Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, over the last 48 hours, and particularly in the last 24 hours, both parties, all parties have been discussing an all-party solution to the crisis, and there was a resolution put forward today calling on the federal government to take immediate action to deal with the crisis of flooding in Manitoba, and further amendments were being considered to have an all-party committee established by this Legislature.

The member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) was directed by the Liberal Leader to not grant leave. Madam Speaker, we believe this Legislature should show our support for the farmers in crisis, no matter who holds the seat. We should also show our support, and we should show unity in this Legislature to Ottawa for those people.

I would like to ask the Premier if the support and unity would not be helpful to the Premier in dealing with the federal government on behalf of people in crisis in Manitoba.

* (1335)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, because I am going to be referring to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) and because yesterday in this House we acknowledged the impending 30th anniversary tomorrow of the election of the member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans), I just want to mention to members that the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) yesterday celebrated his 33rd anniversary in this Legislature.

I want to thank the honourable member opposite for raising again an issue that is of absolutely critical importance to the people in a large part of this province. Something in the range of less than a million acres, a very significant area of land, will likely be unseeded this year. The economic consequences are devastating for the people in that area.

I believe that it is important for us, because it appears as though Ottawa just simply does not understand the magnitude of the economic impact on Manitoba in general but certainly on a concentrated area in particular in our province.

I would argue, as I did this morning in my discussion with Premier Romanow, that it is in fact a more significant impact than was the flood of the century, than was the Saguenay flooding, than was the ice storm in Ontario, Quebec, because in all cases they were able to be reconstructed and to create a positive economic reversal of the situation. Nothing will create a positive economic reversal of the loss of seeding of close to a million acres of land. There is a huge hole in the economy that will just simply be taken away from the economies of Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

I appreciate the fact that this is not being looked at in a partisan fashion. Premier Romanow and I have collaborated, have kept in touch and discussed yet again today our approach to it. I would just say to the member opposite that I believe it is incumbent on us to have a nonpartisan approach and say it is because Manitobans, our fellow citizens in southern Manitoba, are hurting and are in desperate need of support that we need to have action by the federal government.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, apparently the reason for not allowing leave for the debate to proceed and the unity position to be taken is the hearing from the people in Melita on Tuesday evening. Don Bromley from that community has already said this program is not going to fix the problem, the announcement on Monday. Don Dewar has said that this will not begin to deal with many of the farmers in crisis. People are stating that it could be $600 million for the direct communities and $1.2 billion in the southwest region alone. The Brandon Sun has said that the Vanclief proposal speaks to Ontario. Is it not time that this Legislature spoke for Manitoba so the federal government would know?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, there is absolutely no question that this issue is not adequately understood in Ottawa. If it were, Ottawa would be taking action other than what was proposed on Monday. We have discussed it in this House in Question Period every day this week. It has been the subject of discussions in the Estimates review of the Department of Agriculture this week. What has been proposed thus far will simply leave many, many Manitobans in danger of losing their economic livelihood in our small communities, our towns, our villages and on the farms.

I believe that it is absolutely essential that the Liberal Party of Manitoba join with the other parties of this House in saying there is a problem that needs to be resolved, it requires the attention and the action of the government in Ottawa, and it must be addressed.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, there is a discrepancy between the release of the Liberal Party that mentioned $25 per acre being announced by the federal government which was turned down allegedly by Mr. Enns and the Free Press editorial today that talked about Vanclief all wet on this proposal because only 30 farmers have accessed this program to begin with. Our experience has actually been this is not a very farmer-friendly, producer-friendly proposal.

Alan Clark at Melita says–and if we want to hear from the people of Melita–if I lose my farm, I have not just lost my house or my job or my life's savings; I have lost all three things.

Would it not make more sense for us to stand together today in unity with Ottawa and say to the people of Melita next week we are standing together? Let us do this before the meeting so we can tell them we have heard their concerns, and we are going to act on them, Madam Speaker.

