for the contributions and the lasting legacy of Maya's Memories.
Slava Ukraini. [Glory to Ukraine.]
Thank you.
MLA Malaya Marcelino (Notre Dame): Helping Manitobans recover from the pandemic should be our utmost priority. In these efforts, adult education is a key aspect to improving economic and social well-being that is often overlooked. Adult education helps adults achieve sufficient levels of literacy, numeracy and other essential skills necessary to obtain or qualify for higher levels of employment or education. Only a fraction of those who would benefit from adult education are currently enrolled in programs, due to underfunding and numerous barriers.
One major issue is that current EIA rules stipulate that recipients cannot be enrolled in education programs while they receive employment assistance. This makes it incredibly difficult for folks living in poverty, and especially parents, to improve their skills while they have to worry about feeding their family.
I am calling on the Minister of Families to change this legislation and effect a shift in the EIA program, away from pushing people with limited skills into the paid labour force, and towards directing them instead into an adult education program where they can develop their skills and abilities and significantly improve their chances of moving permanently out of poverty.
The benefits of adult education are enormous, such as stronger and healthier families and communities, improved school outcomes for their children, significant reductions in poverty and enhanced tax revenues and reduced social assistance and related costs. It is clear to all that the benefits of helping adults out of poverty far outweigh the costs.
I am calling on the government to immediately make a change to this policy to give unemployed and low-wage workers in Manitoba a chance to move forward and thrive in our recovering economy.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland): Faouzia is a talented singer-songwriter born in Morocco, then immigrating to Canada with her family to live first in Notre Dame de Lourdes, then moving to Carman where she received her education. She now lives in Winnipeg, attending the U of M faculty of engineering.
Her passion for music began at a young age with writing songs, poems and learning to play musical instruments. By the age of 15, she had released her first single, Knock on My Door, and signed with Paradigm Talent Agency, and her music career was launched.
Since then, Faouzia has competed in many competitions, including Canada's Walk of Fame and the International Songwriting Competition. In 2020, she released the single, Minefields with singer-songwriter John Legend.
This past week, Faouzia was nominated for Breakthrough Artist of the Year for the 2022 Juno Awards, and Vogue Magazine has named Faouzia as one of 12 style stars set to make 2022 exciting.
In November 2017, we had Faouzia as our guest in the gallery. She sang for us in the Pool of the Black Star that day, and it was awesome with the acoustics.
On behalf of all members of this Assembly, we wish Faouzia all the best in her Juno nomination and her musical career in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Krystal Mousseau's life mattered, and she is dearly missed by her family, friends and her children.
Now, we've laid out serious discrepancies between what the critical incident investigation found and the account provided by the Chief Medical Examiner. We now know that the company contracted to transport Krystal didn't have the right training, didn't have the right equipment to care for an ICU patient. That's very concerning. It means that there is a systemic failure involved in Ms. Mousseau's death.
Manitobans deserve answers. The government may refuse to call an inquest, but the Premier can call an inquiry.
Will the Premier call an inquiry today into the death of Krystal Mousseau?
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Premier): Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition referred to a letter from Prairie Mountain Health to the family on this very issue, Madam Speaker.
I will ask the Leader of the Opposition–he didn't table that letter for this Chamber yesterday. Will he do so today?
Mr. Kinew: While the Premier was Health minister, this government hired contractors to move ICU patients that didn't have the right equipment and that used staff that didn't have the right training.
Manitobans deserve to know how it is that a government could hire an outside contractor without ensuring that they met the standards to care for somebody who was critically ill. These are serious questions about what due diligence, if any, the Premier, as minister of Health, carried out on behalf of our health-care system.
We need independent answers and we need independent recommendations to fix these mistakes so that they never happen again.
Will the Premier call an inquiry into the death of Krystal Mousseau?
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is talking about very serious allegations, and I'm simply just asking for the Leader of the Opposition to table the letter. [interjection] There was–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Mrs. Stefanson: There was no letter that was tabled in this House yesterday from Prairie Mountain Health to the family–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Stefanson: –Mr. Deputy Speaker. I ask the Leader of the Opposition–he referred to that yesterday. It's in Hansard; he can go back and read his own comments.
I ask him to table that letter today.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Kinew: Well, let's review the facts which have been established on the record and that have been reported publicly.
Manitoba's health-care system ran out of the ability to care for additional ICU patients during the third wave. Krystal Mousseau died during an attempt to transport her in which a contractor didn't have the right equipment nor used proper staff with the appropriate training to care for somebody who was critically ill.
I might also add the fact that the Premier has access to all this information and did so as the Health minister.
We need recommendations so that the events which led to Krystal's death never happen again. There is the open question of what due diligence the Health minister at the time, who is currently Premier, carried out before engaging these contractors.
Krystal's family deserves justice. The people of Manitoba deserve to hear the truth.
Will the Premier listen and call an inquiry?
Mrs. Stefanson: I think we all want to get to the bottom of this. And what would help is that the Leader of the Opposition could table the letter that he referred to yesterday, that he is referring to today, Madam–or Mr. Deputy Speaker. He could–it is–it's a letter from Prairie Mountain Health to the family. That's what he referred to. I'm simply asking him to help us all out, to help the family out.
* (14:00)
Will he help the family out by tabling that letter for us today?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Opposition, on a final supplementary–[interjection]–on a new question.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Coulda, woulda, shoulda. That's their talking point–coulda, shoulda, woulda.
I'll give you coulda, woulda, shoulda. This government coulda done better. They shoulda done better and everyone in Manitoba knows that this team woulda done better during the pandemic, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
And that's how it is with this PC party. They say one thing and then they do the other. They say that they want to help small business, but then they go and give their Fort Whyte candidate half a million dollars. That's playing favourites. That's not creating a level playing field for small businesses in Manitoba.
Why did the Premier choose to give half a million dollars to her Fort Whyte candidate?
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Premier): Manitobans can recover from this pandemic. We will do it with compassion and understanding, Madam–or Mr. Deputy Speaker, and we shall lead this province into a brighter future for all Manitobans.
That's what we remain focused on, Madam Speaker. That's what Manitobans want to see from us and that's what we'll deliver for them.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Yes, they just got the coulda, woulda, shoulda joke, which is why they all stood up and applauded.
Now, I know that the Premier has trouble tracking–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Kinew: –$31 million in expenses, but that's not the reality for the average person out there. The average person right now is struggling because of this PC government.
Look at what they've done in office: hiking taxes on renters by $175 per year–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mr. Kinew: –and they're going to double it next year.
Hydro's up more than $150, and that's just on average. It's more for those who live in rural Manitoba.
We know that tuition's up–$1,000 more for people who want to go to college. Even the cost to visit a provincial park is going up because this party wants to send the money to Texas instead of keeping it right here in Manitoba.
Manitobans need a government that keeps life affordable.
So I ask the Premier: Will she take action today? Will she stop raising–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The member's time has expired.
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Premier): Manitobans know full well there isn't a tax that the NDP hasn't hiked at some point in time when they were in government, Madam–Mr. Deputy Speaker: 18 taxes that they increased on the backs of Manitobans in 17 years.
We will take no lessons from the members opposite when it comes to affordability for Manitobans.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): The Premier catered to a convoy that cost our economy half a billion dollars. The PCs wouldn't stand up to them, but you know what they did do? They went and got an injunction against their own Hydro partners–the Keeyask First Nations; Tataskweyak Cree Nation, in particular. They're supposed to be partners.
Not only did the PCs ignore those communities' COVID concerns, they got an injunction against them when they protested the PC's pandemic failures. And do you know what? That injunction is still in force today.
So what's the difference between the two groups?
Why did the Premier take one group to court and give the convoy every single thing they wanted?
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Premier): I always appreciate any question from the Leader of the Opposition when it comes to Manitoba Hydro, because he and every single one of his NDP members across the way knows that they increased the debt to Manitoba Hydro significantly, almost threefold while they were in office, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I will take–and none of us on this side of the House, and Manitobans will take no lessons from the NDP Leader of the Opposition when it comes to the best interests for Manitoba hydro ratepayers. They jacked up the rates of hydro, Mr. Deputy Speaker, they jacked up the debt of Hydro. Now, Manitobans are being forced to pay for that. They jacked it up. It's their issue.
My question for them: What's their plan to deal with this very serious issue, Mr. Deputy Speaker?
MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): Mr. Deputy Speaker, cuts to health care hurt. Over 300 patients have now been transferred from their home communities, many of them hours and hours away. One of those transferred, Elias Apalit, suffers from dementia and asked, and I quote: What did I do wrong? Why am I being punished? End quote.
Elias and his family did nothing wrong, Deputy Speaker.
I ask that the minister accept responsibility for the cuts her government made and commit to ending this system of endless transfers.
Will she do so and commit to ending these transfers today?
Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health): I'd like to start by announcing here in the Chamber that today we reported a 76-patient decrease in the number of COVID hospitalizations.
And I also want to state, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that the patient transfer protocol that was also used by the NDP within the province has been in place for decades. It has. And it's important to remember that decisions that are being made about patient transfer are being made by clinicians in the health system, not here at the Legislature and not by politicians.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Union Station, on a supplementary question.
MLA Asagwara: Mr. Deputy Speaker, there are 124 less hospital beds in Winnipeg than there were four years ago. That's in the region's annual report. David Matear, who is now co-lead for health incident command, said in November, and I quote, he completely understands the frustration. Quite simply, we just don't have enough beds. End quote.
He's right, Deputy Speaker. Health care is not there for those who need it.
When will this government replace the beds they cut, and will they commit to ending these transfers today?
Ms. Gordon: Mr. Deputy Speaker, we know this has been a very difficult time for Manitobans, individuals that have been transferred and individuals seeking care in our hospital system. And we have an incident command team that has been–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Ms. Gordon: –working to ensure that there's capacity with our–within our system to provide–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Gordon: –services to those we can see in the health system, and those who are waiting for care, and we will continue to support our clinicians making these very difficult decisions during a pandemic, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Union Station, on a final supplementary.
MLA Asagwara: Last month, an 89-year-old Winnipeg woman, Denise Mignot, was transferred to Flin Flon without opportunity for her family to even say goodbye.
Clarke Gehman, a veteran, was transferred from Winnipeg to Russell and then to Reston. Somewhere along the way, he contracted COVID, and he died. His son, Kirby, says, and I quote, we shouldn't have to be doing this. The resources should be there.
And we agree. We need to restore beds. We need to restore a sense of compassion for veterans and seniors who are being transferred hundreds of kilometres from their homes.
* (14:10)
Will the minister restore the beds that they cut and commit to ending these–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The member's time has expired.
Ms. Gordon: Mr. Deputy Speaker, once again, I want to state in this House that these decisions are being made by clinicians.
We know it's very difficult for the families. It's very difficult for the patients that are being transferred. That is why our government took a proactive step, working with Shared Health, to–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Gordon: –create a hardship supports and financial assistance program, so that family members could visit their loved ones. [interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Gordon: I want to assure Manitobans that they continue to receive quality care in the facilities where they are being transferred.
Mr. Adrien Sala (St. James): Mr. Deputy Speaker, inflation has reached a record level of 5.7 per cent. We haven't seen the cost of goods and services rise so much since 1991.
