Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon ten Grades 9 to 12 students from Neepawa Area Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Murray Martin. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Cummings).

Also, thirteen Grade 5 students from Holland Elementary School under the direction of Mrs. Shelley Wallis and Mrs. Janice Drummond. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan).

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

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, yesterday we were asking questions about the Tories' priority of spending money in health care on propaganda ads. We have also been concerned about the Tories' priority of wasting money on frozen food, SmartHealth, and we are quite concerned about the bureaucracies the Tories have created in the health care sector.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, we just spent a number of hours during the Detailed Estimates process for the Department of Health. The Health critic, the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), has asked for a great deal of information. We have indicated that we will be providing that. Certainly, one of the pieces of information he has asked for I believe are organizational charts for both of those organizations, the Winnipeg Hospital Authority and the WCA, the Winnipeg Long Term Care Authority. Again, I will be providing that information very shortly to the Health critic, and I am sure he will provide that to the Leader of the Opposition. It will show the numbers of vice-presidents, it will show the total staff complement, and the entire administrative structure of both of those authorities.

* (1335)

Can the minister advise us: what are the salaries for those 10 vice-presidents, and could some of that money not be better spent on nurses, diagnostic tests and direct services to patients?

Mr. Stefanson: Well, first of all, Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues, they supported the 1999 budget that we brought down that includes all of the funding for health care in the province of Manitoba which is in total $2.1 billion, which includes the funding for the administrative structures, whether it is the administrative structures of the hospital authorities or the administrative structures within hospitals, and so on.

The objective throughout the entire transition to regional authorities is to be sure that there is not additional administrative bureaucracy, that the support either comes from the existing facilities or is taken away, in part, from the Department of Health. There has been a significant transfer of employees from the Department of Health to regional health authorities across the province, and I provided that information, again, to the Health critic for the member opposite.

So I think the important message for Manitobans is that this budget includes $194 million more in spending on health care. That spending is going into all of the areas of health care. It is reducing waiting lists for diagnostic services, for surgery procedures. It is providing $20 million more for home care, providing $13 million more for personal care homes, creating 850 additional personal care home beds across the province of Manitoba, and I certainly would be pleased to go on and on.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the minister is going on and on, but not giving us any answers. I asked: what are the salaries of those individuals?

Can the minister confirm that in the WHA authority and the WCHA authority there are 10 directors on top of the 10 vice-presidents, and how many of these senior people are in there? What are their salaries? What is the staffing, and can this money not be better spent for patient services here in Manitoba?

But I think the important issue and the important message is that we are spending $2.1 billion. We are spending $194 million more on health care in the province of Manitoba. We are seeing waiting lists come down significantly in Manitoba, whether it is for CT scans or ultrasound or other diagnostic testing. We are seeing more procedures done, whether it is hips, knees, cataracts or other procedures. We are seeing more services in the area of dialysis services, more mammograms, more numbers of services across the entire spectrum of health care because it continues to be our No. 1 spending priority, $2.1 billion, 35.5 percent of our budget, $5.6 million each and every day. I am assuming, and I can only assume, Madam Speaker, that is one of the reasons that the Leader of the Opposition supported our 1999 budget.

* (1340)

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, what we are seeing in this period leading up to an election is more announcements by a desperate government, paying for more ads than any other time in the history of this government.

Like so much in health care, we see now the government seems to be in the position that they want to increase the enrollment of doctors at the medical college. After 11 years in office, the minister is musing about this possibility. I want to ask the minister: given the critical problem shortages of doctors, specialists and the like in many areas, is the minister aware that the graduating class, for example, and the residents that are presently practising in Manitoba are the lowest paid in the country? More than half the graduating class is leaving this year, and we have a crisis today that the minister ought to deal with as part of a so-called plan.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Again, the member for Kildonan makes a very general statement about compensation for physicians. The compensation levels will vary depending on the nature of the services being provided by the doctors and the physicians. The member knows we are currently in an arbitration process, agreed to by both parties, entered into by both parties, the Manitoba Medical Association and the employers along with the support from our government that is going through a very comprehensive process in terms of continuing to address that issue. But, in the meantime, we have continued to make adjustments in areas like family practice where we made adjustments in some of the tariffs.

Just recently we have adjusted some $6.5 million in funding to adjust some of the key tariffs with the support of the Manitoba Medical Association, with the support of the doctors in those very important areas. So we continue to address the entire issue of compensation for doctors in Manitoba.