* (1340)

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, in all my 33 years, I have never experienced this kind of fabrication of the facts laid out to the public by a Leader, a supposedly responsible Leader of a political party. I am only led to the comment that he is indeed a stranger to the truth. I initiated the request in Mr. Vanclief's first visit to Manitoba three weeks ago for consideration of a $25-an-acre payment out of the funds allocated that we have allocated for farm relief. On Monday the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey), in the company of at least a hundred producers, attended the news conference by Mr. Vanclief where again no mention of a $25-an-acre payment was coming from the federal minister. I initiated again in that public meeting for consideration.

We are, however, partners in these funds, and there is an appropriate way of doing it. I need to involve the federal government to come to the table with me, and what I will be doing right after Question Period is faxing this to Mr. Vanclief and telling him if that offer is real and true, it is accepted.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): The situation facing people in the western part of the province is very serious. What those people need is actual answers, and they need the truth to be told, not political games to be played. That is what we are having here when we hear one person say there is $25 an acre on the table and the minister telling us it is not there. I believe the minister; I was at that meeting. But, Madam Speaker, we have to look at other options.

On June 15, the Minister of Agriculture said that the national disaster plan is in force, all the provisions that are applicable will be applied, and all of the programs and the national federal funding are in place as we speak. If those things are in place, why are we not hearing some answers about what other programs are in place to help the business community, to help farm families, who are under tremendous stress right now, to get some answers from government of what kind of help they are going to get?

Hon. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): I just want to share with the honourable member that, when we talk about an existing program in place, if we are talking about the Disaster Financial Assistance arrangement that is present between the province and the federal government, under that program there is an automatic type of kickstart to the program that brings it into play right away in terms of the cost-sharing formula to cover the results of damage to property, damage to land caused by erosion or fences that are done away with in flood waters. That is the type of Disaster Financial Assistance program in place under that assistance policy.

Unfortunately, that policy does not address loss of income. As such, it addresses everything else, with the exception of loss of income. This is where we have written to Minister Duhamel, who is the minister responsible for the Western Economic Diversification program, requesting his immediate attention to programs such as the Custom Seeding Program that PFRA totally cost-shared, covered the cost 100 percent. There is also the Business Restart program and also the JERI program which took a look at covering off lost inputs such as fertilizers and herbicides. We have requested that they take a look at those programs.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, given what the people in southwest Manitoba are saying and the Chamber of Commerce executive director is saying, it is a creeping disaster. We know that there are businesses that are laying off people; businesses are closing down. The minister is outlining all these programs.

When are we going to have some answers? When are people going to know whether the JERI program is going to be implemented? When are farmers going to know whether there is going to be assistance to help them with the fertilizer that they have lost? When are there going to be some actual answers?

Mr. Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, a great number of us were expecting some of those answers last Monday when the federal minister came back to Manitoba for the second time, supposedly to tell us. But what did he tell us? He told us he would make the existing programs, NISA and AIDA, more flexible.

I come back to the $25 an acre. I will accept that offer because, among other things, that maintains the traditional 60-40 sharing of that responsibility that covers those funds. I raised that question specifically with him, and I hope maybe later on in the afternoon we will have an answer.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, I want to ask the minister–and I believe he realizes that AIDA and NISA are not going to work for all the producers. There are many who cannot access funds out of those programs. There has to be some extra.

What step is he prepared to take further? And I ask the Premier: what steps are we prepared to take further to ensure that there are some answers that get to those people so that we do not see further doors closed, and we do not see additional stress on those families who will not have any income for the next 18 months?

* (1345)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I spoke this morning with Premier Romanow who has a considerable area of his province in very similar circumstances. It is our intention, we are currently jointly drafting a letter to the Prime Minister to ask the Prime Minister to meet with us so that we can in fact put this kind of position before him.

The position is being put forward by spokespeople for the Liberal government that this is not covered by the normal programs. The position that we put in response is that in the case of the 1997 flood, many of the things that were initiated were not normal existing programs, JERI, the cost of fertilizer and chemical inputs that was returned, the Custom Seeding Program, and so on and so forth.

In the case of the Saguenay flood, I spoke with Premier Bouchard during the 1997 flood, and he had told me of their experience a year earlier with Saguenay, and that was that the federal government responded with programs and offers that were specifically designed to recognize a disaster of unheralded proportions, and similarly with the ice storm. There were things done that were not in any Disaster Financial Assistance program or any ongoing program.