Food is up, housing is up and hydro bills are up. More and more people are struggling to pay their bills. In two months, the number of people in arrears with their hydro bills went up by thousands: 80,000 are now behind. The situation is about to get worse.
Will the government take action today and stop raising hydro rates?
Hon. Cameron Friesen (Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro): Mr. Deputy Speaker, the NDP must be floating out lines to see what might stick in a election period sometime in the future.
Our advice to them would be that dog simply won't hunt, not with any Manitoban. There is no Manitoban who will be fooled by that kind of advance by the NDP that somehow their over-expenditure, because of failure to manage, by $10 billion on Keeyask and bipole would come without a consequence.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, there's a consequence. It means that every Manitoban will pay for the mismanagement of those projects by the NDP. And Manitobans won't forget it.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The member for St. James, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Sala: Mr. Deputy Speaker, we're giving the government another opportunity to step up and tell Manitobans that they're going to make life more affordable. But we've heard nothing. They could raise minimum wage, but they haven't.
A five-cent raise doesn't even cover their hydro rate increases. Now the amount in arrears at Hydro has grown–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mr. Sala: –by $5 million in just two months. Two thousand additional Manitobans can't pay their bill.
Will the minister take action and stop raising hydro rates?
Mr. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Speaker, we welcome any question from that other side on the subject of affordability and standing up for Manitobans, because Manitobans won't be fooled by that question. Manitobans know that that party raised 18 taxes in 17 years. They expanded the PST. They raised the PST. [interjection]
And even now, when they chirp and try to shout down the answer, they know. They know, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They know that in last year's budget, our government returned more than a quarter of a billion dollars to Manitobans to keep that money in their own pockets, because it's better in their pockets than in the hands of the government. [interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
The honourable member for St. James, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Sala: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Manitobans also know that this government raised hydro rates by legislation for the very first time in this province's history, and they should be ashamed about that.
Five point seven per cent inflation, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Manitobans simply can't keep up. Two thousand additional Manitobans have gone into arrears on their hydro bills in just two months.
People are struggling to keep their lights on and pay to heat their homes, and this government has sat idle and done nothing to help low- and middle-income Manitobans struggling to pay their bills.
Will they stop raising hydro rates today?
Mr. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the question is an absurdity.
The NDP said that Keeyask and bipole would not cost Manitobans one penny. They said that the cost would be solely covered by export contracts. It was lies and deceit, and Mr. Deputy Speaker, now we know that that review of Manitoba Hydro has made clear that those projects–billions and billions of dollars over budget because the NDP hid the cost from Manitobans. [interjection]
Let the members chirp and chirp from their seats, but they know–they know–that when it comes to affordability, our government is standing up to Manitobans–for Manitobans–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The member's time has expired.
The honourable member for Wolseley. [interjection] Honourable member for Wolseley. [interjection]
Order, please.
Ms. Lisa Naylor (Wolseley): I want to start by welcoming the new Climate Minister to his role and remind him that the Stefanson government has done nothing to fight the climate crisis and their so-called plan will do nothing to stop GHG emissions from increasing.
Today, I will table the government's own documents that show just that. According to these internal documents, the PC's plan will result in emissions going even higher, and that is wrong, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
When will this government get serious with a real plan to address climate change? Will they do so today?
Hon. Jeff Wharton (Minister of Environment, Climate and Parks): Thank the member from Wolseley for that wonderful, warm, arousing welcome to my new portfolio. I know we had the opportunity to meet briefly in the hallway a couple of days ago. We had a nice chat.
I know the member and the party opposite will get on board with science as we move forward, Madam Speaker, and not ideology, like the NDP have done for years. [interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. Order.
The honourable member for Wolseley, on a supplementary question.
Ms. Naylor: Up, Mr. Deputy Speaker. That's the direction for emissions with this government.
Their own internal documents–and I'm told that some of the best scientific processes available–their own internal documents say their plan will result in higher emissions in Manitoba, and that is the wrong direction. Their so-called climate plan has no real targets and will, in fact, lead to emissions going higher.
Will the minister put forward a real plan with real investments that actually address the climate crisis, today?
Mr. Wharton: Again, it's a pleasure to remind the member that the plan that they had–well, of course, we know their plan, Madam Speaker–was a disaster.
Well, again, relying on science–and I was so pleased on Tuesday to rise in this House and introduce Bill 22, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We know our government is committed to the–protecting the environment, and that's exactly what we're going to do.
We're going to rely on Health Canada, Madam Speaker, and their recommendations, not the NDP.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, on a final supplementary.
Ms. Naylor: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Stefanson government's approach to climate is to try and change the goalposts. I appreciate it will take some time for the new minister to learn his file, but the internal documents we are releasing are clear. They're your documents.
Their plan results in more emissions in Manitoba. Their plan is failing on its own metrics, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and it's Manitobans who will pay the price.
The PCs cannot stall any longer.
Will they support real action and offer a real plan to address the climate crisis today?
* (14:20)
Mr. Wharton: Again, we'll remind the House of the record of the NDP when it comes to the environment. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we know that–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mr. Wharton: –back in 2012, it was announced that Lake Winnipeg was one of the most threatened and endangered lakes in North America.
What did the NDP do, Mr. Deputy Speaker? They did a photo op. They dumped millions and millions of litres into harbours along Lake Winnipeg simply for a photo op in 2014, with no science.
Where they failed on the environment, we'll get it right. [interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): When a person claims CPP early at the age of 60, it results in a larger reduction to the money they receive for the rest of their lives.
But that's exactly what this PC government is doing: forcing EIA recipients to take their CPP early against their will. All if they–and if they don't, they get cut off or threatened to cut off–be cut off, just like Bertrand Murdock [phonetic], who was cut off in January. He's now $2,700 behind in rent and is going to be evicted at the end of this month, and this minister knows it because we've sent a letter to her office.
Will the minister immediately stop the practice of forcing EIA recipients to claim CPP early, and reinstate Bertrand Murdock's [phonetic] EIA disability–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The member's time has expired.
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Families): I appreciate the question from members opposite about what our government is doing to support people who are living on EIA, which includes providing more benefits and services to them so that they can achieve their destiny.
That is why last year we invested $20 million in an endowment fund so that people who are on EIA can take the skills and the training that they can to achieve their full destiny.
That is why we routinely exempt certain benefits from the EIA formulary so that they can receive other benefits for their services while they are on EIA, and the member knows full well about those benefits that this government has brought into effect since we formed office in 2016, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Point Douglas, on a supplementary question.
Mrs. Smith: Two years ago, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found it was illegal for the government to force people on disability EIA to claim CPP early. The court stated that this practice was wrong for folks on–to cut people off on disability.
But, Deputy Speaker, this practice is wrong for anyone on EIA, like Bertrand [phonetic]. No one's financial stability should ever be at risk. Claiming CPP early for people means about one-third less when they are older, after 65.
Will the minister immediately stop this practice of forcing EIA recipients to claim CPP early?
Ms. Squires: Our government believes that people who are dealing with severe and prolonged disabilities ought not to be in the same program stream as people who are not afflicted with a severe and prolonged disability.
That's why our government introduced and passed bill 72 last year, which will make a more streamlined process for people who are dealing with severe and prolonged disabilities, that they won't have to go to a doctor year after year, like they did under the NDP, and requalify for their disability income.
That is why, under our program, we're going to have a streamlined benefit for everybody who are dealing–who are living with disabilities, so that they can have a much better life with enhanced program services and a more streamlined service delivery for them.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Point Douglas, on a final supplementary.
Mrs. Smith: The cost of living is only going up here in Manitoba. People on EIA are already struggling to make ends meet, pay for groceries, pay for their rent, pay for hydro because this government keeps hiking it up.
And now the PC government is putting income security at risk. It's wrong. It's forcing more people into poverty and it's unfortunate that this PC government and the minister thinks that it's okay to do that.
Will the minister stop this practice of forcing EI recipients to claim CPP early?
Ms. Squires: Well, it's very unfortunate, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that the member opposite comes in here and puts false information on the record when she knows better, that we on this side of the House is making life more affordable for all Manitobans.
On this side of the House we–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Squires: –[inaudible] And I know the member opposite, she doesn't want to hear about what our government is doing to–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Squires: –make life more affordable for all Manitobans. She wants to chirp from her seat, and she doesn't want to hear about the investments that we've made. She doesn't want to hear about how we've quadrupled Rent Assist, Mr. Deputy Speaker. [interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Squires: She doesn't want to hear about the $110 million that we've invested in making new housing, 735 new housing units that our government's created. She doesn't want to hear any of that. She wants to sit and chirp from her seat and she doesn't want to hear about how life is more–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The minister's time has expired. [interjection]
Order, please.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): Yesterday, Shared Health said, with government lifting all restrictions, we should expect increased hospitalizations and ICU admissions from COVID. This is confirmed by Dr. Tara Moriarty of the University of Toronto, who's been running the numbers. She warned on March 11th, I quote, if we don't take things seriously, we will likely see a lot of severe outcomes in Canada, including deaths.
I table her modelling for Canada, which estimates that Manitoba alone could prevent 320 deaths, keep 680 people out of hospital and prevent over 1,600 hospitalizations if we proceed with vaccine boosters for the next Omicron variant.
This government has been wrong over and over.
What evidence can the Premier (Mrs. Stefanson) can provide to counter Dr. Moriarty's models so that we don't see history repeat itself in this province?
Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health): I, again, want to announce in this House that today we have a 76-patient decrease in COVID hospitalizations. Madam–Mr. Deputy–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Ms. Gordon: The numbers continue to trend down, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I want to thank all Manitobans for their support of the Vaccine Implementation Task Force, for getting vaccinated not once, twice, but for many, three times.
And we're going to continue to take the advice–scientific advice–of the national immunization council, in terms of vaccinations and what will come next.
And, again, thank you to all the health-care professionals–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The minister's time has expired.
The honourable member for St. Boniface, on a supplemental question.
Retaliation Against Business
Mr. Lamont: It's worth mentioning there were four deaths today and that Prairie Mountain Health did not report its hospitalizations, which is why numbers are down as far as they are.
In a global public health emergency, it is reasonable, legal and entirely constitutional to require that people take basic steps not to infect their fellow citizens with a disease that can still be deadly, like wearing a mask.
This government has now stopped doing that. Now a Facebook group has sprung up and is being organized to identify and target Manitoba businesses who still want to use masks and are harassing and abusing them and deliberately writing bad reviews.
We warned this government that when they left it up to everybody, this is exactly the kind of division would happen.
Is the Premier (Mrs. Stefanson) going to do anything to stand up for these businesses facing harassment or will it be–do the right–and who are doing the right thing, or are they still just being abandoned?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Ms. Gordon: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to encourage all Manitobans to show kindness, compassion and to be very thoughtful to their fellow Manitobans, in terms of their decision wear a mask or not wear a mask.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, we've all gone through a very difficult time in the last two years, and we want to move out of this fourth wave in a very compassionate and thoughtful way. Again, we have seen record numbers of vaccinations: over 87 per cent of Manitobans are vaccinated. We also have treatments available, and those treatments are being rolled out across the province. And I encourage Manitobans to bond together and just support each other as–
* (14:30)
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The minister's time has expired.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, in Manitoba today, delays in accessing health care are extraordinary.