Mr. Stefanson: Yes, I have had a chance to meet with some of our medical students. Yes, I have had a chance to meet with the Faculty of Medicine, all the heads of all of the individual disciplines within the area. We continue to take a number of steps to address issues of retaining more of our graduates here in the province of Manitoba. We are making significant improvement in all of those areas. I have indicated for the member, when you look at our graduating nursing class of April of this year, there are some 40 nurses graduating from the Faculty of Nursing. I am told that 39 out of those 40 are staying right here in the province of Manitoba.

Having said that, we do have more work to do. I mean, our collective objective should be to ensure that the maximum number of graduates from our faculties, Faculty of Medicine, Faculty of Nursing, all of our faculties, stay right here in the province of Manitoba. There are opportunities for them in a whole range of sectors. The health sector is certainly one.

There are opportunities for our young people in many other sectors of the economy, and that is certainly a priority of our government, to make opportunities available and to ensure that the young people stay here in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): How can this government spend three-quarters of a million dollars on ads saying they have a plan when the minister muses about having more medical graduates, when in fact he does not know that the medical graduates are the lowest in Canada, most are leaving? We are losing our best and brightest, and they clearly do not have a plan to deal with the medical shortage in Manitoba today.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): When you look at the statistics in terms of our doctors, when it comes to the number of specialists per capita, we are the fourth highest in all of Canada. When it comes to the number of pediatricians in Canada, we have the highest ratio per capita in all of Canada, so I do not think in any way the member for Kildonan does justice to the quality medical services here in the province of Manitoba by trying to paint a picture of individuals not providing the services or not wanting to stay in the province of Manitoba.

There is no doubt that a good number of the graduates from all of our faculties want to stay in the province of Manitoba. We have introduced a number of programs for students in the Faculty of Medicine to undertake programs in rural Manitoba. They have opportunities to practice during their education, in rural Manitoba, so when they do stay here, they will also fill some of those needs. When you look at our overall physician count today, it is approximately the same as it has been over the last several years, just a little over 2,000.

The member saw today, through the media, that we have been in discussions with the Faculty of Medicine, the University of Manitoba, and we are committed to increasing the enrollment at the Faculty of Medicine which will again provide more doctors here in the province of Manitoba.

* (1345)

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): The Caledon Institute report on employment and aboriginal people states that there is probably no single important issue for the economic future of Manitoba than the advancement of its aboriginal human resources, and says that the development of urban ghetto slums must be stopped now before they become entrenched.

With that in mind, I have a question for the Minister responsible for Native Affairs. Winnipeg's aboriginal population's labour force is expected to exceed 16 percent of the total labour force in the next decade and the aboriginal unemployment rate has remained constant according to the most recent StatsCan studies. I would like to ask the minister if he will agree at this time that his government's 11-year record of cuts to Access, to students' social allowances and a series of pilot projects have been a failure.

Hon. David Newman (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Madam Speaker, the record of this government over 11 years I think stands a comparative test of anywhere else in this country, which is very favourable. Looking back with the perfect vision of history of the passage of time, the achievement over the last 11 years will be a distinctive feature of the accomplishments of the Filmon government because what they chose to address was root causes and not symptoms.

The kinds of things that have been done with respect to treaty land entitlement settlements, Northern Flood Agreement settlements and North Central power development, Partners for Careers, all of these kinds of fundamental things that have been done over the last 11 years, the kinds of agreements that have been signed with First Nations allowing them to have a sharing of resources, whether from gaming or from gasoline taxes or from tobacco taxes. All of these things have been fundamental empowerment tools for the development of our First Nations communities on and off reserve.

Hon. David Newman (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Madam Speaker, this government has diligently worked to develop such a comprehensive strategy in relation to the federal government. I emphatically state that the federal government should have taken primary responsibility for this and have been pushed and pushed and pushed by this province. I might say that the Royal Commission report that came out has made a contribution to getting them off their duffs and getting into action to develop real concerted planned efforts to overcome this challenge over a generation.

I believe Manitoba is taking a lead in this and that the federal government, through the involvement particularly of Human Resources Development Canada and the aboriginal human resources development initiative, where I am a champion for this province through the Native Affairs Secretariat and my counterpart in Saskatchewan is doing the same thing in Saskatchewan, is one of those tools, Partners for Careers, again, a federal-provincial government partnership and several of our own departments, Education and Training and Northern and Native Affairs. These are the kinds of things, the long-term strategies that are making a difference, as will the urban aboriginal strategy.