That is the message that has to be delivered to the federal government, and because we are obviously not getting any satisfaction what-soever in our dealings with Minister Vanclief, we have to go to the Prime Minister. I believe that the letter will be generated today that will jointly ask for a meeting so that we can, face to face, give the Prime Minister a sense of the magnitude and the unusual aspects of this, because this again is of never-before-experienced circumstances.

In my discussions with the farmers and the municipal leaders there, particularly the young farmers, one of the reasons for their tremendous despair in that southern area of the province is that they turn to their elders, the people they may have bought their land from, and say: what did you do when this last happened? It has not happened this century that people in that area were unable to plant a crop, and of the magnitude of almost a million acres, it is just unheard of.

So that is what we hope will be the next step, to try and raise the profile and the circumstance of these situations.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, during Health Estimates I supplied the Health minister with documentation in regard to the business case put forward by the provincial government in regard to the Urban Shared Services food facility. I want to add some additional information to that today. I want to table this information: a memo of June 23, 1997, in which Joe Sheil requests that by June 30, 1997, the nine participating facilities ratify the material contained in an extended version of this package. He indicates that the business case summary, which I supplied to the Health minister at that time, was indeed the business case on which the whole facility was being based.

Madam Speaker, the Health minister has had a couple of weeks to look at this. He will notice that the renovation costs for the nine facilities were estimated to be only $1.6 million for patient facility renovations and that, in fact, he has already told us that it will be over $3.7 million for St. Boniface and HSC alone. I wonder if the minister has had time to calculate the interest rate. Could he tell us the total capital amount and the interest rate that was assumed on this business case? He has the material already, I believe.

* (1350)

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, during the Estimates process of the Health department, we had a fairly lengthy discussion on the issue of Urban Shared Services. Not surprisingly, the member for Crescentwood in particular asked a number of questions, asked for a great deal of information and confirmation of various figures and issues. I have undertaken to provide him with that information.

When it comes to the whole issue of the redevelopment of both the Health Sciences Centre and the St. Boniface Hospital, which have not come on stream yet for the Urban Shared Services Corporation services, they are now in the process–when I say "they," the two hospitals and the Urban Shared Services Corporation–of finalizing all of those aspects, of finalizing what the capital cost requirements will be and all of the other implications on doing the conversions.

As I indicated yesterday, both of those facilities are still committed to this service in this fashion. Urban Shared Services Corporation is committed to getting those two facilities onboard, and that work is ongoing right now. I certainly will continue to provide the member with as much information as I can as it becomes available. He knows there is going to be a revised business plan fairly shortly, and I certainly look forward to receiving that.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, the minister did not answer the question. The question was: what was the total amount that was mortgaged under the agreement with Newcourt Capital? How much was actually mortgaged, and what was the actual interest rate? What was the interest rate? What was the capital mortgaged at the end of the day? It is a simple question, and I am sure you have the answer. Let us have it.

Mr. Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, it is a similar question to what I was asked during the Estimates process, along with a number of questions. I have been in the process of compiling a response to all of the questions that the member asked relative to Urban Shared Services Corporation. I expect to be able to respond to him fairly shortly.

I have also indicated in this House that the Urban Shared Services Corporation are in the process of finalizing their discussions and review with the Health Sciences Centre and with St. Boniface Hospital. They are also in the process of finalizing a revised business plan because, as we all know, it has taken longer for those two facilities to come on stream with the new services, and there have been some additional transition costs and one-time costs in terms of the implementation of the new system.

So the member asked for a great deal of information during the Estimates process, and I indicated an undertaking to provide as much of that as I possibly can. We are in the process of compiling that.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, all we have asked for is a simple calculation which you can do off the Internet in 30 seconds. We have asked the minister–and he has refused to respond–what was the loan principal, and how much was the interest rate? I am going to table documents which show the Toronto Dominion Bank's loan calculator that points out that in fact, on the business case submitted by Mr. Sheil, the interest rate is 11.49 percent, for an amount of $21 million at the annual interest and principal shown in Mr. Sheil's own business case. Will the minister confirm that interest rate?