Jason Dutchak from Morden is an example. He's 49 years old. He's been working and he wants to work. However, he has a very serious heart condition–severe aortic valve stenosis–which needs surgery. He's short of breath, can't do much in the way of exercise, tires from walking to the end of his driveway, is extremely fatigued and cannot work. Heart surgery can correct this, but he has waited since September of last year and still hasn't even been given a date for the surgery.
I've written to the minister about this urgent situation–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health): Unfortunately, due to the public health–the health information act, I cannot speak to specific cases on the floor of this Chamber. But I do know that our health incident command team and the entire health system, front-line health-care workers are working very hard to return to pre-pandemic surgical slate levels so that individuals can get their surgeries.
And Health Sciences Centre has increased their surgical slates from seven to 10 to 12 to 13. Concordia Hospital has been running at full capacity for several weeks. All cardiac slates at St. Boniface general hospital have been running since the end of January. We've started–restarted surgeries in Brandon and Carman–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable minister's time has expired.
Mrs. Cathy Cox (Kildonan-River East): We know that navigating through the justice system can be extremely difficult for victims, survivors and families impacted by crime. Better supports are needed to help ensure those impacted are not retraumatized and to ensure that they receive the help and support they need while going through this process.
Can the Minister of Justice please share with the House how our government continues–government plans to support victims and survivors of violent crime?
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to thank the member for Kildonan-River East for the question and also for her tireless advocacy when it comes to victims and their families.
Candace Derksen, in 1984, was 13 years old when she was tragically killed. It's a Manitoba story that many Manitobans will always remember, but for Cliff and Wilma Derksen, of course, it was their daughter.
And as they navigated through the justice system they realized that there needed to be a place for victims, a safe place for victims. They created that place and they called it Candace House. Since 2018, they've served more than 500 victims and their families, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I want to thank Cliff and Wilma Derksen. I want to let them know that this Assembly is praying for them as they go through difficult times, and I want to thank the member for Kildonan-River East for the question and her advocacy.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The minister's time has expired.
Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): Mr. Deputy Speaker, it's now day 21 of Russia's invasion in Ukraine; 3 million people have fled and counting–a full-on refugee crisis.
Manitobans have heard the call and they want to step up. They want to help, but this Stefanson government needs to match their resolve. We need to greatly increase settlement services in place now to help those fleeing devastation.
On day 21, will the minister and the Premier (Mrs. Stefanson) finally announce increased funding for resettlement services?
Hon. Jon Reyes (Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration): On March 10th, 2022, our government provided $500,000 on top of the $150,000 announced earlier, totalling $650,000 to be used for humanitarian aid and efforts directly in Ukraine.
Yesterday, I was pleased to announce that our government will be waiving off the $500 fee for the Provincial Nominee Program, which is retroactive from–to February 22, and any Ukrainian citizen applying for the PNP.
We are taking actions, unlike the opposition members who are trying to use the current Ukraine situation to score petty political points.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Wasyliw: Politicizing this issue is saying you stand with Ukraine but you won't actually spend any money to support them. That's politicizing the issue.
There's not enough people evaluating nominee applications to keep up. This needs to change immediately, and government needs to staff up. And for those arriving, there are not nearly enough resettlement funds in place to support them.
Much more is needed to support Ukrainians fleeing devastation.
Will the minister and the Premier announce, on day 21, that they are finally going to give money for resettlement services?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Minister for Economic Development, Investment–no, that's wrong, I'm sorry. The honourable Minister for Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration.
Mr. Reyes: This is an incredibly important issue, and it should be an opportunity for us to engage across the aisle.
Instead, the member opposite rises in his place and casually, yesterday, calls the Provincial Nominee Program fee a head tax, drawing connections to a dark moment in Canadian history.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is disgusting and beneath the member. Shame on him, and I call on him today to retract the statement from yesterday.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The time for questions has expired.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background of this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
A large–
(2) A large percentage of people in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are also living on low incomes.
(4) The northern regional health authority, N‑R‑H‑A, previously provided essential medical foot-care services to seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes has only continued to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond just those served in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot care treatment to the city of Thompson effective April 1, 2022.
This petition has been signed by Riley Corner, Samson Hunter, Amir Shahin and many other Manitobans.
MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
(2) A large percentage of people in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are also living on low incomes.
(4) The northern regional health authority, N‑R‑H‑A, previously provided essential medical foot-care services to seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes has only continued to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health centre–regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond just those served in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot care treatment to the city of Thompson effective April 1st, 2022.
This has been signed by many Manitobans.
Mr. Ian Bushie (Keewatinook): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
* (14:40)
The background of this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
(2) A large percentage of people in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are also living on low incomes.
(4) The northern regional health authority, the N‑R‑H‑A, previously provided essential medical foot-care services to those seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes has only continued to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond just those served in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot-care treatment to the city of Thompson effective April 1, 2022.
And this has been signed by many, many Manitobans.
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
(2) A large percentage of people in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are also living on low incomes.
(4) The northern regional health authority previously provided essential medical foot-care services to seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes has only continued to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond those just served in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot care treatment to the city of Thompson effective April 1st, 2022.
This petition, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is signed by many Manitobans.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
(2) And a large percentage of people in the age–in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are living on low incomes.
(4) The northern regional health authority previously provided essential medical foot-care services to seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes are only continuing to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond just those serviced in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot care treatment to the city of Thompson effective April 1, 2020.
And this has been signed by Sonya Wiseman, Leona Beardy and Ivas Sandau [phonetic].
MLA Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background of this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
(2) A large percentage of people in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are also living on low incomes.
(4) The northern regional health authority, R–N‑R‑H‑A, previously provided essential medical foot-care services to seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
Mr. Dennis Smook, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes has only continued to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond just those served in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot-care treatment to the city of Thompson effective April 1, 2022.
This petition has been signed by Dylan Bignell, Fran Budd, Juliana [phonetic] Lagimodiere and many other Manitobans.
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background of this petition is as follows:
(1) Until recently, diagnostic medical tests, including for blood and fluid samples, were available and accessible in most medical clinics.
(2) Dynacare blood test labs have consolidated their blood and fluid testing services by closing 25 of its labs.
(3) The provincial government has cut diagnostic testing at many clinic sites, and residents now have to travel to different locations to get their testing done, even for a simple blood test or urine sample.
(4) Further, travel challenges for vulnerable and elderly residents of northeast Winnipeg may result in fewer tests being done or delays in testing, with the attendant effects of increased health-care costs and poorer individual patient outcomes.
(5) COVID‑19 emergency rules have resulted in long outdoor lineups, putting vulnerable residents at further risk in extreme weather, be it hot or cold. Moreover, these long lineups have resulted in longer wait times for services and poorer service in general.
(6) Manitoba residents value the convenience and efficiency of the health-care system when they are able to give their samples at the time of their doctor visit.
We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:
To urge the provincial government to immediately demand Dynacare maintain all of the phlebotomy, blood sample, sites existing prior to the COVID‑19 public health emergency, and allow all Manitobans to get their blood and urine tests done when visiting their doctor, thereby facilitating local access to blood testing services.
And this petition's signed by many, many Manitobans. Many.
Mr. Jamie Moses (St. Vital): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The population of those aged 55-plus has grown to approximately 2,500 in the city of Thompson.
(2) A large percentage of people in this age group require necessary medical foot care and treatment.
Mr. Andrew Micklefield, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
(3) A large percentage of those who are elderly and/or diabetic are also living on low incomes.
* (14:50)
(4) The northern regional health authority, N‑R‑H‑A, previously provided essential medical foot-care services to seniors and those living with diabetes until 2019, then subsequently cut the program after the last two nurses filling those positions retired.
(5) The number of seniors and those with diabetes has only continued to grow in Thompson and surrounding areas.
(6) There is no adequate medical care available in the city and region, whereas the city of Winnipeg has 14 medical foot-care centres.
(7) The implications of inadequate or lack of podiatric care can lead to amputations.
(8) The city of Thompson also serves as a regional health-care service provider, and the need for foot care extends beyond just those served in the capital city of the province.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to provide the services of two nurses to restore essential medical foot care treatment in the city of Thompson effective April 1, 2022.
This petition has been signed by Donna Bee, Felix Bonner and Chantelle Mercredi and many other Manitobans. Thank you.
Ms. Lisa Naylor (Wolseley): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the background of this petition is as follows:
(1) An estimated 1 million people suffer from eating disorders in Canada.
(2) Eating disorders are serious mental illnesses–sorry–affecting one's physical, psychological and social functions and have the highest mortality rate of any mental illness.
(3) The development and treatment of eating disorders are influenced by the social determinants of health, including food and income security, access to housing, health care and mental health supports.
(4) It is important to share the diverse experiences of people living with eating disorders across all ages, genders and identities, including Indigenous, Black and racialized people; queer and gender-diverse people; people with disabilities; people with chronic illness; and people with co‑occurring mental health conditions or addictions.
(5) It is necessary to increase awareness and education about the impact of those living with, or affected by, eating disorders in order to dispel dangerous stereotypes and myths about those illnesses.
(6) Setting aside one week each year to focus attention on eating disorders will heighten public understanding, increase awareness of culturally relevant resources and supports for those impacted by eating disorders and encourage Manitobans to develop healthier relationships with their bodies.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to support a declaration that the first week in February of each year be known as eating disorders awareness week.
And this has been signed by many Manitobans.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Manitoba women, girls, two-spirit, genderqueer, non-binary and trans persons deserve to be safe and supported when accessing abortion services.
(2) Limited access to effective and safe abortion services contributes to detrimental outcomes and consequences for those seeking an abortion, as an estimated 25 million unsafe abortions occur worldwide each year.
(3) The provincial government's reckless health-care cuts have created inequity within the health-care system whereby access to the abortion pill, Mifegymiso, and surgical abortions are less accessible for northern and rural individuals than individuals in southern Manitoba, as they face travel barriers and access the handful of non-urban health-care professionals who are trained to provide medical abortions.
(4) For over five years, and over the administration of three failed Health ministers, the provincial government operated under the pretense that reproductive health was not the responsibility of the minister of Health and seniors care, and shifted the responsibility to a secretariat with no policy, program or financial authority within the health-care system.
(5) For over four years, the provincial government has refused to support bill 200, The Safe Access to Abortion Services Act, which will ensure the safety of Manitoba women, girls, two-spirit, genderqueer, non-binary and trans persons accessing abortion services, and the staff who provide such services, by establishing buffer zones for anti-choice Manitobans around clinics.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to immediately ensure effective and safe access to abortion services for individuals, regardless of where they reside in Manitoba, and to ensure that buffer zones are immediately legislated.
Signed by many Manitobans.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Are there any more petitions? Grievances?
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): I have a leave request as it relates to this afternoon's business.