Mr. Robinson: I would like to direct the minister's attention to paragraph 5 of the report that I am talking about this afternoon, Madam Speaker, where it says even a casual visitor to Winnipeg can easily spot the growth of concentrated poverty, deteriorating housing, gangs and all other signs marking the emergence of Canada's first U.S.-style slum. Again I revert back to my question and that is: where is the comprehensive strategy with the national and the city governments?

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, I will be very candid about one of the greatest frustrations of anyone serving as a Minister responsible for Northern and Native Affairs, probably federally and here, and probably in every other jurisdiction in this country. It has been very difficult to get federal co-operation in ways that will induce empowerment of the very people who are in the greatest need of help. Another frustration is that the aboriginal political leadership, aided, abetted and encouraged by members opposite, rather than acting to the degree that they could to empower people, are far too often doing exactly the opposite. That is creating a grave difficulty.

Just, for example, what is happening with respect to Neeginan. You have one group that wants to move forward, and you have leaders of other groups that are doing everything they can to prevent success from occurring. So it is very, very difficult to deal with this, but we are dealing with it consistently, patiently, in good faith and with absolute determination over the next generation, with a vision toward 2025, which hopefully will see the aboriginal people of this province emerge as the pre-eminent people in this province because of their long history here in a multicultural community.

* (1350)

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): To the Minister of Justice: on Tuesday, when I asked why this government let its gang hotline go cold after the last election while overseeing the serious and dangerous rise of gangs, the minister announced that he had a record of my calls to the line. The government assured Winnipeg youth and families with this pledge in the wallet card: Privacy. Your call is confidential. You do not have to give your name. No calls will be traced or displayed.

Again, Madam Speaker, it says no calls will be traced or displayed.

I ask the minister, Madam Speaker: why did this government baldly mislead Winnipeg youth and families all along? Calls were traced and displayed.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, Madam Speaker, the member has indicated that the line is the responsibility of the province. The province sent some money to the city in order to ensure that that line was there.

I understand that discussions have taken place between the City of Winnipeg and indeed representatives of my department to determine whether that is in fact the most appropriate utilization of that money. Those discussions are continuing, and we hope to resolve that issue one way or another shortly.

Mr. Mackintosh: Well, how will this government explain to Manitoba youth, to whom the former minister said on open radio that the youth asked for and got total anonymity with this line, this lack of ethics and trustworthiness? What kind of betrayal is this? You cannot trust these people.

Mr. Toews: I can assure the member that we have misled no youth or adults who are genuinely seeking help from that line. I think the member knows exactly what his role was. It was simply to politicize and to find fault where I think none was warranted.

As I have indicated, Madam Speaker, that particular program is under discussion. It is a program that is being administered by the City of Winnipeg, and the province and the City of Winnipeg are in fact having discussions as to whether or not that is the most appropriate way of dealing with this issue.

There are a number of other initiatives that I am pleased to report that it is indicated have overtaken the utility of that particular program. So we want to have further discussions with the city on this point.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns, to please pose his question.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I certainly do not think this issue is funny. What I find totally amazing is that this member would in fact admit that he is trying to disrupt a particular program.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Justice did not have a point of order.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, to please pose his question.

Mr. Mackintosh: Would this minister tell us, other than using callers' names for partisan political purposes, what was done with the traced names of youth seeking to get out of gangs, for example, families quietly to deal with their problems, informants' names? If a cabinet minister got the names, who else did? Were lives in danger?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I can advise the member that I know of no names of anyone who called. In fact, the admission by him that he in fact called is the first admission that I have had of anyone calling. [interjection] Yes. Well, he admitted it.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

* (1355)

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): A point of order, Madam Speaker.

Beauchesne Citation 417 is very clear that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised, and should not provoke debate.

The member for St. Johns has asked three times about the fact that this minister in the House got up in this House and said that the member for St. Johns had placed calls, clearly indicating that that minister had information about people who called that line. It is a very serious matter, and this minister should be called to order and should answer that question. How did he get that information, and how many more calls were treated in a way that was not confidential, contrary to the purpose of this line?

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

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, the only confirmation that I have of the member making calls was his confirmation today.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns, on the same point of order.

Mr. Mackintosh: Madam Speaker, it is as if Tuesday never happened with this minister. He got up in the House on Tuesday and said that I had called that line eight times without leaving a message. He put that on the record. He knew exactly the number. Where did he get that information? He got it by breaching confidentiality and by misleading youth and families of Manitoba.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns did not speak to the point of order. There was no point of order.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, in the flood of the century in 1997, the Red River Floodway, we had the federal government that came out with a custom seeding benefit program for our farmers, and this Premier (Mr. Filmon) could not act quickly enough in terms of opting out. Well, things have changed quite dramatically in the sense that they now have a Custom Seeding Program. The problem is the Premier does not realize the difference between a flood zone and the rolling hills that Manitoba has.