Mr. Stefanson: No, I will not, Madam Speaker. If it is such an easy calculation that takes 30 seconds, I am sure even the member for Crescentwood is capable of doing that.

I have indicated very clearly that we had a lengthy discussion on Urban Shared Services Corporation during the Health Estimates. The member for Crescentwood asked a number of questions, asked for a great deal of information which I know he wants to receive.

We are in the process of compiling all of that information, and I certainly will be getting back to the member for Crescentwood very shortly, responding to all of the questions and all of the issues that he raised during the Health Estimates process.

Mr. Sale: On a new question, Madam Speaker. Wood Gundy publishes monthly the cost of borrowing for provinces, and in the month in which the loan was probably put out, the cost for a 20-year loan for the Province of Manitoba was 6.17 percent. The estimated interest rate, based on Joe Sheil's own submission of the business case, is 11.49 percent.

Will the minister confirm that the difference between those two has cost the people of Manitoba over $15 million more in interest and principal over the time of this mortgage in simple arithmetic terms? Pretty simple math. Will you confirm that, Mr. Minister?

Mr. Stefanson: What a quantum leap, as usual, by the member for Crescentwood. He talks about having cost the taxpayers of Manitoba $15 million more when this is a process that has been in place now for a little over a year. So he has taken the quantum leap to the end of the mortgage, Madam Speaker. Again I do not necessarily accept any of the numbers he is providing here today because of his past record in terms of issues that we have all seen on many occasions. So I do not accept that at all.

* (1355)

I have indicated very clearly I will respond to the member when it comes to the issue of the mortgage and the issue of the interest rate, but I do not accept his calculation. I am glad he acknowledged, he suggested, the borrowing rate of the Province of Manitoba at just over 6 percent. I think we all know that Manitoba today borrows money at the second lowest interest rates of any province in Canada, and that is a compliment to the overall financial management and economic performance of the Province of Manitoba, something we should all be proud of.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, last year, well over a year ago, in this Chamber, because the business plan of the USSC was so out of whack by $2.5 million, we recommended to the former minister that a new business plan be created. They said at that time there would be a new business plan. Now, over a year later, we find out there is $3.7 million in additional expenses for renovations, a potential of $2.5 million in severance costs, a $2.5-million overrun in which the Auditor is now examining that corporation, and now the member has indicated that there are incredibly higher borrowing costs as a result of the–

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Is there a question here?

Mr. Chomiak: How can this province, how can we trust this government with a business plan, a revised business plan, when the costs have been so horrendous and we are facing such overruns?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): I do not necessarily accept a lot of what the member for Kildonan–he himself used the word "potential." He talks about potential costs here, potential costs there. I met with the board of the Urban Shared Services Corporation last week. I have encouraged members opposite; we have offered to line up meetings with the board, with the organization, offered them to take a tour of the facility to see what they are doing. I certainly continue to offer them that, Madam Speaker, so they can hear first-hand and see first-hand what is actually taking place at that facility. I did meet with the board, and as we all know, the board consists of the nine CEOs of the hospitals themselves.

Let us remember that these individuals are not only on the Urban Shared Services Corporation, they are also the clients, so to speak. They are the ones that provide the food to the citizens of Manitoba through the hospitals. They are the ones that are just as interested as anybody in making sure the food is of a quality and of a nutritional value, and that it is done on an efficient and effective basis. They are committed to prepare a revised business plan for some of the reasons I have outlined in this House on previous occasions. I am expecting that revised business plan very shortly, along with the issues relative to St. Boniface and the Health Sciences Centre, and I look forward to having a further discussion publicly, and obviously with members opposite, when that occurs.