Could you please canvass the House for leave to consider the following bills today for concurrence and third reading, despite the fact that they are not yet listed on the Order Paper, and could they be called in this category: Bill 5, The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act; Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to the Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes; and Bill 11, The Elections Amendment Act.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is there leave to consider the following bills today for concurrence and third reading, despite the fact that they are not yet listed on the Order Paper, in that category: Bill 5, The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act; Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to the Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes; Bill 11, The Elections Amendment Act.
Is there leave? [Agreed]
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Deputy Speaker, could you please canvass the House for leave to consider report stage amendments today for Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes, prior to the bill being considered for concurrence and third reading?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is there leave to consider report stage amendments today for Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes, prior to the bill being considered for concurrence and third reading?
Is there leave? [Agreed]
Mr. Goertzen: Could you please then call for this afternoon report stage amendments on Bill 10, followed by concurrence and third reading on Bill 10, 5 and 11?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been announced by the honourable Government House Leader, we will be considering report stage amendments on Bill 10, followed by concurrence and third readings in this order: for Bill 10, 5 and 11.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: We will now move to consider report stage amendments on Bill 10.
The honourable member–I'm informing the House that, earlier today, the Speaker received a written request from the honourable member for River Heights asking that his report stage amendments for Bill 10 be grouped for debate today.
* (15:00)
In accordance with subrule 138(10), I have reviewed the amendments and they do fit the criteria for the provisions referenced in subrule 138(10)(a), which says, "amendments which could form the subject of a single debate are grouped according to content if, once adopted, they would have the same effect in different parts of the bill or if they relate to the same provision or similar provisions of the bill." End quote.
Accordingly, as per subrule 138(10), the member's five amendments to this bill will be moved consecutively, be the subject of a single debate and have the questions put and decided collectively.
I will now recognize the honourable member for River Heights to move his amendments.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Tyndall Park,
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 18 in the proposed clause (l.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), and adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for River Heights, seconded by the honourable member for Tyndall Park (Ms. Lamoureux),
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 18 in the proposed clause 1.1 to–by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), and adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
The member made a slight mistake in reading. Is there leave to consider it as printed? [Agreed]
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 18 in the proposed clause (l.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Tyndall Park,
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 29 in the proposed clause (l.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for River Heights, seconded–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.
I'll now recognize the honourable member for River Heights to move his next amendment.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Tyndall Park,
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 40(a) in the proposed clause (d.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), and adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) respecting requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for River Heights, seconded by–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.
There was an error in–by the honourable member in reading it. Is there leave to have this amendment as written? [Agreed]
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 40(a) in the proposed clause (d.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) respecting requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I am informed I should have stated earlier these first three amendments are all in order.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Tyndall Park,
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clause 52 in the proposed clause (gg.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for River Heights–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense.
The motion is in order.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the MLA for Tyndall Park,
THAT Bill 10 be amended in Clauses 53(1) and (2) in the proposed clause (d.1) by striking out "and" at the end of subclause (i), adding "and" at the end of subclause (ii) and adding the following after subclause (ii):
(iii) requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants, in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that Act;
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense.
The motion is in order. The floor is open for debate.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I've brought forward five report stage amendments to Bill 10, which itself, built in, provides amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and various corporate statutes.
The five amendments are similar, with one dealing with The Condominium Act, one for The Cooperatives Act, one for The Corporations Act and two for The Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act.
In each case, in the section dealing with electronic meetings, a clause is added which makes provision for the possibility of regulations which provide details for requirements for barrier-free access for meeting participants in accordance with The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the accessibility standards prescribed under that act.
These words would come under the section which allows for regulations to be provided respecting electronic meetings in each of these bills. It follows clauses which allow for the provision of regulation in relation to the notices and the calling of electronic meetings and for voting at electronic meetings.
The five amendments include one for The Condominium Act, one for The Cooperatives Act, one for The Corporations Act and two for The Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act.
The amendments are being introduced to address the concerns raised by David Kron at committee stage with respect to access for individuals with disabilities. I will quote from the transcript from the committee meeting.
I had asked David Kron the following: Just to be clear in terms of what you're asking for, I think that part of what you would like is that where we're amending The Condominium Act, The Cooperatives Act and The Corporations Act, that there should be a clause in each of these amendments that specifically says that the meeting must follow the requirements for the–of The Accessibility for Manitobans Act. Is that the direction you would like?
And David Kron then replied, and I quote: Yes, that's exactly what we would recommend to the committee. It reinforces a law that's already on the books, and it makes all those organizations look and see what the AMA act is. Because one out of–almost 40 per cent of the business leaders in Manitoba do not know what the AMA is, this reinforces something that's already been passed.
* (15:10)
Now let me illustrate with an example why it's so important to add this clause. I will refer to the situation of individuals who are hard of hearing, who have a disability, in that they can hear less well and in order to what–understand what is said, they need assistance.
Let me tell you the story of Gladys Nielsen, a senior who has difficulty hearing and has a cochlear implant. She attended one of the government's consultation events with respect to the budget. She asked for closed captioning so she could easily follow what was said.
The first meeting she was to attend, closed captioning was not provided and the meeting was of little use to her. However, closed captioning was provided at a meeting she attended after Christmas and she was easily able to know what was happening and to participate equally in the meeting with others.
Now, individuals might say you could not do that at all the business meetings mentioned under these acts. However, the fact is that Zoom and other means which provide for electronic and virtual meetings, Zoom provides the ability to use closed captioning and there're, indeed, apps for Zoom which would make this very easy to provide.
Thus, with a small change in the legislation it's possible to accommodate an individual with a hearing difficulty. And I would remind those MLAs who represent rural areas that some 50 per cent or more of farmers over the age of 50 have a hearing loss and I'm sure that MLAs representing rural areas would not want to make it difficult for half the farmers in their constituencies to participate in these meetings.
It is 2022 and it's time to ensure that individuals with disabilities can participate easily. There are about 175,000 Manitobans with a disability. They are important. These report stage amendments are important for them and I hope all MLAs will support these report stage amendments.
Thank you. Merci. Miigwech. Dyakuyu.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The–mic's on. Okay, are there any other speakers?
Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health): I just want to put a few words on the record regarding the amendments brought forward by the member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard).
This bill is about seamlessly extending provisions that are already in place and these amendments would expand on the limited nature of the emergency measures that are in place already today.
As such, we do not know the subsequent impacts, if any, that these changes would result in. As such, I would be concerned about loosely accepting them on the floor of the House today. That said, I have heard the concern about accessibility raised by both members opposite and our public presenter the other night and during committee, and would be happy to take this back to the department and assess whether future changes are required.
Again, as I stated at committee, all organizations covered by these acts have a good faith responsibility to be inclusive of their memberships.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): So, what I'll say in regards to the amendments is that we heard very clearly from David Kron at committee and we've heard loud and clear from many advocates in the disabilities community that when pieces of legislation are brought forward, especially legislation–I would say it's all legislation but, in particular, bills like this, which purport to make accessibility better, to enhance that for the general public, it is really important that we don't, you know, in this case I would almost say intentionally, because at this point concerns have been brought forward, perpetuate disadvantaging folks who already have a hard time accessing certain spaces and opportunities.
And so I just want to again thank Mr. Kron for bringing his concerns forward.
And I want to highlight that The Accessibility for Manitobans Act does provide a wealth of information that should inform legislation before it's brought to the floor of this House. And ideally, you know, advocates would not have to extend energy after the fact, after they've fought so hard for that act to be in place, in order to see the act in and of itself represented and reflected in the decision making in regards to legislation.
Thanks.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Any further speakers?
The question before the House are the five report stage amendments put forward by the honourable member for River Heights.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendments?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the amendments, please say yea–aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it.
I declare the amendments lost.
* * *
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'm asking for a recorded vote.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the member have the support of three other members?
I would ask anyone in favour to please rise to show their support.
The member does not have sufficient support.
I declare the amendments lost–defeated.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: We will now move on to concurrence and third reading of Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes.
Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Friesen), that Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes, be reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Ms. Gordon: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'm pleased to rise for a third reading of Bill 10, An Act respecting Amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes.
This bill will enable the seamless transition of important and convenient measures that were implemented through emergency orders in response to the COVID‑19 pandemic to become permanent and ongoing features of our new normal.
Bill 10 will enable pharmacists to consider administering and interpreting COVID‑19 point-of-care tests.
I want to ensure that the cost of all medically necessary COVID tests will continue to be paid by Manitoba Health. The tests reflected in this bill are for travel and rapid access purposes only. Pharmacists have played a vital role in our tremendously successful vaccination program, and this type of testing in their pharmacies has become a convenience for many Manitobans.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, Bill 10 also includes amendments under a number of corporate acts that allows for the continued option of virtual meetings to be held for a number of organizations such as condo boards, credit union and co‑op annual general meetings.
* (15:20)
This option has been generally well received by the memberships as a way to continue safely social distancing and to enable greater participation of their memberships and shareholders.
I want to note that I appreciate the feedback we have received on accessibility, access and secret-ballot consideration that members opposite and our public delegation has provided.
I note that all organizations covered by these acts, again, have a good-faith responsibility to be inclusive of their memberships and that we expect all organizations to use virtual meetings as a tool for greater participation, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and not less.
On a final note, thank you to all the members of this Chamber for their support and co‑operative spirit on Bill 10. I appreciate the general consensus and willingness of the members opposite to expedite passage, as it will mean there should be no disruption to the public in regards to conveniences they experienced during the pandemic.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): I appreciate the opportunity, again, to put some words on the record in regards to Bill 10.
I've had the opportunity, in a very short amount of time, to talk about this bill in some detail. But I think it is important that whenever we can talk about pieces of legislation like this that, you know–I certainly understand why this is being brought forward. It's also important for us to talk about the gaps and where, you know, this government can do better, where we can all do better moving forward when we bring about legislation.
So, first, I do want to say that, you know, we all understand that this pandemic has forced governments across the world to reconsider and consider deeply how they operate. And not just governments; this pandemic has forced organizations, financial institutions, you know, early-childhood-education centres. It's forced all of us, really, to consider deeply how we operate and it's forced us to adapt and change to allow for the continuation of the things that we need to do.
And so we certainly understand that emergency orders that were made under the health services act are due to expire on April 17th, and that the government, you know, intends to have this legislation passed in order to continue on some of the measures that were put in place so that there would be an opportunity for folks to engage in the ways they need to during this pandemic. I certainly understand and appreciate that.
Where I raise concern, where I have previously and where I'll do it again, is that we need to make sure these changes that are being made aren't actually making it more difficult for some folks to participate. And that's more speaking to the aspects of this bill that are addressing The Condominium Act, The Cooperatives Act, The Corporations Act and the credit unions act.
What I'll first do is talk about the public health aspect, though, of this legislation, because that is something that, you know, we understandably have concerns around and that I strongly encourage the government to do its due diligence in terms of making sure that the direction they could be headed with this piece of legislation isn't one that, you know, undermines public access to health care, which is ultimately the bulk of my concern in regards to the decision being made on the public health aspect of this legislation.
So, you know, obviously, I think that most people understand we're still in a pandemic, right? We want this fourth wave to be done. We want to be done with COVID, absolutely. The reality of it is people are still getting sick with COVID.