My question to the Premier is: why is the government not providing assistance to farmers who can plant on their own, and why is that, because it is very clear that there is a need for some flexibility in the program that this particular Premier is bringing in?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Where Manitobans can plant on their own, they are doing that right now with every hour of sunshine that is out there, and I am very pleased to see that is happening. What the Custom Seeding Program helps is, because of the shortness of time, to bring additional equipment that otherwise would not be available to them into the area and help speed up that process.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I look to the Minister of Agriculture and ask the Minister of Agriculture to acknowledge that, given the extreme situation that those farmers have been placed in, it is like farming in a patch-quilt area, that there is an additional cost as a result of it. Why does the Minister of Agriculture not see fit to come up with a program that has more flexibility, to allow those farmers to seed?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Enns: Madam Speaker, I earnestly seek the honourable member's support and co-operation and that of his Leader to ensure that same concern that was shown for the farm difficulties in the 1997 flood in the Red River Valley that that same concern and compassion will be shown by his federal colleagues in Ottawa under these circumstances. We could not wait any longer, and I am very pleased and proud that my government supported me in allowing us to announce that program, but we certainly expect no less from Ottawa today under these circumstances than was provided in 1997.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, will in fact the Minister of Agriculture admit that more flexibility is needed with this seeding program so that farmers can be assisted in their own seeding and not only when they have to hire someone else?

Mr. Enns: Madam Speaker, considerably more is needed, and I am pleased to announce to the House that I have arranged for a call and a meeting via telephone with federal Minister Vanclief tomorrow at 1:30. I will further press the issue of the problems our farmers are facing in the hope that we can co-ordinate a comprehensive program of support.

* (1400)

MATTER OF PRIVILEGE

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, I rise on a matter of privilege and it relates to the comments just made by the minister in this House, comments that indicate very clearly that the minister deliberately misled this House. I am rising at the first opportunity because I wanted to check Hansard. What the minister said in this House on June 15, and I want to point to Hansard, page 2778, in which the minister said: "Well, I know, Madam Speaker, in speaking with the relevant authorities, that his office has called at least eight times, never left a message, never left his name, simply hung up."

On Tuesday, it is very clear, from what was stated in this House, that this minister had information in terms of that; not only that, he documented eight times, not seven, not six, not nine, not 10 times. I note that the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) never referenced having called eight times, never referenced having not left his name, that the minister knew.

Now what is interesting is in Question Period today, rather than answer the questions about the gang line, I want to read into the record why this is such an important issue for us in dealing with this, and I have with me the description of the program which states: Privacy. Your call is confidential. You do not have to give your name. No calls will be traced or displayed.

On Tuesday, this minister said that he could trace eight times in which the member for St. Johns had phoned, and yet the document that is handed out to the public, Madam Speaker, says that no tracing will be done. It is obvious that there is not the confidentiality with that gang line, and it is obvious that this minister, who we know has been in difficulty before in this House, if one remembers the selection of judges, the process, in this case, on Tuesday, he said one thing and today he got up and denied it.

Let there be no doubt his comments in the House today were a completely different version, not a confusion, Madam Speaker, but it is very clear from his comments that, in fact, this minister was either not telling the truth on Tuesday or not telling the truth today. It was, I believe, of the point which is the essence of privilege. This is contempt of the House, and more importantly, this is contempt for the many people who take the assurances in this program that this is going to be private and confidential. It shows that this minister, for his own political games on Tuesday, was quite willing to violate what has been guaranteed to the people of Manitoba. To try and embarrass the member for St. Johns, that minister may feel it is appropriate to trace calls. The bottom line, this document here guaranteed privacy. This minister has violated that privacy, and today he did not tell the truth when he was confronted with that simple fact.

That is why, Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh), that the deliberately misleading statements of the Justice minister be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I think I need to read into the record the entire conversation. I do not deny that somebody told me that that in fact happened. I stated it in the House that: "in speaking with the relevant authorities, that his office has called at least eight times." There is no question about that. There was no confirmation of that particular point. Indeed, what did the member say in response to my question or in response to my answer? I should say, first of all, I am quoting from 2778:

"Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, if he wants a return, all he has to do is leave his name and number.

"Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

"Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns, with a new question?

"Point of Order

"Mr. Mackintosh: A point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sure the minister would not want to leave an untruth on the record. He should know full well that the call that was made was by people other than myself, no return phone call."