Cancellation

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, does the minister actually expect Manitobans to accept this minister's defence of the corporation who last year we told to have a revised business plan, who have since lost $2.5 million, who have very clearly indicated that their mortgage costs are going to be far beyond what the provincial costs would cost, who are going to encounter $3.7 million? Will the minister not do the right thing and cancel this project while we still have some money that we can use on our health care system to try to remedy the 11 years of neglect?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, again, Madam Speaker, I do not accept a lot of what the member said. He suggests that the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) has very clearly indicated something. I do not agree with that for a minute. I have indicated on many occasions that this operation is committed to a number of things. It is committed to providing quality and nutritional food. We have seen the issues of patient surveys. We have seen that that continues to improve. We have seen comparisons to what the food was like before the changes, and the ratings are higher today. They are committed to avoid capital cost investments and again–

* (1400)

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

Mr. Stefanson: Thank you, Madam Speaker. To conclude, members opposite know that by concentrating the capital investment in one facility as opposed to nine, there can be savings in terms of capital investments, and there will be operational efficiencies and savings as a result of doing the services from one location as opposed to nine. The Urban Shared Services Corporation made up of the nine urban hospitals will be coming forward very shortly with a revised business plan, projecting not only the current year but into the years ahead. This is an operation that is a 20-year, at least, investment and can certainly reduce capital costs, improve efficiencies and provide quality nutritional food. That is the commitment of that board. That is the commitment of all of the hospitals that are a part of that service, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Well, on a completely different topic, Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier. The Pan Am Games appear to be on the way to great success and will be a great benefit to the economies of Winnipeg and Manitoba, yet significant problems may still rear their ugly heads. Winnipeg paramedics are still in labour negotiation, and we know that, given the size of this event, their services will be needed. The Manitoba Telecom Service, one of the event's major sponsors, is also facing a labour dispute. I have also been informed that the strikers, possibly on political advice, may decide to disrupt the Games. Can the Premier tell this House what steps this government has taken to ensure a safe Pan Am Games for all Manitobans?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, obviously our preference at all times, with all public services, would be to avoid disruption. We have worked very, very diligently to resolve many outstanding issues with respect to labour negotiations this year and avoided strike circumstances in the near past with the nurses' union and more recently with the CUPE agreement, which I understand has been ratified, for which we are very grateful. I understand that the paramedics are in mediation right now. We are hopeful that a resolution will come of that. Our Minister of Labour (Mr. Radcliffe) has written to the federal Minister of Labour urging involvement in the settlement of the MTS strike so that–

An Honourable Member: Lockout.

Mr. Filmon: Lockout, I beg your pardon. I apologize to the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett). She is absolutely right, the MTS lockout–so that dispute can be resolved. It is not in anybody's interest to have these disruptions of services in the public sector, and we would hope that people will get back to the table, that with the assistance of mediation and other forms of compromise, they will be able to find a resolution.

Mr. Kowalski: No conclusion in negotiations between the paramedics union and the City of Winnipeg has been reached. If negotiations fail, is the Premier going to consider the Pan Am Games an essential service and encourage the city to force paramedics to provide their services?

Mr. Filmon: I think it is really important to take these things one step at a time. There is no sense in our making assumptions and hypothetical responses to hypothetical questions. We are supportive of the process of mediation, and we have indicated that we hope that it leads to the conclusion that all of us want, which is a settlement of the dispute. There is no point in our taking speculation further to raise people's ire over interference or speculation about what might be done.

Mr. Kowalski: A number of other groups have indicated that they are going to use the Pan Am Games as a platform for their protest of displeasure with this government. What is the Premier doing to assure that these protests do not disrupt the Pan Am Games?

Mr. Filmon: Thousands of Manitobans have been involved in the effort to make the Pan American Games an opportunity to showcase our city and our province. All the things of which we are very proud will be shown to 100,000 visitors, 8,000 or so athletes, coaches, officials, and participants in a way that will create a profile for the city that it probably has not ever received to an audience of hundreds of millions of people.

This obviously is something that is in the best interests of all people who believe in Manitoba, who are committed to Manitoba and its future, and who are able to see the opportunities that we have through the Pan American Games to have more people become aware of just the tremendous assets that we have to offer to everyone. The economic impact, as the member well knows, is expected to be in excess of $350 million. This is something for which we should all be very proud and very excited to be a full participant.