Unfortunately, people are getting very sick with COVID, some people are dying of COVID and we need to make sure that we still have access to COVID testing, that folks have access to COVID treatments. The window for being able to access treatments is very, very short. It's very brief; it's only five days.
And, you know, when a bill like this is brought forward and we're talking about, you know, making sure pharmacists can still administer COVID testing, making sure people can access it, you know, in those establishments, businesses, what have you, I get that. That makes sense.
But what we also need to be talking about–and this is still an area the government has not been able to provide very much clarity on whatsoever–is how, generally, Manitobans can expect to access COVID tests. I don't understand how, at this point, that's a difficult question to answer or a question, this government hasn't just rolled the plan out for Manitobans to say: listen, over the next four weeks this is what we're looking at; over the next eight months–sorry, eight weeks, this is what we're looking at. We're looking at, in six months, this is what you can come to expect, barring, you know, an increase in numbers or the introduction of a new variant.
We've been through this now for a couple of years. This government should be able to put plans in place that factor in different variables and tell Manitobans what they can come to expect in terms of access to health care.
And so, yes, okay, this legislation, we understand why this is being brought forward, support that. But at the same time, when we're asking questions about how can Manitobans expect to and where can they expect to access COVID testing, and how is it going to be communicated–because I am telling you right now, it's not being communicated very well at all. How is it going to be communicated that new oral–with new oral therapeutics being more readily available, folks can get this in five days and potentially save their life. These are important questions.
Lastly, I want to make sure that, on the technological aspect of this bill, that I highlight somebody in my own constituency doing an incredible amount of work: Allen Mankewich. He's a disabilities activist, advocate, and he talks about The Accessibility for Manitobans Act all the time. I hope that this Conservative government will listen to folks like Allen, and instead of bringing forward legislation that needs to be amended, do the due diligence in advance so that we can all be in full support of a bill that affects many Manitobans.
Thank you.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I rise to put a few comments on the record on Bill 10, the act respecting health services insurance, pharmaceutical and various corporate statutes.
I will talk first about the point-of-care tests which are discussed under The Health Services Insurance Act and The Pharmaceutical Act. Clearly, it is important that these point-of-care tests be available and that the tests which are available be both the rapid antigen tests and, when they are available, the rapid PCR tests.
And we need–in addition to having these tests available it is becoming increasingly clear that it's very important that people have a way of keeping a record which can be accepted as documentation that they had a positive test. Right now, that is only possible if you have a test done at–by–in a pharmacy or in a hospital or health-care institution. But for many people at the moment, the rapid antigen tests are being done at home and there is not adequate documentation of a positive test that will be accepted as proof that the person has had a COVID infection.
And this becomes important in a variety of circumstances. A number of countries are now accepting a recent–in the last six months–COVID-positive test as being equivalent to somebody having been vaccinated, in that the person would have some level of immune response. That may be important for a number of people to have that documentation if they want to travel at the moment, and we don't know how long into the future that will also apply.
But it is also important for people who develop long COVID. And if there is not documentation which is formally accepted that a person has had a positive COVID test, then there is a possibility that the physician or the insurance company will not accept a diagnosis of long COVID without there being a positive COVID test which has been properly documented.
* (15:30)
This would be, in a sense, equivalent to what has happened with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders in the past, where there is a critical need, in order to have the diagnosis, for there to be a documentation of alcohol use in pregnancy. This is completely different, but it is a similar sort of issue that, where you want to have a diagnosis of long COVID, it is likely that you will need to have documentation of a positive COVID test, and, at the moment, tests done at home are not acceptable.
We should work out ways in which tests done at home can be acceptable. People can take a photograph of the positive test. There can be somebody in the home or a neighbour who can provide signed documentation of witnessing the positive test.
This should be something that is done and done properly right now because we have–will have, I suspect, many people in the future who can suffer because their COVID-positive test was not verified properly and may not have been then accepted in–by a physician wanting to diagnose or considering diagnosing long COVID, or by an insurance company, whether here or elsewhere, accepting the fact that the individual has had a positive COVID test and has thus been infected by the coronavirus, the SARS-CoV-2 virus or COVID‑19.
So this, sadly, was not included in this act and it should have been, in order to have proper documentation, allowed, substantiated and proper records. This, interestingly enough, if it had been done and people were then reporting these, we could have had a much better incidence of the number of people who are developing COVID‑19 infections, and we would be in better shape today in terms of being able to monitor the extent of COVID‑19 infections in our community and in our province.
Now there is a way that can be used for monitoring under the present circumstances, when we don't have the same level of monitoring, when we don't have a proper way of verifying that somebody has a COVID‑19 positive rapid antigen test or rapid PCR test. And that would be for–by the testing of waste water. And we understand that the Province is doing some testing of waste water, but we are not getting daily results of that, as we should be getting, as other provinces and other jurisdictions are providing.
The government needs to pull up its socks and do a proper job instead of not reporting the level of COVID in our waste water today.
The Pharmaceutical Act allows for continuation of pharmacists to do rapid antigen tests, and one presumes also rapid PCR tests, when they're available, and to verify the fact that it is positive or not.
This is important that this continue, but it is really important that it's not just available for people who are travelling, as it was for quite some time. I am told that it's more available now than it was. I was told that the change was made in November or December, but, clearly, at the end of December, early January, this change had not been made aware–or not all pharmacists had been made aware of that change.
It is important that people know that they have a positive test and can get that test done. It is vital, if that's to be a service provided by pharmacists, that pharmacists will be able to have the test materials, whether it be the rapid antigen test or the rapid PCR test, and on an ongoing and continuing basis.
It is interesting that this will set an important precedent, that pharmacists should be able to do point-of-care tests in a number of areas in the future, and it is likely, given the changing nature of diagnostic laboratory tests. For example, it–with the appropriate attachments to an iPhone, you're now able to get a number of tests done, including, I'm told, an ultrasound. And that will change the dynamics, the availability and where a test can be done.
And I suspect, in the not too distant future, we will have a larger variety of tests being able to be done in pharmacies, and that is probably a good thing, provided that we have the standards–adequate standards and assurance of quality control that is well needed.
Let me say a few words about The Condominium Act change, The Cooperatives Act, Corporations Act, Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act changes. These are changes to make virtual meetings possible with these condominiums, co‑operatives, corporations, credit unions, caisses populaires, and make them sure that they are legitimate.
This is a positive step and it is a reflection of the fact that we have learned a lot during the COVID pandemic about using virtual means from Zoom to Teams, to many others. It is important–an important change, but coming along with this important change, there should have been the amendments, which I brought forward, which would have ensured that individuals with disabilities were not disadvantaged by this change.
It is not just me, but the MLA for Union Station, who has put forward a variety of circumstances where individuals who are disadvantaged or with disabilities may be handicapped by this approach and may not be able to fully participate.
It is really important that we are an inclusive society. It is really important that we have The Accessibility for Manitobans Act and the standards which come under that act. It is with almost disbelief that I saw the minister stand up and say she wouldn't support this.
I think we are at a day, at an age, at a time when people with disabilities should be supported and accommodated. These are, in fact, required under law, and so it shouldn't have been a big step to include The Accessibility for Manitobans Act, and the standard under that act is clearly applicable in these circumstances.
It is so important. Whether it be disabilities like problems hearing or problems seeing, or physical disabilities or mental disabilities, there needs to be some action, some consideration. People should not be dismissed. They should not be turned aside. They should not be prevented from adequately participating.
There are 175,000, approximately, Manitobans with disabilities. This is a large group of individuals. We have seen the rise of the possibilities for those with disabilities. We have recently seen the Paralympic Games, which Canadian athletes did very well at. It is past time that we should make sure that people with disabilities can participate and can participate well.
* (15:40)
We have made a substantive change in this Chamber to accommodate a former MLA, Steven Fletcher. And we did that because, in this Chamber, MLAs got together and they said, this is important, that an individual with a disability should be able to participate just like anybody else. That should have been a part of this act and this amendment, and it's a disgrace that it is not.
I'm sorry that it didn't happen. I am discouraged by the negative approach of the minister and the lack of support that I saw. I can only hope that at some point in the future, the government will change its approach to people with disabilities and be much more open and much more inclusive and ensure that people with disabilities are no longer disadvantaged the way they have too often been in the past.
Thank you. Merci. Miigwech. Dyakuyu.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Are there any other speakers?
Is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is the third reading–concurrence and third reading of Bill 10.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: We will now move to Bill 5–to concurrence and third reading of Bill 5, The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Johnson), that Bill 5, The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social Economic Development–Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: I'm very pleased to stand to put just a few words on third reading regarding this particular bill, known, I think, as the polar bear bill and making the polar bear an emblem, officially, of Manitoba. And I think, unofficially it is, in many ways, already an emblem.
For those who live in other places around the world, I think they recognize Manitoba as being home to polar bears, and, of course, the polar bear capital of the world, the–Churchill.
And, those who live in Manitoba, and I've said it before, I think that many people do believe already that the polar bear is a symbol of Manitoba. Schoolchildren–I sometimes get a chance to ask, they will identify the polar bear, along with the bison, at times, as a symbol.
So I think it is high time that we give the polar bear this recognition.
I know that there have been questions about what does the bill do in terms of sustainability for the polar bear and other sort of matters. And, of course, like a lot of the different emblem bills that we have in Manitoba–whether it's for the bison or for the spruce or the great grey owl–they are not bills that go beyond simply naming these iconic symbols as an emblem.
But it is important to recognize them as an emblem, because I think–and the House leader for the opposition did say in committee, and I agree with her–that sometimes just recognizing the importance of something has a lot of tertiary benefits because it does cause people to talk or to think about the importance of something to Manitoba, and the polar bear would be one of those.
So I'm pleased that all members of the House have agreed to support this bill and have ensured that it has speedy passage, and I appreciate that, because I think that there are things in this House, more than most people know, that we do agree on and that there is not division on. We focus a lot on the things where we disagree on, and that's fine; that's part of the democratic process. We should not lose that ability or that enthusiasm for disagreement. But we should also recognize that when there are things we agree on, there isn't necessarily a reason to try to find disagreement.
And sometimes I know, in opposition, you feel that you must find disagreement with everything that the government does, but I'm glad, on this bill, by and large, that hasn't been the case. And so I look forward to quick and unanimous passage of this bill.
Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): So I do want to put some comments on the record in respect to Bill 5, and I do want to concur with the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) that we are in support of Bill 5 and certainly in support of recognizing the importance of polar bears to the identity of Manitoba.
And, certainly, the Government House Leader is right that Manitoba is known around the world. In fact, it is part of our tourism. It's what brings money into Manitoba that folks from around the world want to see polar bears. So we're in agreement with all of that and we're in agreement that we're going to support this bill.
However, I will just put a couple of remarks on the record here.
You know, we are in a climate crisis, Deputy Speaker. There's no denying that around the world, environments are in a crisis because of climate change and because of–as the United Nations has stated in the last six or seven months–because of the actions and activities of humans. Humans are contributing 100 per cent to the climate change that we are experiencing across the globe, and Manitoba's North is no different.