Today in the House, the member said he made the phone calls. So I stood up and said this is the first confirmation that I have had that he made the phone calls.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): To the matter of privilege. It was two weeks ago on Tuesday when an intern with our caucus called the gang line to find out if in fact there was still anyone that was servicing that line.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. A matter of privilege is a very important matter, and the members who in turn speak to it are providing advice to the Chair. It is extremely important that I hear the comments that are being made. I would ask for the co-operation of all honourable members.

Mr. Mackintosh: As of two weeks following the date that the intern made the call, there had still been no return call to her, which coincides with the experiment or the experience of CBC television which a few weeks earlier had made a call and after two and a half weeks had received no call. I believe they had others make the same kind of call and had no return. So the gang hotline had gone stone cold. And that was, of course, the subject of the questions that were raised in this House on Tuesday.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Mackintosh: This is a funny issue for the Conservatives, because they find that misleading statements are funny. That is what they derive their strength from. They are prepared to betray Manitobans, to go out with betrayals like this and put misleading comments before Manitoba youth, trying to gain their trust.

Calls have been made to the gang line, at first to expose and reveal that this government had on the other end of that phone line not a live body as initially promised but a little answering machine. Calls were then later made to find out if this gang line was even in existence, particularly given the rapid rise of criminal street gangs under the watch of this Premier (Mr. Filmon).

How many calls were made I am not sure, but one person does know. This Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) got up in the House on Tuesday and he said that I have called "at least eight times, never left a message, never left his name, simply hung up." There is only one way that this minister could make that comment. There is only one source of that information, and that is call display or a trace, contrary to the assurances of the former Minister of Justice who assured total anonymity to Manitoba youth, who she said had asked for total anonymity, contrary to the releases of this government, of the Filmon government when it announced this gang hotline before the last election and before it went cold after the election, contrary to the wallet-size card that was distributed to Manitoba youth and families.

Today he comes in the House, and he said the first time that he knew that I had talked about this was now in the House. Madam Speaker, he said I had called at least eight times. I ask this minister, I ask that he come clean with Manitobans, that he table that information, that he advise where he got this information, why it was that this government has misled Manitoba youth and families in this way. When did he become aware of this information, and what has he done with this?

I am more than happy and I am proud that I have been monitoring this line, which has really served as just a token gesture by this government in the face of a very serious challenge to our safety. I am concerned for people who phoned that line. I suspect there are not great numbers, but I think that some people probably called that line, relying on the assurances by this government that this was a confidential line and actually believed it. I guess some people still believe this government when it says no calls will be traced or displayed, no calls traced or displayed. What happened to people informing of gang activity? What happened to people who were calling for help? This was advertised as a help line. What happened to families who were calling in because they wanted to work out their problems and needed assistance on a confidential basis?

Who has these names? Because we know that at least one cabinet minister does, and when he got up today, he deliberately misled the House just two days after he told this House that he knew that I had called eight times. Today he said he did not know. That inconsistency cannot be tolerated in this Legislature.

* (1410)

Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Matters of privilege are always matters of great importance, particularly when they involve the bringing of information to this Assembly.

Before I get into the main portion of my remarks, the member for St. Johns says that there is only one way that the Attorney General could have known, but there is a second way, logically there is a second way. Very potentially that someone in their own caucus perhaps has been telling a lot of people as to what in fact the member for St. Johns or others have done. So there is another logical option.

Madam Speaker, the point of the matter is there is not only one logical way as the member for St. Johns has alleged. In the exchange of both members who have spoken on this matter, the honourable Attorney General (Mr. Toews) and the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh), there is a lot of back and forth about information that they have brought to this House. From what I have heard, it is quite likely that the member for St. Johns may have in fact misled this House in information that he has brought. I think it is very important that the record of what was said be properly perused by yourself and by others, and if it should result in a clear indication that the member for St. Johns has in fact not been accurate, in fact misled this House in his comments in the course of questions, this side clearly reserves the right today, and I put it on the record, following your perusal, to move a motion of privilege on this matter censuring the member for St. Johns.

In the interim, Madam Speaker, we believe, given the fact that both members involved in this exchange have been quoting the record, in pieces of the record, that it is incumbent upon you as Speaker to peruse, and we would suggest to you that you peruse all of the relevant records and report back to the House. Should it be clear that the member for St. Johns has not accurately provided information to this House, has in fact misled the House in the course of his questions, this side will reserve the right to move a motion of privilege against that member.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, I, too, would like to speak to this matter of privilege, given very much the significance of this matter, and I just want to frame my comments to you by dealing with some of the significance of this.