Anybody who uses the Pan American Games for their own partisan purposes, for their own particular grievances, I think would probably be losing a lot of good will for whatever their purpose, for whatever their cause, and I would hope that people would evaluate that very, very carefully before they took any action that would be designed to disrupt the Games and to harm Manitoba.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My question is for the Minister of Health. Our office has received copies of letters from hundreds of Manitobans in the southern part of the province, representing churches, municipal councils, parent councils, student councils, health officials, a great number of people, Madam Speaker. They are drawing the attention of the government to the rapid increase of drug and alcohol use amongst young people, and they are asking for assistance to the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba to provide counselling to the over 1,200 students of the Prairie Spirit School Division. I would like to ask the Minister of Health what response he has given to those hundreds of letters that he has received.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, I would certainly welcome any additional information that the member for Wolseley herself has received on this issue. We are in contact with the Addictions Foundation currently about all of the services they are providing, and I will get back with further details to the member.

Ms. Friesen: Well, Madam Speaker, would the minister, who has received these letters, who has heard me raise this issue with the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) in Question Period–I subsequently raised it with the Minister of Education in Estimates when he had his staff here and was referred–I mean, talk about passing the buck–to the Minister of Health. I now raise it with the Minister of Health on behalf of those hundreds of Manitobans in the south-central part of the province, and I am looking for an answer. What response has been given? Are they sitting there in some file drawer?

Mr. Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, we have indicated very clearly, and I believe, as the member herself has just indicated, she has brought the issue up as well during the Department of Education Estimates. We are in discussion with the AFM on that very issue in terms of the services to be provided. So, as soon as we have further information, we will get back, obviously to the member, and inform her and this House.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, could the minister give us an estimate of when he will have a response for the people of south-central Manitoba who have written? Are they going to have to wait the two years that the people in the Interlake had to wait on exactly the same issue?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I would expect that we can get back to the member for Wolseley and to this House very shortly on that issue.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, yesterday I asked the Minister of Justice to tell us whether the Youth Advisory Council, announced by this government before the last election as part of its get-tough-on-youth-crime promises, had ever met. After hearing the responses, and particularly after reading the Hansard today, there is no doubt that the mystery has heightened.

I wonder if today the minister can tell this House, tell Manitobans: has the Youth Advisory Council ever met? Yes or no?

* (1410)

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I under-stand that the Youth Advisory Council was announced as a part of the government's February of 1994 plan on youth violence. There were some initial arrangements made in terms of carrying out that particular council, and I know that various other matters have in fact been done.

As I indicated yesterday, the Provincial Council on Youth Crime, whose membership has in fact included youth, is a very important aspect of the Council on Youth Crime to ensure that our government receives timely advice on the development of its policy. I know I could also indicate that through the Child and Youth Secretariat there are two–

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson, on a point of order.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, I hate to quote Citation 417 of Beauchesne once again, particularly with this minister, but answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. He was asked: yes or no, did it meet? He was not asked to give a rambling description of various other committees. Did this Advisory Council that was announced in 1994 meet? Yes or no?

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

Mr. Toews: Yes, on the same point of order. I am simply providing the member with information on how the particular policy was carried out and, Madam Speaker–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, as I was about to say, in addition to the Provincial Council on Youth Crime which carries out those activities, the Child and Youth Secretariat has also established two youth advisory councils.

Madam Speaker: Order, please, on the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, the honourable member did not have a point of order.

Mr. Toews: I was giving my answer when–

Some Honourable Members: Challenging the Speaker.

Mr. Toews: No, I am just seeking clarification, Madam Speaker.

The member for Thompson rose on a point of order. I have no difficulty in waiting for the next question to complete my answer. I just wanted to ensure that the record was appropriate.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Justice was, I assume, on a point of clarification. I was of the impression the honourable minister had consumed his time and had given his response to the question asked.

Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister, rather than referring to some other organization, simply tell Manitobans: has the Youth Advisory Council, to have been chaired by Craig Morrissey of Thompson, based on the B.C. model, ever met? Simple one-syllable answer, yes or no.

Mr. Toews: Well, Madam Speaker, the member has in fact referenced a Mr. Morrissey, who was referenced in the question from the member for St. Johns, who was asked and initially agreed to chair the council. I understand, however, that when contacted later on, Mr. Morrissey indicated that he no longer wanted to chair the committee. As a result of that, different developments took place in the department.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, all I have been trying to do is explain what happened, and every time I do so, members opposite stand up and object. Do they want information or not? I am simply here to put the information on the record.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.