The climate change that we see in our North is sometimes rendered in pictures that journalists get of polar bears on an iceberg by themselves in a sea of ocean where normally there would be ice and polar bears could travel the miles upon miles upon miles that they do in search of food and raising their offspring and getting ready for the, you know, all of the elements that present themselves within their lives.
And so, yes, Bill 5 is a feel-good bill. We can all feel good about making the polar bear an official emblem of Manitoba. But the fact remains is that, you know, in this House as legislators and particularly as government, government has a responsibility to do everything that they can to protect polar bears, to protect polar bears for what Manitoba is known for, to ensure that we will have polar bears for generations to come. That is the responsibility of being in government.
It's not only the responsibility of being in government to do something that really takes no effort, and making the polar bear the official emblem or one of the official emblems of Manitoba takes no effort. There's no cost to it. It feels good. We can all rally around it. But we need concrete actions in respect of protecting polar bears.
And I think it's important to put on the record here, Deputy Speaker, a couple of things that the PC government–both Brian Pallister's government and the Stefanson government–have done, have undertaken since 2016 when they became government. So they–the PCs scrapped plans to protect polar bear dens through the establishment of a polar bear provincial park. They scrapped that. Again, what we're trying to do is protect the populations of polar bears that are fragile at best right now because of what we're doing.
* (15:50)
And so, in 2013, Deputy Speaker, the NDP, our government, announced plans to begin consultation for a provincial park on the Hudson Bay coastline to protect polar bear denning areas. At the time, it was heralded by environmental groups as an excellent initiative to protect the species.
And I just want to put a couple of the words on the record at that time. So, the Manitoba chapter of Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society wrote, and I quote: With polar bears facing an uncertain future as climate change alters their winter sea ice hunting grounds, protections of large areas of their land base habitat will provide greater opportunity to adapt to these changes. By far, the largest park in Manitoba, if created, it will serve a huge diversity of species in this northern boreal region, including caribou, Arctic fart–fox, beluga whales and thousands of migratory birds that flock here to breed in the summer. End quote. Deputy Speaker. I know, that was a little bit of a mix-up there.
And so, back in 2016, the PC–the PCs at the time pretended that they were going to support the NDP plan, and then the minister of Sustainable Development told the press that, and I quote: The long-term sustainability of polar bears is important to Manitoba and definitely important to all of us, so we want to move forward with the park in conjunction with First Nation peoples. End quote.
But since then, the provincial–officials have confirmed that the PC government abandoned this initiative; they just abandoned it. They just gave up on polar bears. They didn't want to protect areas that would contribute to the long-term sustainability of polar bear populations–that's gone, that's out.
And then it is important to know that CPAWS still continues to advocate for this polar bear park. So, you know, in the next year and a half, I think that's what we're looking–are 500-plus days until the next election in October of 2023. The PC government can restart that and start that process of looking at protecting polar bear denning areas. They can do that right now, right in conjunction with this bill, they can say, yes, we're going to do this and we're going to make polar bears the official emblem of Manitoba, but we're also going to do something that's even more tangible and more important, and that is to ensure that we're protecting areas for polar bears.
More recently, what we saw the Stefanson government do was they–it–well, let me just backtrack a little bit here. In–since 1984, the Manitoba government had issued 18 tundra vehicle permits for companies to facilitate polar bear tourism in the North. So, as I noted and as everybody knows here in this Chamber, polar bears are a part of tourism for Manitoba and certainly for Churchill. Lots of folks go up there. I've been up there. I've had the pleasure of being up there and didn't see any polar bears. I did see hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of beluga whales, which looked like kind of waves but actually they're beluga whales coming in and out. It was quite–something I'll never forget.
So, of course, you know, going out on the tundra trying to see polar bears is a huge contributing factor to tourism and so these 18 permits limit was a good balance to preserving the Churchill area's ecosystem and allowing the tourism sector to still thrive, Deputy Speaker.
And so, unfortunately, without consulting Churchill residents and unbeknownst to anybody, the PC government, the Stefanson government, gave another permit. And what's shocking–again, no consultation–nobody asked for an additional permit to make it up to 19 or 20; didn't do any of that.
But what's shocking about this is, I mean, maybe that–maybe it's not shocking considering what we know about their candidate now in Fort Whyte, they gave this permit to a former Conservative Party of Canada candidate and a PC party of Manitoba donor; they gave that.
And so there–and here–the other piece about this is that other–[interjection]–I don't know why they're upset. I'm just pointing out facts, that it seems to be a pattern with the PCs here that they give money to their friends and then they let them run for them to–so that we're all going to have to sit in this office knowing that folks are given $500,000 when other small businesses are struggling here.
So, again, I guess it's not shocking that the PCs keep giving these, like, benefits–not to anybody else, but to their friends who make donors–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: So let me just say this. When they did this, and they went against expert advice, they upset quite a few people. They upset, you know, members of the business community in Churchill. They upset First Nation leadership who were not consulted on this as well. And certainly they–the PCs upset environmental groups.
Because, again, it means nothing for us to have a polar bear as our official emblem if we have no polar bears; if we don't do what this building is designed to do, and that is what's in the best interest of all Manitoba, including protecting polar bears.
I want to just share John Gunter, a Churchill business owner, and he said, and I quote, Deputy Speaker, he said: it's extremely–I'm extremely disappointed in the government's action, and I just don't understand. I'm stunned. It seems like there's two sets of rules, and I'm not sure why that's the case. End quote.
We've established, in the last two weeks in this Chamber–and well beyond that, but certainly in the last couple of weeks–we've established that there's one set of rules for them, and then one set of rules for the rest of us, the rest of Manitobans.
And here's a good example of just giving a new permit to a new business of a PC donor who–I don't know what his qualifications are. Like, what are his qualifications? Does he have connections to the community? Does he have connections to First Nation leadership? Does any of that money help the community? I don't know any of that. I don't think Manitobans know any of that.
And so, I think I want to put some words on the record, again, for another business owner. And Caleb Ross echoed those concerns, and he said that he only heard about this additional permit through the grapevine. Like, the government didn't even let any of the other permit holders know that they were giving these new permits. And that–it's surprising and a bit disappointing that the rest of us weren't given the option.
So the PC government chose to give an additional permit that nobody asked for to a PC donor, but didn't–you know, for all the talk of the PCs who say that they care so much about business and small business and blah, blah, blah, didn't give the operators that are already doing good work, that already have those established relationships with community and First Nation communities, and have already established that they are good operators in the environment, didn't give them the opportunity if–for whatever reason, which we still don't know why they decided to give an additional permit–they didn't give those small businesses the option of getting that one additional permit. Gave it to some PC donor.
I have to say, it's so offensive that this government keeps rewarding those people who give them money. And again, like, you know, we see the example in the last little bit with, you know, $500,000 to a candidate when, you know, we have so many small businesses all across Manitoba that were struggling just for the little bit of pittance that they gave to small businesses, and had to go–jump through all of these hoops, and yet somebody comes out in support of the Premier (Mrs. Stefanson) during her leadership race, and gets half a million dollars.
And so, it's no different than what the PCs did here when they gave a permit to one of their PC donors. I think that's shameful. I think Manitobans would agree that it's absolutely shameful.
* (16:00)
Finally, let me just put this on the record. Again, Chief Morris Beardy from Fox Lake Cree Nation, whose traditional lands includes parts of the Churchill Wildlife Management Area, noted that his community was not consulted with, and I quote: there was no consultation with our resource management board or our community that shared these traditional lands. Indigenous communities must be part of the decisions that affect our territories and communities must be a part of the opportunities to promote and expand tourism in the North. End quote.
Again, you know, Chief Beardy isn't saying that, you know, no new development or anything like that, but they weren't even consulted. They weren't even given an opportunity. And I remind folks in this Chamber that all of Manitoba is traditional Indigenous lands, and the fact that the government gave an extra permit that nobody asked for to a PC donor that has no connection to anything up there and didn't go first to the original peoples of our traditional territories, tells you everything that you need to know about, you know, who the PCs reward and who they don't.
And for all the talk from, you know, like we believe in, like, reconciliation and reconciliation is so important to us, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And yet they can't even, out of respect, approach Chief Beardy to say hey, this is what we're thinking about. Are you guys okay with that? Are you on board? Do you want a permit? Do you think a permit is good? That–they don't–Indigenous people in that area don't even exist to this government.
So spare me all of the we-believe-in-reconciliation, or telling us, on this side of the House, for us to get on board with reconciliation.
How many Indigenous people do we have on this side of the House? Don't tell us to get on side with reconciliation. We live and breathe reconciliation every single day. The fact that we're still alive in this colonial Canada and the assault that is taking place over generations and generations, we're still here. We know about reconciliation. If the government really believes about reconciliation, they can rescind this permit and go and meet with Chief Beardy, meet with the communities and protect polar bears.
Miigwech.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, polar bears are amazing animals. They are iconic–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, the polar bears are amazing animals. They are iconic. They are found during parts of the year very frequently in Churchill. Although I have been to Churchill a couple of times, one of the sad parts of my trips to Churchill was that I have not yet seen a polar bear and I hope to yet. Seeing polar bears in the wild is an experience which I think more and more people should have and, hopefully–hopefully–this bill will be part of a movement to try and make sure that polar bears will be part of Manitoba and will live in the wild in Manitoba for a long, long, long time into the future.
But, of course, that future right now is in question. People are already talking about the likelihood that polar bears will no longer be in the wild in Manitoba by the end of this century. We have to be careful that we don't have an emblem which is going to disappear from our province. We need an action plan; we need an approach which is going to make sure that polar bears are here for years and years to come.
Seeing a polar bear in the Assiniboine zoo is an incredible experience. The display that was put together there is a marvellous example of what can be done to give animals a habitat and an ecosystem in a very small scale, which better mimics the ecosystem in the wild. It is, I think, an example of what should be the situation for many, many more of the animals who are in our Assiniboine zoo. That they should have the space that is more similar to their wild space, they should have more room than a small cage and that we should consider the animals and the environment which they are in as increasingly important.
What will it take to ensure that polar bears continue to live in the wild in Manitoba?
Probably, first and foremost, it will take a major effort to address climate change, to arrest what is so rapidly occurring at the moment, which is an increase in global temperatures, a decrease in winter temperatures–or, an increase in winter temperatures, and an increase that occurs particularly in northern parts of the world and in mid-continent areas.
And so, the polar bears are particularly susceptible to climate change, and they need the kind of environment that we have currently in Manitoba. And, if the ice is gone completely on Hudson Bay and if there are no longer the sort of winters that we've had in and around Hudson Bay and particularly around Churchill, then the polar bears may not be around. And, of course, with that comes not only an increase in temperature, but an increase in the volatility.
Here, we have increased floods, increased fires. Exactly what that will mean to the area around Churchill, I suspect we don't know for sure, except that probably a lot of the areas which have permafrost up there now will no longer have permafrost. We will see much more in the way of marshes instead of frozen permafrost areas, and it will be quite a big change. And that big change will not necessarily be good for polar bears.
So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am in strong support of the polar bear being a symbol for Manitoba. I raise concerns over its future because I think we should all be concerned, and we should all be working not just to make it a symbol, but to do what we can to make sure that polar bears live in the wild in Manitoba for a long time to come.