Contrary to some of the comments that I have heard from members opposite, this is an extremely serious issue. For a government to advertise confidentiality of a gang line, given the terrible state of gangs arising in this province under the leadership of the member for Tuxedo (Mr. Filmon), given the government has broadcast the confidentiality of a gang line and a promise that no calls would be traced, the comments by the minister on Tuesday past were indeed significant in this Chamber. In fact, the comments of the minister on Tuesday were such that they should be subjected to investigation and review because on Tuesday, when the member for St. Johns asked specific questions about the functioning of the gang line, the minister stood up and stated, and I am quoting, Madam Speaker, from page 2778 of Hansard: "Madam Speaker, in speaking with the relevant authorities, that his office has called at least eight times, never left a message, never left his name, simply hung up. I know that he is checking up on the gang hotline, and that is good to see that the member from the opposition does that."

So it is clear from the minister's statements on Tuesday that that was breached. So that issue itself is so serious as to require us to investigate the function of that line, the effectiveness of that line, and the integrity of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) who will put in place a line advertised, I might add, across the province, thousands and thousands of dollars, about a gang menace, and yet breach the confidentiality, and who knows how many times. We know at least eight times, according to the minister, a breach of confidentiality of that line.

So that is the first issue, Madam Speaker, that requires to be clarified. The second and related issue is the minister standing up in the House today and saying that the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) had, in fact, phoned the line and confirmed that he phoned the line.

Now the minister has attempted to play, as we say, Philadelphia, P-H-I, Philadelphia, and the minister knows what that is, lawyers who play around with words and try to dance around with words and not deal with the issues. The minister attempted to stand up and obfuscate the issue by saying: Well, Madam Speaker, this was the first time that I confirmed that it was the member who called.

So, Madam Speaker, I suggest that this matter be reviewed, but I have a further suggestion. I think we can at least end the issue of the minister's integrity today by the minister simply standing up, admitting that he made a mistake today, that he misled the House, and that would resolve the issue. Although the larger issue of the government trying to take credit for confidentiality on a gang line, for not tracing calls and for then, in fact, breaching that confidentiality is a larger issue that we in this province and Chamber have to deal with.

But I think the proper course of action for the minister to do today would be to apologize for misleading the House today, for suggesting that this was the first time that he confirmed that it was the member, when in fact the minister's own words said otherwise on Tuesday. The minister said otherwise on Tuesday, and no wordsmithing on the part of the minister can change what is written in Hansard and what the minister said today. The minister ought to do the right thing. He ought to apologize today, and then we can get on and deal with the larger issue and the very significant issue of why a government that has recently been won over to gangs and trying to fight gangs would breach the confidentiality of a gang line where they promised anonymity. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

* (1420)

At the end of the matter of privilege, I would love to pose that particular question to the government, but that issue in itself is definitely not a matter of privilege in the way in which you have pointed it out. If the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) was meaning to try to say that because of what happened, the member feels threatened in some fashion in which he feels that the government is monitoring his actions, well, then you are getting very close. I would suggest to you that would in fact be a matter of privilege. That is why my advice to the member for St. Johns is to in fact review what has actually taken place and how he feels that this could potentially be a matter of privilege. But definitely with the arguments that have been talked about from all sides of this House, it does not appear to be a matter of privilege.

It does raise a valid point, something that is worthwhile in pursuing, in particular getting more information from the Minister of Justice as to the legitimacy of that line. Manitobans expect it to be in confidence, Madam Speaker. Now that is being called into question. The Department of Justice has a responsibility to come clean and clearly indicate and assure Manitobans that if there was a breach, that breach is going to be dealt with immediately; and if there was not a breach, to be able to justify the comments that have been put on the record.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): On June 15, speaking to the point of privilege, the minister said: "Well, I know, Madam Speaker, in speaking with the relevant authorities, that his office has called at least eight times." Today he said in the House, and I quote: "I can advise the member that I know of no names of anyone who called." In fact, the admission by him that he in fact called is the first admission that I had of anyone calling.

Madam Speaker, this minister deliberately misled the House. Last year you wrote a Speaker's Ruling about the minister again having inconsistent statements to this House between his statements on May 11 and May 7 in dealing with the issue of the judge's appointment. There are three issues of this issue of privilege: one is the issue of confidentiality. Ministers of the Crown have resigned in Saskatchewan, in Ontario and other provinces when it has become clear that the ministers have breached confidentiality. There are precedents for that.