Thank you.
An Honourable Member: It's an honour to put a few words on the record–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
My mic was not turned on. I think for Hansard, I need to repeat that with the mic on.
The honourable member for Transcona.
Mr. Nello Altomare (Transcona): I'm happy to put a few words on the record for Bill 5. It adds the polar bear as one of the designated mammals as an emblem of Manitoba.
I would say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that there's another mammal of the avian variety that has become ubiquitous to a certain part of the city. Ubiquitous is defined as present, appearing and found everywhere, and I would say that I want to remind ourselves that the pink flamingo is ubiquitous to Transcona.
And I just want to make a couple of, you know, direct relations–a direct correlation to Transcona is that these are social birds. They gather in groups of 50 and up to 1,000–kind of like at a social. And when they're not, right, when they're not gathering, you know what they do? They tend to themselves by either eating or personally grooming.
And it is just a fantastic symbol, and I hope that, at some point, members of the House that remain after the 2023 election consider this mammal as another emblem that we can add to the pieces here in Manitoba.
* (16:10)
And I thank you, and I thank the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma) because he agrees, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that this is something that should be considered.
Thank you very much, everybody.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Are there any other speakers?
Is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure–oh, the question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 5, The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: We will now move to concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Elections Amendment Act.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure (Mr. Piwniuk), that Bill 11, The Elections Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be read now for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: Just to reiterate a few words that have already been said about this bill at second reading, and at committee.
So, the bill has the support of the Chief Electoral Officer of Manitoba. In fact, most of the recommendations in the bill have come through her annual reports and then have gone to a standing committee where we discuss the annual reports.
It's been supported by all of the parties that are represented here in the House, and I think that that's, you know, a testament of goodwill between the political parties in terms of how this bill has proceeded. I shared much of the information of the bill, not the text of the bill, but generalities of the bill, with the Opposition House Leader prior to introducing it.
So, just in terms of the highlights, it will allow for tabulators to be used on election days. This is used in the city of Winnipeg, many other provinces. I think the members had an opportunity to see the demonstration of the tabulators.
Just so there's no confusion, this isn't the same thing as electronic voting. This isn't members of the public going to a voting station and pressing a screen for an electronic vote. It still is the manual paper ballot that we're all used to and have various degrees of fondness for, but it's still that manual system. It's just that those paper ballots can get read by a tabulator.
And, of course, it maintains those, not like putting it into a shredder, they maintain the ballots so if there is any sort of question, or if somebody wants to dispute the tabulation, the ballots can be then manually counted. So it has that redundancy function, if necessary. But in most cases, it should speed up the tabulation of the vote.
The electronic strike-off provision, which allows for vote anywhere in your constituency, has been used in Manitoba in advance polling, I believe, and I think, maybe, in by-elections as well, which allows for real-time dissemination of information about who has voted.
That, then, allows an individual to vote at any polling station within their riding because, at another polling station, it automatically updates the voting list and that wouldn't allow an individual, if they so choose–and I know most Manitobans would never do such a thing–but it wouldn't allow somebody to vote in one polling station, then go to another polling station in their riding, vote again, and carry on and do the same thing, because the information is automatically updated electronically.
And so, that, again, is about accessibility and allowing people to vote more easily within their constituencies on election day.
There is a provision to no longer record the addresses of individuals who are running for election. It's an outdated provision, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I think only one other province has it.
When I asked the Chief Electoral Officer in committee why that provision existed in Manitoba, she couldn't quite remember, doesn't know the genesis of it, doesn't know why it was there.
It may hearken back to a time when, you know, people didn't know how to access their political officials. I know I've, you know, spoken in the House before, but you can go back to a time in history where people could literally walk up to the White House, knock on the door and ask to speak to the president. Well, that doesn't happen anymore, either, you know. For good or for bad, times have changed and this was probably just a reflection of an older time and it's being updated now.
When it comes to the ability to bring a person's own reading devices if they have–if they're sight-challenged, I think that's an improvement. There's been many things we've tried to do to ensure that those who are–otherwise have barriers to voting can participate in the easiest way possible. I'm sure that, you know, other suggestions will come up in the years ahead. But that's an ongoing thing about bringing down barriers for those who might otherwise have barriers for voting.
So, those are just some of the highlights of the bill–again, all supported by the chief electoral officer, all approved at committees here in the Legislature by and large, and I know that the opposition has expressed support for it. So, they may try to find, like they did with the polar bears, something to be offended by when–in their speeches, but I think by and large they will find agreement with this bill, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I'm going to put a couple of words on the record for Bill 11.
So, again, my colleague is right. There–we are in support of Bill 11. And actually–[interjection]
Hold on, I'm getting to the but. Hold on. I do actually want to take this opportunity to thank the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) for the collaboration on the bill, and letting us know, and having those discussions. I think it's really important to have those discussions, particularly as it impacts on our democracy.
And, you know, I don't think it's any big secret that, you know, part of the bill is in respect of having more protections for MLAs in the Chamber or outside the Chamber. And it's no big secret that, you know, we've seen a shift in the last year, year and a half, in respect of the way that the public engages with politicians. And I know that in the last year, and certainly in the last six months–well, actually, since I first got elected, but it's just ramped up and ramped up in the last year and last six months, where, you know, I'm–and, like, several members in this Chamber are inundated with really grotesque, threatening messages.
And in fact, I've shared with a couple of folks that I had organized an abortion rally here on October 2nd or October 4th, I can't remember quite the date, and actually had an individual, a man, try to get to me on the stage. And luckily, we had volunteers from Comm.UNITY.204 that were there, and my staff, but I noticed him because I knew–I could see the way that he was behaving. And I had given my staff a heads up, and I said keep an eye on him. And just as I was getting up, he was trying to make it up the stairs to the Leg.
And that's just one example of many different examples that I know members in the Chamber here, and our colleagues, regardless of what side of the House they sit on, across the country, in Parliament and across our Legislature. So, I appreciate some of the attempts to have a little bit more protections for public servants in this Chamber.
I want to say miigwech to the Chief Electoral Officer. I know I say it all the time, but I actually think she's quite extraordinary. I think that Elections Manitoba and her team are quite extraordinary. They do such phenomenal work, and I know that every time she comes to a standing committee meeting I'm just, you know, so blown away with how brilliant she is, and just how dedicated she is to Manitoba's democracy. And so, I want to thank her for that.
You know, I think that Bill 11 is important because it, you know, hopefully creates and puts measures in place that allow Manitobans to participate more easily in our democracy.
You know, it's–you know, we know that not every eligible Manitoban votes for whatever reason. I know that probably each and every one of us in this Chamber has gone knocking at a door and: hello, I'm, you know, so-and-so, and, you know what–and people at the door will say, I don't pay attention to politics and I don't vote. And so why? Like, I–I'm always, you know, I'm not shocked anymore.
* (16:20)
But in the beginning I was like, oh, I thought everybody kind of paid attention to politics and know people don't all–not every single person pays attention to politics. And why is that? Like, why is it that what happens in this Chamber that affects every single Manitobans' life. People aren't engaged in that, and is it because it's too inaccessible, that this place is inaccessible, the language that we use is inaccessible? Is the voting processes intimidating and inaccessible, and it's probably all of it, I would suggest.
And so when we can put, you know, an infrastructure in place that allows, hopefully, or takes out some of the intimidation pieces to vote in the elections, I think that that's a good day and I think that's important work. And I think that everybody on this side of the House and everybody in the House would support that work to have people to participate in our democracy.
I will say, though, I want to remind, you know, folks in the Chamber and certainly anybody that's going to go and read Hansard or watch, you know, a video, that–you know–the PCs under Brian Pallister actually made it harder.
So on the one hand we have this bill which is the infrastructure of voting. But on the other hand, you know, the PCs made it much harder for, in particular, women and BIPOC, gender-diverse folks–folks that are more marginalized Manitobans–to participate as potential candidates when they changed the rules in respect of the dollars that are given back at the end after an election. They reduced that amount.
And, you know, I think it's important because, you know, as I pointed out way back then, we know that other provinces and territories actively support to have the electorate participate in the election processes as candidates and to run in elections–by supporting that; recognizing that not all citizens are at a–you know–start in an equal playing field. They don't.
Women in particular, BIPOC women, and gender-diverse folks aren't at the same starting point as, let's say, white men, and, you know, we know that this–we know that legislatures and parliaments across the country, across the western society, we know that those have always been the domain of men. Politics have been the domain of men. Politics have been the domain of men for men, by men. And it was, you know, it's the legislatures and parliaments are situated in a way that conditions men to feel that it is their right to participate in elections.
Often–I think there was, you know, just before the 2016 election when we all thought–or many of us thought–that Hillary Clinton was going to win, there was a really important interview on CBC, The National, with Peter Mansbridge, and he was interviewing a–several at the time–women premiers, which, again, those premiers are no longer. We only have one female premier across the country, which is a sad commentary that we only have one when there are so many extraordinary women across the country that could do a phenomenal job and actually care about the constituents that they represent.
But at that time, you know, Peter Mansbridge asked, you know, like, what you–what do we need to do to get more women to run in politics? And Rachel Notley, who was the premier of Alberta at the time, and she said you have to ask women four or five times if they're going to run. And that is profound and one hundred per cent accurate.
I know that the member for Union Station (MLA Asagwara) and myself and other members here alongside one of our colleagues outside this Chamber, Anna Rothney, we've been really, really trying to–and my sister colleague from Point Douglas–have been really, really trying to reach out to women and gender-diverse folks to run in the next provincial election. But not only the next provincial election, all elections, right? Like, for–in First Nations communities the elections for chief and council happen every two years. We have very few women that run in those positions or if they do, they're not necessarily elected. We don't have a huge number of women chiefs. That number is growing, certainly, but there's still a discrepancy between male and female chiefs, or gender-diverse folks as well.
We know that in October–and I know I keep bringing this up on social media and every opportunity that I have–we know that Winnipeg is going to go to the polls to elect the next mayor. And, in 148 years of the city of Winnipeg having elections for mayor, only one woman has ever been elected mayor. That's unacceptable. It's unacceptable, and folks have to do more to step up to support women and gender-diverse folks to run, in particular BIPOC women and gender-diverse folks, to run in elections.
Because it is–and you know, like Rachel Notley said, you have to go four or five times. I think that, inevitably, we get to this place where we're a little bit insecure, or we feel–I know that, myself, when I was asked in 2008 to run federally for the NDP by Jack Layton himself, I remember thinking, like, I don't think he knows what he's talking about. Like, why would he ask me to run federally? I'm not smart enough. I don't have enough experience. Like, all of these things, even though, you know, I'd been doing so much work in the community, had a master's degree, blah blah blah, all of that stuff, but still feeling, as a woman, and particularly as an Indigenous woman, that I wasn't qualified to be a part of that space. And that's not right. That's not accurate.
In fact, we routinely see mediocre men get elected to legislatures all across Canada. And we don't say that, and I'm sure that those mediocre men don't look at themselves and say, hey, I have no business being elected; I'm just a mediocre man. But they get elected.