The second issue is that it is a broken promise. Now I know members opposite do not care about their word anymore, as quoted on page 16, but it is in writing that your name will be held in a confidential way. That is the second issue.

The third issue is Rule 262 dealing with contempt of this Legislature and the right of all members to have honest answers to questions put. This is a point of privilege and regrettably the breach of confidentiality, in my view, has been worthy of other ministers with greater honour resigning, the issue of confidentiality for mothers with kids that are worried about gangs is a serious, serious issue on top of the issue of the contempt.

Madam Speaker: I thank all honourable member for their advice. I indeed will take the matter of privilege under advisement and bring a ruling back to this House after consulting Hansard and the authorities.

We will now continue Question Period.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, I had a question for the minister in charge of Workplace Safety and Health, who I saw a few minutes ago, so there may be an acting minister.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the member that there is to be no reference made to the presence or absence of a member from this Chamber. Would the honourable member please pose his question?

Mr. L. Evans: To the Acting Minister of Labour, or maybe the Minister of Environment (Mrs. McIntosh) because she should be concerned about this. On Monday I asked the minister for a report on the safety situation at the Simplot plant in Brandon, given the fact that there had been three explosions in a nine-month period. The minister said he would look into the matter and report back to the House, and I am concerned, Madam Speaker, as are my constituents, as to just what is the situation. Has the minister received a report? Or perhaps the Minister of Environment, who I know should take an interest in this as well, perhaps has received some information back on that matter.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Labour.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): A point of order, Madam Speaker. If I heard the honourable member correctly, he attributed to me a certain view which I do not believe has been expressed by myself. I would ask the honourable member perhaps to withdraw what he said about my views. This is an important matter. The honourable member has raised it as an important matter, and I view it that way too, but I think he is attributing to me something which is incorrect.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Education and Training did not have a point of order.

I would ask the honourable member, however, to please pose his question now. He was recognized for a supplementary question to which there should be no preamble.

Mr. L. Evans: Well, can the minister confirm that the company itself has called for an independent review by an outside group of experts and to be funded not by the company but by others than the company so that there be every assurance that this was a completely independent review?

Mr. Praznik: I thank the honourable member for the supplementary question. I will take it as notice, on behalf of the minister.

Mr. L. Evans: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister, regarding the matter of reviewing the Simplot situation where there have been serious explosions over the past nine months, whether the Province of Manitoba is prepared to fund an independent inquiry of experts, a team of chemical engineers, given the fact that the Manitoba government, the Province of Manitoba, has a responsibility for environment and has a responsibility for Workplace Safety and Health, and given the fact that the Simplot company itself has asked for an independent review, should not fund itself for obvious reasons.

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, in response to my honourable colleague's question, these are very serious questions. I can advise my colleagues in the Chamber that the matter is under investigation by Workplace Safety and Health at this point in time. Until we have received the preliminary reports and let due process takes its course, it is premature to go charging off suggesting that we have independent inquiries on this, that or the other thing. I have undertaken on a previous occasion to furnish my honourable colleague with a copy of the report when it is forthcoming, and I repeat that undertaking here today. Until we receive the preliminary report, any other course of action, I would suggest with the greatest respect, would be premature.

* (1430)

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My question is for the Minister of Education. Over the last decade one of the most serious failures of the Filmon government has been their inability to enable a significant growth in community colleges. The absence of government leadership that the Roblin report noted and the cuts to funding over 11 years have resulted in growing waiting lists for young people. I would like to ask the minister to confirm that the five-year review of colleges, required by legislation in 1991, has not yet been completed by his department. Could he tell us whether this is an indication of the significance that this government attaches to community colleges?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I think, with due respect, the honourable member has got it backwards. It is the previous government that had no particular interest in post-secondary education in general or community colleges in particular. It was this administration that struck the Roblin commission which produced a report called Doing Things Differently, and goodness knows, I think it is time that people did things a little differently from what was in effect before this government came along.

The fact that the honourable member and her colleagues stood to their feet to vote for the budget brought forward by the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Gilleshammer) is proof positive that they very much support what is happening in our community college sector, especially this year when we have the $4-million colleges' fund, we have the $1.3-million strategic fund so that we can put another thousand students to work learning trades and getting an education so that they can take advantage of the future that this particular government has had a lot to do with building in terms of its potential.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister, who has been part of a government for 11 years, tell us why the review of colleges required, after five years, in legislation published in 1991 has not yet been completed? That was the question I asked the minister. I would like an answer.

Mr. McCrae: Again I refer to the fact that the New Democratic Party is supporting the $4-million colleges' growth fund which will increase enrollment by 1,000 in this coming academic year.

I guess imitation is the highest form of flattery, and we are seeing it over and over again, but we know what the real thing is. I mean we see the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) in his three-piece pinstripe suits now. We see Tory-blue billboard signs. We see the Leader of the Opposition trying to make us believe that he really supports balanced budgets, and he is trying to imitate the Premier of Manitoba as if he might be one some day. I just remind him of what Yogi Berra said. He said, "If you can't imitate him, don't copy him."

Ms. Friesen: Would the minister, who I think is perhaps seeing a little darkly through his many sweaters, tell us when those reviews, required by legislation in 1991, are going to be completed, and will he make a commitment to this House to make those reviews public?

The honourable member and I just went through, I think, nearly 30 hours of a fairly detailed examination of the Estimates of Expenditure for the Department of Education and Training. I think the honourable member would be the first one to admit that I have tried to be as open and forthcoming with information as I possibly can, and I will continue to be that way with the honourable member and this House because I believe that that is the best way for us to get the message out about the truth of what is going on in health and in education and all those areas of public endeavour that are so important to Manitobans. So that any information that is left outstanding that I ought to be providing to the honourable member, I make that undertaking to make that available at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): I have a couple of questions for a couple of different ministers but on a related matter. Firstly, I would like to ask the Minister responsible for Sport whether or not he could explain to us why more than $8 million in tax money was spent making the seats at the Blue Bomber stadium three inches shorter than they were previously.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister responsible for Sport): I think that most of us know the Winnipeg Stadium is undergoing a major renovation with contributions from Winnipeg Enterprises, the federal government, the provincial government. We are seeing the changes outside of the stadium, we are seeing the changes inside of the stadium, and for the first time, seats in the lower levels of the stadium are actually going to have backs on them. So when the member refers to the changes, I mean, I think anybody who has attended the stadium for a football game or another event knows that the old format used to be sitting on these aluminum-type benches. These are going to be individual seats with their backs.

As to the sizing and the leg room and the whole body fit, I know the member for Rupertsland is a fairly big man, and there are many big individuals who attend events at the stadium. I will certainly undertake to look into what the structure is and what the improvements are at Winnipeg Stadium.

Hon. David Newman (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): I have no knowledge of a $400,000 commitment of the province in this particular respect, but that is an issue not directly within my area of responsibility as Minister responsible for Native Affairs. However, I do know that the province of Manitoba has offered and in fact paid $200,000 towards the aboriginal component of the games, in particular a tribal journey by canoe, York boat, to the Games, which is underway now, and to an entertainment site promoting aboriginal culture and talents at The Forks site on federal property.

The provincial contribution, which was sought I might say at the last minute, was gathered together and supported on condition the federal government contribute at least $450,000 toward that same initiative. Both commitments were fulfilled, the monies, I gather, have been exchanged, and a business plan has been put together to make this happen. We would expect applause given the last-minute nature of this, rather than criticism.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Robinson: A new question, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: I assume this is a supplementary question.

Mr. Robinson: No, this is a new question.

Madam Speaker: New question? Thank you. The honourable member, with a new question.

* (1440)

Mr. Robinson: Madam Speaker, If I may continue, the original funding needs of both the aboriginal village and the tribal journey was estimated at $1.1 million. This amount was decided on by both Canada and the Province of Manitoba to be dollar for dollar. Canada came up with $450,000; the province was asked to come up with the same amount. In fact, they came up short when they came up with $200,000.

Madam Speaker, I need not tell you about the importance that aboriginal people have played in the development of this province, the fur trade, the war effort, and our participation in all parts of Canada's daily life. To do anything less by not having the full commitment originally made by the Province of Manitoba would be an injustice towards aboriginal people.

Simply, my question is: will the Province of Manitoba provide the $400,000 it originally committed itself to?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister responsible for Sport): Well, Madam Speaker, the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Newman) has already outlined in a great deal of detail the funding arrangements for the undertakings that are taking place with the aboriginal community, both at The Forks and in terms of a journey to The Forks. I am certainly told that the roughly $650,000 approximately are appropriate resources to accomplish all of the undertakings that have been put forward.

The member talks about previous commitments. I would encourage him to provide us with details of what his source is for that, what evidence he has of that. I know discussions were ongoing, and certainly the information we have is that, as the Minister of Northern Affairs has indicated, the province is contributing $200,000 and the federal government is contributing in the range of $400,000 to $450,000, and those resources will accomplish the undertakings that everybody has been working on at The Forks.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.