And so we have to do more to support women, BIPOC women and gender-diverse folks to getting elected. And, to that end, you know, I want to encourage–I want to encourage women to run in the next municipal election for the City of Winnipeg for mayor. I think that there are phenomenal, phenomenal, uber-qualified women in Winnipeg that I could list off a whole bunch right now, that could run for mayor and could do the things that we need to do for the city of Winnipeg. I mean, the needs are extraordinary for Winnipeg. And so, I want to encourage those women to run for mayor.
And I encourage men, because now, all of a sudden, in the last, like, six or seven months, of course, like, surprise, surprise, all of the men are coming out, well, I'm running for mayor and I'm running for mayor. Of course they're going to do that, like, that's typical what they do. But, you know, men can also step aside. Men can step aside and say, you know what, I'm going to support women; I'm going to support gender-diverse folks to run; I'm going to support a BIPOC woman to run for mayor; I'll step aside.
Like, the whole political spectrum is about positioning men's domain over this space. It's okay for men to step aside and let women run–or, not let women run, but support women to run. So, let me qualify that. So, again, men can step aside. We can ensure that these buildings that decisions are made, that impact on all of us, are truly representative of Manitobans, including the City of Winnipeg.
So, I encourage men to step aside; I encourage folks to support women; I encourage people to support gender-diverse folks and, certainly, I encourage people to support BIPOC women to run in all elections. And, again, finally, let me just say this, is that I completely support and–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –encourage Manitobans, women, BIPOC women, gender-diverse folks, to go get those candidate applications and to run for any of the 34 seats that are up for grabs in the October 2023 election.
Let's elect people that truly care about Manitobans and want to take this role seriously for the sacred responsibility that it is and actually care about Manitobans. There are 34 seats that are available that folks can vote–that can–they can get up, they'll have support, they can run and we can kick these folks out.
Miigwech.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
* (16:30)
Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): I'll be very–fairly brief in my comments.
I think that lots has been said about this bill. I think it does make some important strides in being able to improve the process of elections. There are still, as everyone has acknowledged, there's still major challenges. If we were to look at the last–it's actually common not just in Manitoba, but in many elections–in the 2016 presidential election in the US–that the number of people who don't vote at all tends to outnumber the winner. I think–and that's unfortunate. That happened here in Manitoba.
So one of things that we really do need to do is focus on increasing voter turnout and making sure that there aren't obstacles. Sometimes it's forgotten. In fact, I didn't even realize until, I think, I was elected that the right to vote is protected in the constitution. It was introduced into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms only when we patriated the constitution. Before that it was not an official right, and the story of progress in a society is often the story of more people being able to vote.
Over the years, it–when people–I was talking–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Lamont: –to somebody who asked whether there ever had been a Manitoba Liberal government in Manitoba. There had been. It–we were the government that, at the assistance and the activism of a number of suffragettes at the time, brought in the vote for women. Oh–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
Just to remind all members, the member has the floor. The member has the right to speak, to share their views, and I would encourage all members to listen, whether they agree or not, to give the member the dignity of being able to share what they want to say.
The honourable member for St. Boniface.
Mr. Lamont: Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
And I was saying, it was votes women, but not all women that had large number of women who were excluded from this. And there have been times when who was allowed to vote varied. Only property owners were allowed to vote for a while, and the fact that we've added more and more people to the rolls, that is a sign of progress.
And in 1953, Manitoba was made–provided the franchise, and I shouldn't say provided–recognized that First Nations should always have had the right to vote in provincial elections, and in 1953 that was recognized. Before 1960 when–in–when the federal government finally recognized that the First Nations should be allowed to vote in–allowed to vote–again, should have had their–the right–they always should've had in being able to participate in our democracy.
And so that's one of the challenges because there are still obstacles. I mean, some of them are–some of the obstacles that we all face in–meaning having resources, people and time in order to be able to reach out and talk the number of voters we actually need to–we need to, especially in a fragmented media landscape. But also it is critically important that we reduce those barriers because it is a constitutional right, and that most rights that we have, the right to freedom of speech, we don't have–ever have to pay a price.
We don't have to show ID to show that we have a right to speak. We don't have to show ID or purchase ID in order to be able worship. But we do have to have ID in order to vote, which, again, is a constitutionally protected right, and so for that reason one of the things is that that rights–is a fundamental principle rights should not be for sale. And that's something that I hope–I mentioned it in a briefing with the minister, that we hope the bill will consider a universal card; they're all various ways of providing universal, free identification that would allow everybody to vote.
I mean, as somebody pointed out that their vaccine card is now–their–the Province did a good job of getting vaccine cards out and–but they're still having to rely on their old paper health card. If we can actually have a free ID card for everybody that will allow people to vote and encourage people to vote because it is truly amazing, especially in a time right now when I think there is–I think every single person in this Chamber could agree, that they've been absolutely inspired by what's happening–by the leadership of President Zelensky and so many other brave Ukrainians in defence of democracy.
And for many years there have been worries. There have been signs that people were worried that democracy was failing them and that there were other systems of government–there's a rise of authoritarianism around the world–totalitarians–and we have a duty to stand up for democracy and to stand up for what it offers us, that the–we're not enemies in this House; we're all opponents, and that's a very important distinction to make, I think, simply because when we start to think of each other as enemies then anything becomes possible. And that's so–when we say opponents, it is–we are always able to at least recognize that we have some commonality.
So with that being said, I do think that that's the one thing that missing from this; I do think this is a positive step forward. And with that I'll cede my time.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Ian Bushie (Keewatinook): I just wanted to put a few words on the record.
First off, I think this Bill 11 is a start, but at the same time, it also takes–makes certain assumptions, takes certain things for granted, and it raises a lot of questions. First Nation communities, federal elections, local elections, provincial elections; there's always been a number of issues.
And when we talk about the use of vote-counting machines, that that assumes you have access to that machine. That assumes that machine can actually function there. And not to say the machine itself is inadequate and doesn't work. It's being able to actually have it serve its purpose and be useful in the community for this purpose alone, just to make that count.
We've all heard many, many stories at election time–and usually, it happens, you know, election night, election morning, middle of the night before the actual total is out there–about how many potential poll stations had issues. A variety of different issues, whether or not it be just, oh, there's the matter of counting, or there's been so much we haven't been able to count them all.
But the reality for some communities is the fact that they weren't able to be counted at all, let alone be a delay or any–or what have you.
There was a number of issues for a lot of northern communities, and it's not specific to Indigenous communities, just northern communities in general, being able to report such issues on election day, whether it be federal election, provincial election–in this case, provincial election.
But I agree with the premise and the issues that are being raised, and its attempt to make something more efficient. But at the same time, it can't be more efficient with taking for granted some issues that, for us, people in Winnipeg or southern Manitoba, have that never even thought of it as being an issue.
Connectivity is one issue, for example, Mr. Deputy Speaker. That's a real concern. A real concern of being able to have that lack of connection on election day, whether it be to actually get out there and vote, or whether it be to report the results back, to actually have a clear and decisive result in the election.
So, there's a lot of things that perhaps this–The Elections Amendment Act, in this form, address, but at the same time, there's others that need to be addressed. Like I said, the lack of connectivity, or also being able to get people out to vote.
Because ultimately, in a democracy, you want to have voter turnout to be 100 per cent. That's the goal of all democracies, to have 100 per cent, so, truly, you had that voice out there, and that result that's brought out in the election is the true voice of the people. Not, you know what, I received 50 per cent of the 50 per cent of the 50 per cent of people that voted. And in reality, you ended up with 10 per cent of the popular vote or what have you.
So, it is important to get people out to vote, and I think amendments such of this–such as this, like Bill 11, for example, is a start to be able to do that. It's a start to be able to say there are concerns. Here we are sitting in 2022, may not be the same concerns as we had, you know, even just two years ago, let alone 20 or 40 years ago.
But those issues are now arising, and there's still those gaps that remain. And the gaps that remain ultimately need to be addressed. And they can be addressed by this provincial government, and the federal government, local governments, they all need to address those issues.
Because, ultimately, like I said, you do want voter turnout to be 100 per cent. That is the goal. Will we ever get there? Probably not. But that's something you want to do. You want to try and 'chemptive' see, and set that mark saying, this is what we want to be able to do.
So how do we get to that? Let's take away some of the barriers. Let's take away the lack of connectivity. Let's take away the inability of the people to get out and vote.
Another issue, for example, in northern communities, is actually getting out to a polling station. Being able to go to the polling station.
You know, if we called the election, let's say–well, right now, we called them last in a fall. Well, let's say we call them in -40 weather and there's an election. Who's going to get out to vote? Who's going to be able to go in their community–there's no bus service, there's no taxi service, you may not have a vehicle, you sure can't afford price of gas. So, how are you going to go and get that–what's the incentive to get people out there, to get out there and vote?
So, that's another barrier, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we can work to eliminate. I know this Bill 11 eliminates some, and it makes some things easier, it 'streamslines' some kind of things to go. But at the same time, it's something that's a start, and let's do more.
With that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, miigwech.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Are there any other speakers?
Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question for the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Elections Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
* (16:40)
I'm advised that the Administrator is about to arrive to grant royal assent to bills 10, 5 and 11.
I am, therefore, interrupting the proceedings of the House for the royal assent.
* (16:50)
Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (Mr. Cam Steel): His Honour the Administrator.
His Honour Richard Chartier, Administrator of the Province of Manitoba, having entered the House and being seated on the throne, Mr. Deputy Speaker addressed His Honour the Administrator in the following words:
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Your Honour:
At this sitting, The Legislative Assembly has passed certain bills that I ask Your Honour to give assent to:
Clerk Assistant (Ms. Vanessa Gregg):
Bill 5 – The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les armoiries, les emblèmes et le tartan du Manitoba
Bill 10, an act–or, sorry, pardon me–
Bill 10 – An Act respecting Amendments to The Health Services Insurance Act, The Pharmaceutical Act and Various Corporate Statutes; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'assurance-maladie, la Loi sur les pharmacies et diverses lois visant des corporations
Bill 11, the election amendment act–I'm going to reread that–
Bill 11 – The Elections Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi électorale
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): In Her Majesty's name, His Honour assents to these bills.
His Honour was then pleased to retire.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, could you please canvass the House to see if it's the will of members to call it 5 p.m.?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the will of members to call it 5 p.m.? [Agreed]
This House stands adjourned and is adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 a.m.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Wednesday, March 16, 2022
CONTENTS
Bill 28–The Prompt Payment for Construction Act
Bill 26–The Officers of the Assembly Act (Various Acts Amended)
Bill 27–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Alternative Measures for Driving Offences)
Bill 212–The Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Amendment Act
Manitoba Human Trafficking Awareness Day
Candidate for Fort Whyte By-Election
Health-Care System–Patient Transfers
Employment and Income Assistance Recipients
B. Smith
Lifting of Pandemic Restrictions
Delays in Accessing Health Care
Services for Victims of Violent Crime
Supports for Ukrainian Refugees
B. Smith
Diagnostic Testing Accessibility
Eating Disorders Awareness Week
Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 5–The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act
Bill 11–The Elections Amendment Act
Bill 5 – The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act
Bill 11 – The Elections Amendment Act